63 réponses à ce sujet

[Kynare]

The Evil Dead franchise is a nice example of writers just going "**** it", and they gained a pretty substantial cult following for it!

 

I've enjoyed forum-based roleplaying for a while. With the right people, formulating a story before your eyes can be a really fun and rewarding experience. I think every Bioware game does that to a degree. They adjust the story heavily dependent on fan feedback/reception. Cullen would never have been a romance option in DA:I if the fans weren't smitten with him in the first. It's part of the "illusion of choice" they offer to their players. If they just went completely with what their writers intended without any outside influence from the players, I think they'd be capable of coming up with a pretty amazing story.

 

Aren't most popular comic book series just huge improvisations too? "Canon" is commonly applied to comic books because of their inconsistency in writing. In my opinion, it doesn't detract from the story, it just adds to the vastness of the universe they're trying to create. Though they do have to be very careful about how they present it...

[gottaloveme]

Sometimes stuff is going on in your head as you're writing that doesn't always make it onto the page. Familiarity does not help. Proof readers / constructive criticism are a necessity to keep continuity rolling. In gameverse these should be beta testers. Those who know the game even better than the writers because they are playing it constantly and can point out plot holes and crap quite happily.

 

At least discussing this stuff keeps us busy. . . hmmm.

[angol fear]

Sometimes stuff is going on in your head as you're writing that doesn't always make it onto the page. Familiarity does not help. Proof readers / constructive criticism are a necessity to keep continuity rolling. In gameverse these should be beta testers. Those who know the game even better than the writers because they are playing it constantly and can point out plot holes and crap quite happily.

 

At least discussing this stuff keeps us busy. . . hmmm.

 

You seriously mean that there are people who know more than the writers themselves what they are writing? So from now I can imagine that I can say : "I know more than Shakespeare what he was writing" and I can make "constructive criticism" because I didn't like some parts, no?

[The Arbiter]

One thing I noticed much more in ME3, even though it probably was an issue in ME2 as well was the fact that a lot of key story elements are inconsistent as the story progresses. The biggest ones are the Crucible and what people believe it does, Cerberus, and the Reapers, how they work and how vulnerable they are, not to mention the ending itself, which all to certain extends have their fair share of contrivances.

To name an example: when the crucible is revealedit quickly becomes a thing that we're unaware of what it actually does, but at several points, Thessia and Earth at the end the characters suddenly and blindly believe everything will be over once the crucible is activated even though they have still not learned anything particularly telling about what it does.

A lot of those inconsistencies made it clear to me that the story was written bit by bit as Bioware went along, and I want to ask you, in particular anybody who considers themselves to be writers and knows what it's like to write things up as you go and what are the pros and cons with it.

Are there any examples of really great books or movies that were written up as they went that succeeded despite of being written without the writer having a big precise plan from the getgo?

I want to link my plot hole thread here if it's ok... http://forum.bioware...ain-this-to-me/

[Esthlos]

You seriously mean that there are people who know more than the writers themselves what they are writing? So from now I can imagine that I can say : "I know more than Shakespeare what he was writing" and I can make "constructive criticism" because I didn't like some parts, no?

Actually it is a pretty common phenomenon... a game's plot often involves more than one author, doing only a part of the plot, and not rarely when they move on to another job they don't come back to that plot.

There are some fans, on the other hand, that will play the whole franchise many times, read every codex entry, every novel, take part in debates on the plot, and end up knowing way more about the plot than any of its authors.

[angol fear]

And the lead writer? What is his job?

And in Mass Effect 's case, what do you think Casey Hudson was doing? And the producers? Why do you think the writers spend so much time talking?

[nos_astra]

The lead writer for ME2 and 3 was Mac Walters. And he's not known for continuity.

I think David Gaider as the lead writer for the three DA games is good enough at keeping track of his lore.

[chemiclord]

Another element, as others have pointed out, is that BW's goals weren't just to make each entry in the ME series the best they could be but they also wanted to make each game a good "starting point" so some critical elements are apt to be sacrificed in service to these other goals.   Sure enough the product was hurt by not focusing on making the best story & games they could.

 

Well, the very sad truth is that video games kinda HAVE to be that way.  There's always going to be audience decay in pretty much any work or any medium.  There's a flash up to it's maximum popularity, then any work starts slowly bleeding away its fanbase.  THAT much is inevitable.  Unlike in books or movies or TV shows, you can afford that bleed to some degree, and as such can entwine stuff together over several episodes or volumes.

