841 réponses à ce sujet

[dgcatanisiri]

A very important detail: GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD OUR CHARACTER. If there are mandatory plot events, such as Shepard's resurrection in ME2 or the fall of Thessia in ME3, then we NEED the opportunity to discuss these with other characters and PICK a reaction. Shepard turns their death and resurrection into a joke, when some of us believe that it's a massive trauma that involves a significant amount of PTSD. Shepard will take the fall of Thessia personally, while some of us believe that Shepard bares no responsibility and maybe even are pissed off at the way the asari acted throughout the war effort.

 

Don't limit the PC's characterization to just one path in regards to how they are reacting to events taking place. These games are Role Playing Games. Let us role play.

[Sully13]

Just fix it so i don't have 2 useless points i can't use when leveling up. this dude needs those 3 points.

[Grieving Natashina]

Here's another plot one from me.  With a few exceptions, I try to avoid a lot of complaining about the plot.  Odin knows that the ME forums have had that covered for years. but this bugs the crap out of me.

 

There was two points in the series where I found myself yelling at the screen with very coarse language.  One of them was the Starbrat, but the other has to be the setup for the Collector abduction of the Normandy Crew.  I tend to let a lot of inconsistencies in the main arc of the ME series slide, but that made no sense to me.  It still irks me every time it comes up.  

 

Why would the entire squad leave for just one mission?  Why would characters like... 

 

• Grunt (who mentions pretty early on that the Normandy would be easy to invade,)
• The utterly careful and very smart (Miranda, Mordin) 
• Have centuries of battle experience (Samara/Morinth)
• Very paranoid (Zaeed, Jack)
• Or, worst of all for me, were at least on the Normandy in ME1 (Tali, Garrus) 

...agree that taking all of the squad with them for a mission for any reason? Especially when they are testing this Reaper IFF that they don't know much about.   Plus, the player always decides before they leave the ship, and would have no real reason to do so after the mission fully began. 

 

Heck, EDI even got handed the Idiot Ball in this case.  It is very hard for me to believe that she never once in her uber-genius Cerberus created main processor considered that the possibility of the Collectors tracking down the Normandy after getting the Reaper MacGuffin they needed was a likely scenario.

 

In a very stupid sort of way, the Starbrat made sense to me.  I could see the logic in It's actions, though I will never excuse the stupidity.  Still, it made at least a tiny bit of sense to me.  Sure, it was one of the dumber things I've seen whipped together for an ending of a trilogy.  Oh yes, the child metaphor for the lost innocence of the galaxy was played up to damned near nauseating levels.  However, I could see the point that the buggy and too-literal VI was getting at.

 

The setup for the Collectors refuses to make sense in my head.  What's funny is that, other than the contrived-as-hell setup,  I thought it was excellent.  I liked playing from Joker's PoV.  It had a nice visual impact to see some of the NPCs that the player (potentially) got to know getting dragged away.  However, they should have something else to start that sequence of events.  I have a few ideas, but I don't have the conceit to think they are good.  I know the writers could have come up with something better though.

[Dantriges]

Don´t know if Miranda says it in the english localisation but she said just before you started: Ok, the whole squad takes the shuttle, Shepard can decide who to take when we are there.

 

Just imagine 10 people sitting in the cramped (at least for ten dudes) back room of the shuttle staring at each other and going hm well, what do we do in the meantime? Does someone has a card game?

[Grieving Natashina]

Don´t know if Miranda says it in the english localisation but she said just before you started: Ok, the whole squad takes the shuttle, Shepard can decide who to take when we are there.

 

Just imagine 10 people sitting in the cramped (at least for ten dudes) back room of the shuttle staring at each other and going hm well, what do we do in the meantime? Does someone has a card game?

Miranda says it in the English version.  It just makes no bloody sense.  I'd like to think that one person tried to speak up:

 

Shepard: Agreed.  We'll take the shuttle.

<flying out>

 

Jacob: Um Shepard, we just left the Normandy crew alone.

Shepard: And?

Jacob: Is it a really good idea?  I mean, this Reaper tech is unknown.

Shepard: You knew this was a suicidal mission when you started this.  There is a lot of unknowns out there.

Jacob: EDI isn't invulnerable.  Project Overlord?  David?  The square root of PI?  That should ring some bells for you, Shepard.

Shepard: David was unique.  The Collectors can never harm the Normandy.

Jacob: Yeah, but the crew has a lot of non-combatants in it.  Surely we could spare one or two of us?

Shepard: EDI would have let us know if there was a problem.  

Jacob: Maybe.  This doesn't feel right.

Jacob: I think we still have time to go back and leave at least Grunt and Zaeed for backup.  Jack too.

Shepard: Enough, Jacob.  Sure, the Collectors seem to have it in for humans, and tried to kill me once.  But hey, the ship is in good hands.

Shepard: What's the worst that can happen?

[SardaukarElite]

Miranda says it in the English version.  It just makes no bloody sense.  I'd like to think that one person tried to speak up:

 

Not to mention that Shepard might as well hang around for the all important reaper tech tests anyway, it's not like the next mission is actually that pressing at that point. Also Shepard should be pretty good at picking two squad mates by now, and if the Kodiak can fly the whole team it makes you wonder why they only ever take three normally.

