223 réponses à ce sujet

[Paulomedi]

The lack of Narrative Cohesion in the game's last 20 minutes is appalling. The reasons are known since right after the game's launched: an ending made without peers' review.

 

Again and again people try to justify bad writing. It's just that folks.

 

Since DA2 things were going downhill.

 

Mass Effect: Deception, showed they didn't care nearly enough.

 

ME3 was just the icing on the cake.

 

Anyone read ME - Inquisition? Mac Walters wrote that one. It revolves around Bailey's promotion. It reveals the entirety of Mac Walter's competence as a writer. It's not much.

[Alamar2078]

IF we ASSUME that Harbinger is the starbrat and he's trying to indoctrinate Shepard AND his disguise is as an AI then he should appear as a hologram or similar.  The more lifelike [exact??] the image the higher the chance that it could actually break the illusion.

 

The thing is with IT, based on what BW has given us, is we should probably stop trying to prove it or disprove it.  I'm all for letting folks interpret the ending however seems reasonable to them.

 

Note:  If the ending [actually the whole story] were well constructed [and supported by events in ME1 through ME3] then I don't believe any of us would have any doubt one way or another.  Then again I think BW really does want discussion ; multiple interpretations ; etc. as opposed to a clean & clear ending.

[Alamar2078]

As far as narrative cohesion goes I really believe that ME2 & ME3 [and to a lesser degree ME1] did a dis-service to the story arc & construction as a whole.  I find a lot of events, plot elements, etc. in the prior 99% of the game did a poor job of supporting the ending that BW gave us.

[Paulomedi]

 

As far as narrative cohesion goes I really believe that ME2 & ME3 [and to a lesser degree ME1] did a dis-service to the story arc & construction as a whole.  I find a lot of events, plot elements, etc. in the prior 99% of the game did a poor job of supporting the ending that BW gave us.

 

Isn't it the other way around?

[ImaginaryMatter]

As far as narrative cohesion goes I really believe that ME2 & ME3 [and to a lesser degree ME1] did a dis-service to the story arc & construction as a whole.  I find a lot of events, plot elements, etc. in the prior 99% of the game did a poor job of supporting the ending that BW gave us.

 

I think the games all have plot holes, contrivances, gaps in logic, etc. It's only until the ME3 ending that there's really a loss of cohesion. For the rest of the series no matter what silliness goes on you can still follow the story, even if you find in dumb, questionable, or contradicting. The ending though is where it's hard to even follow what's going on. The Catalyst is so frustratingly vague, no one is acting like themselves, motives don't make sense, random events are going on, etc. It's so obstructing that it's hard to see anything else.

 

I do agree about the build up thing though. Like if the writer's did indeed have this bullet loaded in the chamber, why did they make the Rannoch arc and the ME3 Synthetics the way they were?

[themikefest]

Who evacuated all the Normandy people, especially if Cortez is dead?

 

Here's a possible answer.

 

There are 2 shuttles on the Normandy. While Shepard is on the ground taking care of the Hades Cannon, the other shuttle is been flown in by a squadmate or an unknown crewmember to bring the others to the forward operating base. Once Harbinger leaves, that same shutlle arrives to pick up the 2 squadmates after receiving a radio call from one of them and heads for the Normandy

 

I have no explanation on how Steve made it back to the Normandy after the shuttle crashes in time to talk with Shepard via QEC at the fob. I do have a solution to that problem though its nearly 3 years too late. After the shuttle crashes, Steve is lucky enough to of crashed in an area that has no reapers ground forces and its close to the fob. He is seen with a slight limp and a couple of cuts on his face when saying goodbye to Shepard.  With Steve at the fob, he can pick up the 2 squadmates and take everyone back to the Normandy

[Alamar2078]

It's my argument that some of ME1 and large parts of ME2 & ME3 did a terrible job with the OVERALL arch of the series.  Given that a sub-optimal ending was likely and what we got [IMHO] was an @sspull of epic proportions to try to wrap up a story that didn't lead well to ANY particular, satisfying ending.