Games as a general rule don't have that luxury.  The margin between a profitable game and one that doesn't get renewed can be paper thin.  You can't afford that decay.  You HAVE to be constantly enticing a new audience, and that means making sure every game can stand on its own in terms of narrative AND game play.

[chemiclord]

The lead writer for ME2 and 3 was Mac Walters. And he's not known for continuity.

I think David Gaider as the lead writer for the three DA games is good enough at keeping track of his lore.

 

What also helps is that the main character of each Dragon Age game is a completely new character.  It's easier to start a self-contained story when the primary character involved is contained to that story.

[StarcloudSWG]

Gene Wolfe comes to mind. IIRC he said he doesn't even know if he's writing a novel or a short story until it's done; he looks at the height of the pages to know which. And sometimes a character just shows up in the story and he doesn't know who he is or why he's there until later.

 

Gene Wolfe, however, goes back and edits his work so that it's consistent, and you find out later that little details he planted early on add up later to one, surprising, revelation or falls into place to explains something else.

 

There's a difference between that approach and not having a plan at all. Mass Effect? The writing team did not have a plan for the entire trilogy of games, only the first one.

 

Dragon Age? They DO have a plan for the entire series, even if there's room to change the details. The broad sweep has already been written.

[Linkenski]

And the lead writer? What is his job?

And in Mass Effect 's case, what do you think Casey Hudson was doing? And the producers? Why do you think the writers spend so much time talking?

First of all, I can only say what I've heard but I'll try to piece it together how I've understood it:

 

Lead writer is responsible for the major story arc for the game... or well, the main plot so in Mac's case and ME3 that would be the premise. He had part in deciding that the Genophage should be resolved and the Geth/Quarian war should be resolved and he was also the guy who handpicked which senior writers should tackle each subplot. He himself wrote all major missions in between those arcs for the most part. I'm pretty sure Mac mainly wrote Vancouver, Mars, Cerberus Coup, Thessia, London and the endgame.

 

Basically each writer, both seniors and leads write individual missions and characters but the lead ultimately decides what the overarching plot should be and as Mac Walters called it in his interviews "The narrative backbone or emotional beats of the story".

 

But all writers touched upon every missions either throughout or in peer-reviews. Almost every mission in Mass Effect 3 - and this goes for most stuff in DA:I and past Bioware games as well too - were written by its writer but then once characters had to be incorporated their individual writers would write that dialogue or give it a thumbs up if the writer of the mission had given said characters a good enough line and furthermore they'd look at the entire mission and give constructive criticism on it. After that they'd either give it green light or re-iterate it which happens a lot in every Bioware game.

 

For example Cerberus HQ was mostly written by Patrick Weekes, as well as all the video logs, but after writing the first line of dialogue for TIM Mac took over and I guess further peer reviewing was done on it... or not, cuz there are some oddities at the end: TIM rambles and Shepard and Co. just leave the VI there in a very abrupt way.

 

 

Also, David Gaider has said multiple times that he has a vision for where Dragon Age will go in the end and he hopes they can still get to that point. The series, from the start, was planned with a "5-game plan" so we're just over halfway, and with DA:I dabbling quite a bit around in faith and gods I think I can see where the series might end up thematically already and it makes me excited.

[nos_astra]

What also helps is that the main character of each Dragon Age game is a completely new character.  It's easier to start a self-contained story when the primary character involved is contained to that story.

I'm not talking about the main character. Even with a new protagonist the DA did a better job. The stories don't seem as self-contained as in ME. Especially DA:I makes an effort to develop previously established characters (Cassandra, Varric, Leliana, Cullen, Morrigan) and follow up on established lore.

 

It has it's fair share of problems but at least I get a feeling the writing team cares.

 

Not so in ME where contradicting previously introduced ideas is considered an art form and a necessity. In ME almost always anything goes without any sort of explanation.

[wright1978]

Gene Wolfe, however, goes back and edits his work so that it's consistent, and you find out later that little details he planted early on add up later to one, surprising, revelation or falls into place to explains something else.

 

There's a difference between that approach and not having a plan at all. Mass Effect? The writing team did not have a plan for the entire trilogy of games, only the first one.