[In Exile]

Miranda says it in the English version.  It just makes no bloody sense.  I'd like to think that one person tried to speak up:

 

Shepard: Agreed.  We'll take the shuttle.

<flying out>

 

Jacob: Um Shepard, we just left the Normandy crew alone.

Shepard: And?

Jacob: Is it a really good idea?  I mean, this Reaper tech is unknown.

Shepard: You knew this was as suicidal mission when you started this.  There is a lot of unknowns out there.

Jacob: EDI isn't invulnerable.  Project Overlord?  David?  The square root of PI?  That should ring some bells for you, Shepard.

Shepard: David was unique.  The Collectors can never harm the Normandy.

Jacob: Yeah, but the crew has a lot of non-combatants in it.  Surely we could spare one or two of us?

Shepard: EDI would have let us know if there was a problem.  

Jacob: Maybe.  This doesn't feel right.

Jacob: I think we still have time to go back and leave at least Grunt and Zaeed for backup.  Jack too.

Shepard: Enough, Jacob.  Sure, the Collectors seem to have it in for humans, and tried to kill me once.  But hey, the ship is in good hands.

Shepard: What's the worst that can happen?

 

There's only one explanation: it just happened the day we tested the IFF was Shepard's birthday, and it was all a carefully orchestrated surprise party by a crew that was really drunk by the time the idea came around. 

[Dantriges]

it's not like the next mission is actually that pressing at that point. Also Shepard should be pretty good at picking two squad mates by now, and if the Kodiak can fly the whole team it makes you wonder why they only ever take three normally.

 

Will we ever find out what this mission was?  

Why three? Perhaps Monty Python and the Holy grail became tactical doctrine.   You may only take three, not two and not four and especially not five.

[MarchWaltz]

This is not a mistake, I can pretty much promise you it's going to happen in one form or another.

 

I would advise you get used to it.

Max Payne 3 would like a word with you

[Bourne Endeavor]

Would've made more sense if the Collectors made a diversion that somehow had to involve all your squadmates

 

My idea on that whole scenario is it triggered once you started a mission and you essentially have to fight the Collectors aboard the Normandy, with how fast you're able to push them back being what determines who is taken. 

[Oni Changas]

I like ambiguous endings. They leave space for headcanon.

Handcannons are lazy writing. The way I see it, THEY'RE writing the story, not me. Finish the damn story or continue it if you sre gonna leave cliffhangers.

[Grieving Natashina]

I thought it was pretty final to me.  Shep shoots the tube, breathes and lives.  That's all I know or need to.  It doesn't seem like a cliffhanger.  A story lacking an epilogue for the main character him/herself after the breath different from one that ends on a cliffhanger.  The headcanon part comes what happens after that breath, but that's more of an epilogue.  They finished the story, albeit rather abruptly and without nearly as much grace as they could have used for that sequence.

 

It would have be nice if they could have shown more of an epilogue for Shepard, but oh well.  All we can do now is give our thoughts and hope they've been listening.  

[Sylvius the Mad]

Handcannons are lazy writing. The way I see it, THEY'RE writing the story, not me. Finish the damn story or continue it if you sre gonna leave cliffhangers.

BioWare cannot write a complete story around a character that you design.  If you're able to roleplay the character - to control his thoughts and motives and interests from moment-to-moment within the game, BioWare doesn't know enough about that character in order to write a tightly woven narrative.

 

If I can't play wildly different characters on different playthroughs of the same game, I do not want to play that game.

 

I have no interest in merely being told a story.  I want that story to arise naturally from the actions of my character.  BioWare cannot possibly write the story if they don't know what sort of person the protagonist is (or possibly which character is the protagonist).

 

I want that level of control.  That means I don't want BioWare to write the story.

[Oni Changas]

The Vasir fight I liked. Too bad she couldn't be a squadmate

The shadow broker wasn't bad. It would be more fun if he was able to call for backup

Kai Leng. This guy is a joke. He's just a Cerberus trooper with a sword. I would not classify him as an assassin. I would've had the guy kill the councilor as soon as he landed behind her, stabbed Liara on Thessia instead sticking his sword in the ground and throw her across the screen or instead of him playing ballerina, order the gunship to fire at the supports after TIM and Shepard finish talking. The fight on Chronos was ok. He still needed to recharge. I wonder what the clown would've done if we were fighting in the desert?

Yes dude! Imagine angrily finishing the convo with TIM when suddenly the placed gets bombarded and Leng procceeds to whip the nearest squadmates' ass before rushing you. That final battle should have been an N7 1v1 with w unique melee system ala MGS4.

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

Basic mistake:

Failing to get plot and character ideas anchored in from the beginning and allowing whoever whines loudest on BSN to change the creative vision. I have no interest in playing a game produced by these forums. I'll consider playing one produced by Bioware.

[Aezint]

Mac Walters.

[Weskerr]

Mac Walters.

[Oni Changas]

BioWare cannot write a complete story around a character that you design.  If you're able to roleplay the character - to control his thoughts and motives and interests from moment-to-moment within the game, BioWare doesn't know enough about that character in order to write a tightly woven narrative.

