413 réponses à ce sujet

[JeffZero]

I didn't even like the MP. I'm the toughest sell re: multiplayer you'll ever meet, though.

 

But I do love ME3.

[In Exile]

Agreed. Mass Effect 2 is the definition of style over substance.

I agree - at least on the plot and execution - but that's why I liked ME2. The substance in ME was always B-movie territory at best. Often it was bargain bin sci-fi. Moving away from that benefited the series, IMO. The Suicide Mission - which was a silly gimmick, lacked any real build-up in the plot and ultimately amounted to nothing even in the games own story DLCs - was just an awesome experience from start to finish.

[BabyPuncher]

I agree - at least on the plot and execution - but that's why I liked ME2. The substance in ME was always B-movie territory at best. Often it was bargain bin sci-fi. Moving away from that benefited the series, IMO. The Suicide Mission - which was a silly gimmick, lacked any real build-up in the plot and ultimately amounted to nothing even in the games own story DLCs - was just an awesome experience from start to finish.

 

I'm having the strangest sense of deja vu. Weren't you basically repeating this the other day in regards to the science of the series, before admitting that there's very little hard science fiction and it's rarely any good? With the incredibly silly 'solution' that good science fiction should just not bother to give any explanation of it's technology whatsoever?

 

Why don't you give me a few examples of what you think is actually not 'bargain bin sci-fi'?

[In Exile]

I'm having the strangest sense of deja vu. Weren't you basically repeating this the other day in regards to the science of the series, before admitting that there's very little hard science fiction and it's rarely any good? With the incredibly silly 'solution' that good science fiction should just not bother to give any explanation of it's technology whatsoever?

Why don't you give me a few examples of what you think is actually not 'bargain bin sci-fi'?

Your inability to parse English may the trigger here, as I've never said either thing. Feel free to revist the thread to refresh your memory.

There is an absurdly large gulf between the incoherent gibberish that is MEs attempt to explain science, and fun science fiction that generally asks its audience to accept its implausibility and then moves on. ME1 and ME3, quite apart from being gibberish on the science, have awful stories. ME3 in parts has poignant and interesting themes, but doesn't really tie its more interesting scenarios into a coherent narrative. And ME1 has a largely nonsensical plot, with absurd and illogical politics, impossible timelines, and incoherent character motivations.

As for good sci-fi, and what I think really captures the power of the setting, I stand by Hyperion (but only the first book - the sequels went decidedly downhill).

[marcelo caldas]

Your inability to parse English may the trigger here, as I've never said either thing. Feel free to revist the thread to refresh your memory.

There is an absurdly large gulf between the incoherent gibberish that is MEs attempt to explain science, and fun science fiction that generally asks its audience to accept its implausibility and then moves on. ME1 and ME3, quite apart from being gibberish on the science, have awful stories. ME3 in parts has poignant and interesting themes, but doesn't really tie its more interesting scenarios into a coherent narrative. And ME1 has a largely nonsensical plot, with absurd and illogical politics, impossible timelines, and incoherent character motivations.

As for good sci-fi, and what I think really captures the power of the setting, I stand by Hyperion (but only the first book - the sequels went decidedly downhill).

Do you like something from the games?

[Killroy]

So what was ME3 then? Too much substance?

It was a continuation of ME2. Style over substance, bad writing, aimless direction. ME2 veered the ship off course and ME3 held that course.

This sounds to me like you're upset over 'your' Shepard not preparing for the Reapers. Is that the case?

You understand it wouldn't make any difference?

...what? How is it that you're able to write but not read?

[BabyPuncher]

It's always been the case that the "fiction" part of science fiction comes in by taking advantage of the unknown in our base of knowledge. There needn't be an explanation for the premise at all.

 

There are very few "hard" sci-fi stories, and they're rarely any good.

 

Hmm. This seems pretty clear to me. This doesn't seem pretty clear to you? Perhaps it's your inability to parse English.

 

You know, I think we should have a little chat about this science in question. Isn't it quite amazing just how many posters crawl out of the woodwork qualified in esoteric scientific topics that are at minimum undergraduate senior and often graduate level collegiate knowledge as soon as physics is mentioned? That seems quite amazing to me. Does that seem quite amazing to you?

 

So what is it, exactly, that you think makes element zero 'gibberish'?

[BabyPuncher]

...what? How is it that you're able to write but not read?

 

So that isn't the case then? You're not angry or upset over 'your' Shepard not preparing for the Reapers? Because I've seen some people who seem very convinced that an obvious solution was right in front of them. 'Hey, what if we just built a billion jillion dreadnoughts and shot the Reapers in the face!" Or the obvious solution that Shepard should've spent the time 'doing research' to invent some magic technology or whatever. And these people are therefore angry over the plots of ME 2 and ME 3 because they feel that obvious solution was snatched away from 'their Shepard.'