 

Dragon Age? They DO have a plan for the entire series, even if there's room to change the details. The broad sweep has already been written.

 

Agree completely. You've got to have broad brush strokes in, even if details get filled in as you go.

[angol fear]

Interesting to see that everyone who answered my post only talked about the lead writer, only the first part of my post.

So yes, the lead writer is responsible for the major story arc of the game. But the writing is made by the lead writers, the writers, the producers etc... Once the scenario is finished, the writing is not finished.

First, what I don't want to understand is how people can think they know more than the writer themselves what they are doing. There's only here that I can see people thinking like that ( but here I've seen people who don't know anything about art, talking with me and trying to convince me that art was totally subjective! They know better than I do what is my job!).

Second, writing in a team isn't something that easy. You can't put someone who knows nothing about writing in a team of writers. Writing is a complex process. I know that some people will say that MEHEM is a proof that people can do better than Bioware. Well, I totally disagree. MEHEM is far from being well written (there are many problems at every level ). And the fan fictions, or the ideas I saw were not good. Sorry for them but no, there are people who write and it's their job. You can remember more details than the writers themselves that doesn't make you a better writer.

[Linkenski]

I don't think there's a majority that likes MEHEM though, and personally I think it's cringeworthy, yet impressive because it's fan-made and great for those who think that's how they prefer it to end. I watched my friend replay ME3 with that installed and I cringed like crazy with the unfitting music, crappy animations (compared to the official work, ofc) and complete shift in tone. I don't think that was ever in question though. MEHEM is obviously fan-fiction.

 

I don't think Bioware hires writers who have no clue how to write either though, but some of their writers, especially some of the seniors evidently have spotty track-records but I guess they're all above the standards of video gaming.

 

I think you're right though. Being a good critic doesn't mean we're better than Bioware's writers. I read Drew Karpyshyn's blog where he wrote about the necessity of having good editors, arguing that when you're a writer you're so close to your own work that it becomes hard to be objective and critical of your own work and every once in a while it's just healthy to have someone come in with their outside perspective on your work and point out where it needs to be fixed.

 

Arguably there are people in here that would probably be good editors but there's also people like me who pretentiously claim to be smarter than Bioware's staff sometimes when really, if it was my day-to-day job I'd probably fail epically from having to constantly keep track of things as they are being made.

 

I think we all underestimate the difference between analyzing something that's already made and actually creating something from scratch, at times.

 

As for the ending of ME3 you have to imagine there's London and then nothing and we have to make it all up from scratch because that's what Mac Walters was facing. Admittedly other writers could've one better than him but judging by my own ideas and other ideas I have seen Mac's and Casey's answer still ended up stronger overall as unlikeable and thematically abrupt as they were.

[wright1978]

MEHEM doesn't really confer a message regarding writing whether you like it or hate it. It's an impressive piece of modding that makes something of the utter dog's dinner that is ME3's ending but is heavily constrained by the material it has to work within. As a critic i have opinions on directions they could have taken but I wouldn't claim to be able to write better than someone who's professional job it is to write. However because they are professionals with experience doesn't mean what Mac and Casey came up with in their darkened room wasn't an utter trainwreck.  Hope lessons in terms of less back of cigarette packet in a darkened room and more peer review, coupled with better planning will mean we won't get something that awful as a final product to critique in future from talented professional writers.

[Iakus]

 

Also, David Gaider has said multiple times that he has a vision for where Dragon Age will go in the end and he hopes they can still get to that point. The series, from the start, was planned with a "5-game plan" so we're just over halfway, and with DA:I dabbling quite a bit around in faith and gods I think I can see where the series might end up thematically already and it makes me excited.

 

I hadn't heard that DA had a five-game plan.  but that it's meant to be open-ended, with who knows how many games possible.

 

They did say, though, that there is "deep lore", information that's known only to the writers and a few other higher-ups who need to know.  Even if it doesn't appear in a game, they're written with this stuff in mind.

I don't think there's a majority that likes MEHEM though, and personally I think it's cringeworthy, yet impressive because it's fan-made and great for those who think that's how they prefer it to end. I watched my friend replay ME3 with that installed and I cringed like crazy with the unfitting music, crappy animations (compared to the official work, ofc) and complete shift in tone. I don't think that was ever in question though. MEHEM is obviously fan-fiction.