 

To rephrase I'm a FIRM believer that the author needs to know the ending of the story.  They then need to make sure that the events, plots, characters, antagonists, etc. of the story build to and support the ending you have in mind.  IMHO the first 99% of ME failed to support not just the ending we were given but I don't see a way to craft a REALLY GOOD ending without re-architecting earlier elements.

 

FYI:  I LOVE many of the small pieces / missions / quests in Mass Effect.  Taken by themselves many speak to me on a level that very few games ever have.  It's only when analyzed as a whole that they don't seem to mesh well and give a good flow to the OVERALL arch of the series.

[SwobyJ]

It wasn't Harbinger.

 

It was Sovereign.

 

 

Ol' buddy!

[angol fear]

The lack of Narrative Cohesion in the game's last 20 minutes is appalling. The reasons are known since right after the game's launched: an ending made without peers' review.

 

Again and again people try to justify bad writing. It's just that folks.

 

To bad writing argument, I can answer bad reading argument.

 

"Originally, with the catalyst, the star child at the end of the game, I had written that much more in the guise of a investigative style conversation, where there is something he tells you but then, you get to ask a bunch of questions and you get your questions answered. But then me and Casey talked and decided, lets keep the conversation "High level". Give you the details that you need to know, but don't get into the stuff that you don't need to know. Like "How long have they been reaping?" You don't need to know the answers to the mass effect universe. So we intentionally left those out"

[Ithurael]

To bad writing argument, I can answer bad reading argument.

 

"Originally, with the catalyst, the star child at the end of the game, I had written that much more in the guise of a investigative style conversation, where there is something he tells you but then, you get to ask a bunch of questions and you get your questions answered. But then me and Casey talked and decided, lets keep the conversation "High level". Give you the details that you need to know, but don't get into the stuff that you don't need to know. Like "How long have they been reaping?" You don't need to know the answers to the mass effect universe. So we intentionally left those out"

 

 

HAHAHHAHAHAHAH!!!!

 

9/10 Anglo 9/10!!

 

That...that was just perfect!. I really needed a pick me up right now.

[angol fear]

http://forum.bioware...e-to-copyright/

 

The job of a writer isn't to tell and explain everything. It's to tell and explain what needs to be told and explained. And this is not what people want to be told but what the story needs from the narration to develop its own structure and internal logic. That's writing. 

[dreamgazer]

Look a little closer at ME1 and ME2 and you'll see that plenty of details get hand-waved, from magic brain filters and sentient plants crapping out fully-armed asari clones to how Project Lazarus cures brain-death. And that's not even touching on the nonsense of the ProtoReaper and its people slushies.

[ImaginaryMatter]

http://forum.bioware...e-to-copyright/

 

The job of a writer isn't to tell and explain everything. It's to tell and explain what needs to be told and explained.

 

Which they didn't do. Not many people are asking for the answers of the Mass Effect universe. They're asking for basic questions about logic, coherence, and characterization.

[WizzyWarlock]

If its all just to evoke an emotional response then why is it blurred at all? Why isn't it literally the same kid? Why does it go through all the trouble making the form distinct by adding all kinds of glowing, swirling special effects and overlaying the voice twice? Wouldn't it be more suitable to take an approach akin to the Leviathans where the form looks real and not like a hologram projection?

Well, if you look at the Control ending, you briefly see it is the same kid when viewing them both from a distance. The reason it's blurred and glowing is because it's presenting itself as an AI, so a normal kid with normal clothes would look out of place and wouldn't make a whole lot of sense, so the image is changed. But we all know it's the same kid, especially Shepard, who will have an emotional response to its presence as it's been in his dreams for days. Indoctrination Codex tells us about control of the Limbic System, look up the Limbic System, it gives access to memories, emotions and motivations, so it's taking the memory of the kid, using it to create stronger emotions, to motivate you to make a specific choice. Indoctrination.

[Alamar2078]

@Burak:  One's interpretation of the story SHOULD be left up to the person experiencing the story.  In addition it would be wrong for me or you to tell someone what to like or not to like.  On the other hand [at face value] a traditional analysis of story construction would seem to indicate that the ending is just plain bad and that the rest of the story uses mechanics that are frowned upon.