 

If I can't play wildly different characters on different playthroughs of the same game, I do not want to play that game.

 

I have no interest in merely being told a story.  I want that story to arise naturally from the actions of my character.  BioWare cannot possibly write the story if they don't know what sort of person the protagonist is (or possibly which character is the protagonist).

 

I want that level of control.  That means I don't want BioWare to write the story.

Funny, I remember Shepard staring off to the horizon of space and intently looking at a datapad all fine and dandy in some games. Handcannon is lazy wrting. You will not change my mind or opinion. More power to you if you believe otherwise. I'd rather have my story wrapped up one way or another, not with handcannon shotsthat make plot holes or make me question more. I want answers if its the finale. Like I said before, MGS4 and RE5 perfectly wrapped up their series' respectively and answered nearly all questions. I ain't the storyteller, I just decide how it plays out.

[The_Shade]

Abolish the Paragon and Renegade system - To encourage more complex and grey choices rather 
than a dumbed down morality system.  

 

Do NOT add a completely new central conflict ten minutes before the ending with a character that 
we have never met or seen in the game met before. (That has the capacity to lead to a very bad ending). 
  
Single Player and Multiplayer should be independent of one another. The plot should not be 
determined by MP.

[Sifr]

There's only one explanation: it just happened the day we tested the IFF was Shepard's birthday, and it was all a carefully orchestrated surprise party by a crew that was really drunk by the time the idea came around. 

 

It would have made a lot more sense for Shepard to declare they were allowing the crew to have a brief shore leave (preferably on a well-defended colony or Cerberus outpost), while Joker and a volunteer skeleton crew remained onboard to install the IFF and perform shakedown runs in the system.

 

It would have still seemed contrived, but at least it would better explain the decision for 10-12 people to abandon ship in the middle of an important mission for no reason whatsoever.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Funny, I remember Shepard staring off to the horizon of space and intently looking at a datapad all fine and dandy in some games. Handcannon is lazy wrting. You will not change my mind or opinion. More power to you if you believe otherwise. I'd rather have my story wrapped up one way or another, not with handcannon shotsthat make plot holes or make me question more. I want answers if its the finale. Like I said before, MGS4 and RE5 perfectly wrapped up their series' respectively and answered nearly all questions. I ain't the storyteller, I just decide how it plays out.

Which is why I don't play games like MGS. Because I'm not the storyteller in those. I won't play JRPGs for the same reason.

Roleplaying games cannot have tight narratives.

[Sully13]

ok Bioware employee reading this thtead can i call you Bill? 

ok Bill one word of advice.  

dont listen to us. we dont know what we want.

[Quarian Master Race]

Here's another plot one from me.  With a few exceptions, I try to avoid a lot of complaining about the plot.  Odin knows that the ME forums have had that covered for years. but this bugs the crap out of me.

 

There was two points in the series where I found myself yelling at the screen with very coarse language.  One of them was the Starbrat, but the other has to be the setup for the Collector abduction of the Normandy Crew.  I tend to let a lot of inconsistencies in the main arc of the ME series slide, but that made no sense to me.  It still irks me every time it comes up.  

 

Why would the entire squad leave for just one mission?  Why would characters like... 

 

• Grunt (who mentions pretty early on that the Normandy would be easy to invade,)
• The utterly careful and very smart (Miranda, Mordin) 
• Have centuries of battle experience (Samara/Morinth)
• Very paranoid (Zaeed, Jack)
• Or, worst of all for me, were at least on the Normandy in ME1 (Tali, Garrus)

Everyone on the ship had to get handed the idiot ball so that the AI could save the day. The entire contrived setup to the crew abduction is there to push Ray Kurzweil inspired transhumanist crap and make you sympathize with and ultimately accept EDI as an equal, just like the Rannoch arc pinnochio syndrome and quarian/geth "peace" (read: unconditional surrender), and the "best" ending in synthesis.

They can't just write a logical narrative and have you judge the AI's usefulness based on its merits, they have to come up with contrived scenarios and beat you over the head with the feels stick at every oppourtunity so that you know it's a people just like (or actually better than) you, or else you're engaging in fantastic racism.

[Hiemoth]

A very important detail: GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD OUR CHARACTER. If there are mandatory plot events, such as Shepard's resurrection in ME2 or the fall of Thessia in ME3, then we NEED the opportunity to discuss these with other characters and PICK a reaction. Shepard turns their death and resurrection into a joke, when some of us believe that it's a massive trauma that involves a significant amount of PTSD. Shepard will take the fall of Thessia personally, while some of us believe that Shepard bares no responsibility and maybe even are pissed off at the way the asari acted throughout the war effort.

 

Don't limit the PC's characterization to just one path in regards to how they are reacting to events taking place. These games are Role Playing Games. Let us role play.

 

A small point, but there are several discussions in ME3 with the crew members after the fall of Thessia. The game does exactly what you are asking it to do.

[Dantriges]

I thought it was more to put you on a time and sever remaining ties to Cerberus. At this point most people would have made up her mind about the AI on board already.