 

Not going to argue about "majorities" but MEHEM is pretty popular.  And not just because it's a "happy ending mod" (though I'm sure that helps)  It also manages to remove the Starbrat, one of the more nonsensical elements of the game.  As I've said before, it's not a perfect ending, but it does remove the worst of the stupid.

 

Out of curiosity, do you know which version of MEHEM you saw?  It's still being worked on and polished, and the latest version or two (0.4 and 0.5) looks darn near profesional (and has an alternate music score)

[Linkenski]

Halo 4's ending was kind of silly too though and its lead writer is now Mass Effect's lead writer.

 

Just to put it short without spoiling it with any real emotional context: the protagonist blows up a nuke in his hand but survives because his hologram AI friend creates a hologram around him that shields him from... the blast that he triggered in his own hands... because holograms are solid and can survive being in the center of a nuke or they have the power to teleport lightyears in seconds.... it was just really stupid. Emotionally satisfying but stupid from a logical standpoint, and it didn't help that the rest of the plot and the rest of the supporting cast was mediocre too. Schlerf can write and world-build in his comics IMO but the Halo 4 plot was something I didn't quite care for.

 

Then again, I strongly dislike Mac's comics and his story missions in ME3 and I've heard people say Drew Karpyshyn's solo works are shitty too, yet I really enjoyed ME1 2 and 3 as a whole still, even characters Mac wrote and stories Drew K wrote... Schlerf combined with the rest of the legacy Bioware writing staff that still remains should be good.

 

@Iakus, it was v0.4 and that music in the whole ending sequence was a complete mess and it went on for way, way, too long like that. I'd take catalyst and synthesis nonsense over it any day, just because I like the scenery and incredible music that much more.

[Iakus]

MEHEM doesn't really confer a message regarding writing whether you like it or hate it. It's an impressive piece of modding that makes something of the utter dog's dinner that is ME3's ending but is heavily constrained by the material it has to work within. As a critic i have opinions on directions they could have taken but I wouldn't claim to be able to write better than someone who's professional job it is to write. However because they are professionals with experience doesn't mean what Mac and Casey came up with in their darkened room wasn't an utter trainwreck.  Hope lessons in terms of less back of cigarette packet in a darkened room and more peer review, coupled with better planning will mean we won't get something that awful as a final product to critique in future from talented professional writers.

 

Just a personal note:  When the game was still a week or so from release, and the rumors about the endings were circulating, I completely discounted them, thinking (in my non-writer mentality) that it was obvious they wouldn't do that, as there'd be riots.  These are professionals, they'd know better.  Even if that was proposed, someone would catch that and speak up.  "Yeah, uh, I don't think the player would go for that outcome"

 

How wrong my non-writer mind was

[Iakus]

Halo 4's ending was kind of silly too though and its lead writer is now Mass Effect's lead writer.

 

Just to put it short without spoiling it with any real emotional context: the protagonist blows up a nuke in his hand but survives because his hologram AI friend creates a hologram around him that shields him from... the blast that he triggered in his own hands... because holograms are solid and can survive being in the center of a nuke or they have the power to teleport lightyears in seconds.... it was just really stupid. Emotionally satisfying but stupid from a logical standpoint, and it didn't help that the rest of the plot and the rest of the supporting cast was mediocre too. Schlerf can write and world-build in his comics IMO but the Halo 4 plot was something I didn't quite care for.

 

Then again, I strongly dislike Mac's comics and his story missions in ME3 and I've heard people say Drew Karpyshyn's solo works are shitty too, yet I really enjoyed ME1 2 and 3 as a whole still, even characters Mac wrote and stories Drew K wrote... Schlerf combined with the rest of the legacy Bioware writing staff that still remains should be good.

 

@Iakus, it was v0.4 and that music in the whole ending sequence was a complete mess and it went on for way, way, too long like that. I'd take catalyst and synthesis nonsense over it any day, just because I like the scenery and incredible music that much more.

That...actually doesn't sound much worse than the space magic Mass Effect subjected us to.  And is considerably easier to swallow than the Crucible (at least, without knowing further details, I have never played any of the Halo games) 

 

Also, have you seen JohnP's Alternate MEHEM?  the changes are far more subtle and may be more to your liking as a "happy ending mod"

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

See the "happy ending" for Shepard was already included in the Original Ending. It just wasn't available to anyone who didn't have an iPhone or some way of playing the iOS app. If you had over 5000 EMS and picked destroy, you received an message from your love interest that said how they couldn't wait to visit Shepard in the ICU. They had rescued Shepard.