 

When you throw the possibility of deliberate IT into the mix and to end the heroes story in defeat then things become much more interesting from an analytical point of view.  In this event you probably would design the overall story so that it would not necessarily point to a particular ending esp. if you intend to end the story at Shepard's defeat and leave the rest up to the player's imagination.

 

Whether I'm willing to give BW credit for being that gutsy though is really unlikely.  However I'm not about to argue that it's impossible -- I just don't give the devs the credit you do.

[themikefest]

Perhaps the ending isn't meant to be taken at face value. I mean, Shepard, to get past Harbinger to the beam wound up with his armor in ruins. Yet, TIM and Anderson get past Harbinger with no damage at all? Or that when TIM shoots you, his predator pistol sounds like a Carnifex? The whole gun thing isn't writing. That's more the gameplay team doing that.

 

Shepard is the only one with her armor messed up and the other soldiers in the same area have  armor with no damage

[Ithurael]

 

Who said he was back on the Normandy at that time you talked to him? Maybe when he survived he's still on Earth? The hologram of him doesn't show you the background where he is. When talking to Jack, she said she was south of where you were. Not everyone was on the Normandy. How did Garrus go from being at the FOB to being on the Normandy in the EC? That might have happened off-screen. Not everything needs to be shown (see 3 hour movie example).

 

 

No..he is in the memorial scene:

http://youtu.be/kITbOCXcKW8?t=1m10s

far left I think.

[Vazgen]

No..he is in the memorial scene:

http://youtu.be/kITbOCXcKW8?t=1m10s

far left I think.

The idea is that he could've been on Earth when contacting Shepard via hologram and then gets picked up, like Garrus. 

[Ithurael]

The idea is that he could've been on Earth when contacting Shepard via hologram and then gets picked up, like Garrus. 

 

The problem is timeframe and dialog

 

We are told once we have to endure that hilariously bad evac scene that normandy is going to rejoin sword.

 

Then once we activate the crucible normandy is given the order to evac

 

then the crash on eden planet

 

then the whole crew appears on the normandy for the emotional memorial scene, because of reasons.

 

Nowhere are we told that our crew was picked up or why they were picked up. You could headcanon one but that is just your imagination. A good writer would explain, show, or even yes tell the reader how it is possible for Event B to happen after Event A. Or how character A got to point B. It doesn't have to be a bunch of exposition or another 10 minute cutscene. It could have been mentioned before the beam run, once hackett knew someone was on the citadel, a one second teaser of hammer being evacuated into shuttles. Give the player something tangible to headcanon off of that has a realistic possibility in the game.

 

Otherwise it is very much so contrived.

 

The reason all of our crew were on the normandy...they wanted to give a heartfelt sendoff in that scene to shep. The reason it is on the eden planet...because it has much symbolism...wow great eden...much brave new world...wow.

[themikefest]

 

Who said he was back on the Normandy at that time you talked to him? Maybe when he survived he's still on Earth? The hologram of him doesn't show you the background where he is. When talking to Jack, she said she was south of where you were. Not everyone was on the Normandy. How did Garrus go from being at the FOB to being on the Normandy in the EC? That might have happened off-screen. Not everything needs to be shown (see 3 hour movie example).

 

 If he's still on Earth, then explain why he's in the memorial wall scene? 

 

With Garrus getting to the Normandy, read my post for a possible explanation, #181

[themikefest]

Only because they filled that in with the Extended Cut. Originally they didn't tell you how your whole squad went from the FOB (even those you didn't take with you on the "beam run") to the Normandy.

 

I'm referring to the original ending here. You are talking about content that was made afterwards (Extended Cut) to fill in things.

So to be able to talk with him on the QEC, Steve carried a portable QEC with him? I guess that could be applied to all the ME2 squadmates since the QEC yellow pages guy is able to find all these characters, especially Jack. She must be the only one in the galaxy named Jack. The other thing is Steve could've stumbled upon a QEC and waited for Shepard to contact him instead of making his way to the fob.

[God]

ME3's ending explained.

 

Lazy writing mixed with lack of development time combined with lack of planning for the trilogy as a whole.

 

Done.