 

Of course that's all just foolish, and it wouldn't make any difference. But that's not you, of course? You wouldn't be angry about that, would you?

[JeffZero]

Let's maybe try to not be weird, eh.

[wolfhowwl]

So that isn't the case then? You're not angry or upset over 'your' Shepard not preparing for the Reapers? Because I've seen some people who seem very convinced that an obvious solution was right in front of them. 'Hey, what if we just built a billion jillion dreadnoughts and shot the Reapers in the face!" Or the obvious solution that Shepard should've spent the time 'doing research' to invent some magic technology or whatever. And these people are therefore angry over the plots of ME 2 and ME 3 because they feel that obvious solution was snatched away from 'their Shepard.'

 

Of course that's all just foolish, and it wouldn't make any difference. But that's not you, of course? You wouldn't be angry about that, would you?

 

Does it make you feel powerful to say this?

[This is the End My Friend]

LOL.

[BabyPuncher]

You have to admit that there's in a problem in being angry with a plot because your character isn't handed a magic wand to solve their problems. Just, you know, in general. And Shepard just building a fleet to kill the Reapers is a magic wand. We can't let our attachments to fictional characters get in the way of the absolute necessity of their struggle.

[This is the End My Friend]

You have to admit that there's in a problem in being angry with a plot because your character isn't handed a magic wand to solve their problems. Just, you know, in general. We can't let our attachments to fictional characters get in the way of the absolute necessity of their struggle.

 

Well as long as the player gets to be a big goddamn hero.

[KaiserShep]

Does it make you feel powerful to say this?

"My retorts will tear you apart."

[This is the End My Friend]

Speaking of ME2, the suicide mission was the bees knees, nonsense plot and all.

[BabyPuncher]

Well as long as the player gets to be a big goddamn hero.

 

Jesus Christ, no. Then we just get what we saw in Inquisition.

[KaiserShep]

It's just too bad the Contra reaper made its way in there. But the game really should've left some tougher enemies for last. After Horizon it was all a cakewalk.

[KaiserShep]

Jesus Christ, no. Then we just get what we saw in Inquisition.

But Shepard got to be a big guddamn hero, as did the Warden.

[JeffZero]

I'll never actually disagree with "Bob" about Inquisition lacking the struggle that defines my favorite stories. It's there big-time around the plot's ~40% mark, but afterward there really needed to be another setback.

 

Even Mike Laidlaw admitted that, in hindsight!

[BabyPuncher]

So did the Inquisitor. But that doesn't mean anything by itself.

[AlanC9]

Hmm. This seems pretty clear to me. This doesn't seem pretty clear to you? Perhaps it's your inability to parse English.
 
You know, I think we should have a little chat about this science in question. Isn't it quite amazing just how many posters crawl out of the woodwork qualified in esoteric scientific topics that are at minimum undergraduate senior and often graduate level collegiate knowledge as soon as physics is mentioned? That seems quite amazing to me. Does that seem quite amazing to you?
 
So what is it, exactly, that you think makes element zero 'gibberish'?

Wouldn't your best response there have been to drop in a list of really hard SF stories that are really good? If In Exile really is as wrong as you say, you should be able to make it stick. What you've got here is a bit weak.

[BabyPuncher]

Wouldn't your best response there have been to drop in a list of really hard SF stories that are really good? If In Exile really is as wrong as you say, you should be able to make it stick. What you've got here is a bit weak.

That seems to be in complete opposition to my point. Which is that while yes, Mass Effect does make mistakes, sometimes very big ones, that's very much standard fare for pretty much all science fiction barring a small collection of fairly obscure novels. And it does do many things right, such as element zero, generally, which puts it ahead of the majority of popular fiction. And that deriding it as sub-standard is therefore stupid.

A list of really hard and really well written stories would refute that. Not support it.

[Killroy]

So that isn't the case then? You're not angry or upset over 'your' Shepard not preparing for the Reapers? Because I've seen some people who seem very convinced that an obvious solution was right in front of them. 'Hey, what if we just built a billion jillion dreadnoughts and shot the Reapers in the face!" Or the obvious solution that Shepard should've spent the time 'doing research' to invent some magic technology or whatever. And these people are therefore angry over the plots of ME 2 and ME 3 because they feel that obvious solution was snatched away from 'their Shepard.'
 
Of course that's all just foolish, and it wouldn't make any difference. But that's not you, of course? You wouldn't be angry about that, would you?

You just pulled this baseless assertion out of thin air and tried to insult me with it. Is it lean times under your bridge?

[KaiserShep]

So did the Inquisitor. But that doesn't mean anything by itself.

If it doesn't mean anything by itself, then there's not much to really oppose. 

[shodiswe]

Who?