 

But the writers and other Bioware staff decided to troll us instead of stating "the answers are found with the iOS app"  if they didn't want to give away any spoiler. Jessica Merizan used the Schroedinger's Cat analogy for Shepard. Chris Epler said it could have been his last breath. Chris Priestly piled on. And thus began the fury and rage on the forums.

 

And why in the EC, couldn't they simply have incorporated the definitive "Shepard survived" of the iOS app ending? Why did they have to get "artistic" and keep it vague for everyone who didn't have the iOS app? Was it some kind of agreement with Apple? Shepard survives is an Apple proprietary ending. Another reason to hate on Apple.

[AlanC9]

Well, the very sad truth is that video games kinda HAVE to be that way.  There's always going to be audience decay in pretty much any work or any medium.  There's a flash up to it's maximum popularity, then any work starts slowly bleeding away its fanbase.  THAT much is inevitable.  Unlike in books or movies or TV shows, you can afford that bleed to some degree, and as such can entwine stuff together over several episodes or volumes.

Games as a general rule don't have that luxury.  The margin between a profitable game and one that doesn't get renewed can be paper thin.  You can't afford that decay.  You HAVE to be constantly enticing a new audience, and that means making sure every game can stand on its own in terms of narrative AND game play.

Right. The tracking data has been pretty unequivocal about the churn of the ME player base. Haven't seen relevant data from the DA side yet.

[AlanC9]

See the "happy ending" for Shepard was already included in the Original Ending. It just wasn't available to anyone who didn't have an iPhone or some way of playing the iOS app. If you had over 5000 EMS and picked destroy, you received an message from your love interest that said how they couldn't wait to visit Shepard in the ICU. They had rescued Shepard.

Really? This is literally the first I've heard of that.

[Linkenski]

Lol, yeah right, as if any of the 3 endings felt happy before the extended Cut. I still remember that stomach-sickening feeling of ambivalence and my smile slowly wearing off as I watched Joker and EDI hugging on the jungle-planet when I realized "this is it. there's no epilogue, no closure, no nothing" and then credits. I had just witnessed the entire galaxy network of Mass Relays being cut off like in the scene of Dark Knight Rises when Bane cuts off all bridges to Gotham (I know that's a stupid moment but still) -- The Mass Effect universe being destroyed right on the screen in front of me -- and what I mean is that this was equal to the point of no return and the most dark and hope-is-lost moment of the Batman movie except in Mass Effect that's literally how it ended, and it felt like the game wanted me to feel happy or just bittersweet about it, but I know I was feeling depressed.

 

The only thing different in Destroy that was more "happy" was that completely silent and empty-feeling pan-up of Shepard's chest and then a breath but with no indication on whether Normandy crew would ever get off that planet and no indication on whether the various races could ever get back to their homeworlds again, and no citadel for anyone to collectively gather at.

 

I sometimes feel like I could do without those monologue epilogues of Extended Cut, but I just can't do without that normandy co. closure, the extended Catalyst dialogue or that happy-ending fade-out and whether Shepard lives or dies. It feels fulfilling when before it felt empty and depressing.

[katamuro]

I think the main reason for most of the inconsistencies and plot holes through the trilogy is because there was no clear idea of the end in the minds of the creators when they made ME1. In ME1 they were simply introducing the main enemies and they didn't think beyond the "fight with reapers" part. 

In ME2 they tried to bring in some of the story so that it foreshadows the real reason for Reaper existence. Unfortunately the whole dark energy/matter thing actually sounds as bad as the one we got. Or what is more likely the writers simply substituted the dark matter with synthetics to make it work. 

They also fell in love with the idea of multiple endings. But instead of creating the differences in endings like they did in DAO, where the actions of the character impacted directly even the ones you didnt really think would matter, with the ending reached but still with enough differences for different players to feel like their choices were represented. 

 

Basically I think that most of the problems come from the fact that they didnt have a clear plan through the development cycle and instead of thinking through what would make the most sense they jumped to the ideas that seemed cool at the moment. Like the weapons thing in ME2, the endings in ME3. shepard literally dying and being revived and lots of others. Not all of them were mistakes, some of them needed tweaking only like the weapons but you get the idea.