111 réponses à ce sujet

[dragonflight288]

That is not a resolution at all. That reveals or enunciates literally absolutely nothing the player was not already entirely familiar with. The entire point of any meaningful conflict of 'equal validity' is that both sides are 'someone right' and both have 'valid reasons.'

 

This does nothing to resolve the conflict at all, it's pointlessly marching it onwards.

 

So you see no way for the "how" a conflict being resolved by two people are are right and make good points but disagree on the path to solving a problem as meaningful, or in the emotional conflict a character goes through when presented with only bad choices and no good ones can be made?

 

What you are arguing for seems to be a complete dismissal of how life actually works and how conflicts rise, get resolved and new conflicts come soon thereafter or may even be created as a direct or indirect consequence of the previous resolution.

 

Let me create a scenario where there are no good choices to be had, and the solutions are things no one wants to do but urgency requires it.

 

***

 

Adviser 1: Sir, we have a plague creating Zombies, but it's limited to Manhattan Island. If we quarantine the bridge and close off all ports, we can contain this outbreak and keep it from spreading across the country, and maybe the world.

 

Adviser 2: That would leave millions of people to die!

 

Adviser 1: The risk of global infection is too great. 

 

Adviser 3: Quarantine in this situation is just not enough. We can't stop the drug trade or gun traffickers, how can we stop people smuggling themselves out of the city? We cannot, but neither can we sit on our hands. I recommend we evacuate New York outside of Manhattan Island and drop a nuke on the island and utterly destroy any chance of the virus getting loose. 

 

Adviser 2: You're all crazy!?! There has to be another way.

 

President: Kindly tell us one. All we have are bad choices, and action that must be taken immediately. There is no time to find another way, so you better have one right now.

 

Adviser 2: I don't have one, but I know the other options are wrong. 

 

President: *sigh* So sacrifice a huge city with millions of people to kill themselves and fighting any zombies that try coming through, nuke it and stop the zombies but deal with radiation and knowledge we directly killed millions of otherwise uninfected citizens, or do nothing and hope for a better solution....which is the best bad choice?

 

***

 

Conflict doesn't even need to be an external thing to be overcome to make a gripping story. 

[Lady Artifice]

I enjoy the archetypal Betty and Veronica romance triangle and variations thereof, though I usually prefer the kind that doesn't spend a lot of time belaboring the point (Hawke and Fenris had an interesting dynamic on that point, imo). Anyway, I seem to be alone in this. I think most other people find it overdone. Or maybe stories like Twilight have ruined it in specific. 

 

I think variations on that trope occurred with all of the LIs in Origins, ME1, and DA2. I don't see it as much in other/later Bioware games. I'm interested in speculating whether Bioware is deliberately moving away from that dynamic, or if it's coincidental. Or if this active departure from the trend is more in my head than it is in the story in the first place. 

[BabyPuncher]

A pity for you, I suppose, if you can't see it.

 

Well isn't that conveniently self-satisfying.

 

Conflict without resolution is poor writing, practiced and even encouraged by far too many writers these days.

 

Sounds like you need some better reading, then. There's totally gripping stories out there, and they can totally be done through games.

 

Any game that can make the player experience catharsis, for example, is an emotional challenge. A reader, or a player, can definitely work, and suffer, their way through an emotional rollercoaster.

 

And such 'work' and 'suffering' is wholly and entirely irrelevant to the actual outcome of the game. You can weep buckets or be totally indifferent. The story on the screen in front of you won't react to it one bit. The player does not 'earn' anything through whatever 'work' or tears or emotions they might have.
 

[BabyPuncher]

What you are arguing for seems to be a complete dismissal of how life actually works and how conflicts rise, get resolved and new conflicts come soon thereafter or may even be created as a direct or indirect consequence of the previous resolution.

 

No, actually, what I'm arguing is the simple and obvious reality that 'grey' or 'equal' choices or conflicts are not good writing by their mere existence. That, like any conflict or character, the writer actually has to enunciate something meaningful. That conflicts are just conflicts and characters are just characters, and 'greyness' is not some awe-inspiring jaw-dropping revelation that turns morality on it's very head and has the audience gasping in incredulity that such an incomprehensible thing could ever, ever exist.

[RandomSyhn]

I enjoy the archetypal Betty and Veronica romance triangle and variations thereof, though I usually prefer the kind that doesn't spend a lot of time belaboring the point (Hawke and Fenris had an interesting dynamic on that point, imo). Anyway, I seem to be alone in this. I think most other people find it overdone. Or maybe stories like Twilight have ruined it in specific. 

 

I think variations on that trope occurred with all of the LIs in Origins, ME1, and DA2. I don't see it as much in other/later Bioware games. I'm interested in speculating whether Bioware is deliberately moving away from that dynamic, or if it's coincidental. Or if this active departure from the trend is more in my head than it is in the story in the first place. 

This could be interesting because it could play out in so many ways as well. I liked DA II where Fenris left Hawke (sorta) and Anders called him out on it. I in no way wanted to romance Anders and enjoyed telling them to both shut up but it was fun from a character standpoint. I know people complained about Anders hitting on you regardless of gender but I think there needs to be moments like that since they so mirror reality. I've been hit on by people I definitely didn't want to hit on me and I have (unintentionally) almost made two would be suitors fight over my affections. (spoilers neither of them got it)

 

I find things like this mirror life. I've had friends pine over someone who was already in a relationship, and I've know people that have acted despite those relationships. Drama is what makes for a good story.

[Dean_the_Young]

I enjoy the archetypal Betty and Veronica romance triangle and variations thereof, though I usually prefer the kind that doesn't spend a lot of time belaboring the point (Hawke and Fenris had an interesting dynamic on that point, imo). Anyway, I seem to be alone in this. I think most other people find it overdone. Or maybe stories like Twilight have ruined it in specific. 

 

I think variations on that trope occurred with all of the LIs in Origins, ME1, and DA2. I don't see it as much in other/later Bioware games. I'm interested in speculating whether Bioware is deliberately moving away from that dynamic, or if it's coincidental. Or if this active departure from the trend is more in my head than it is in the story in the first place. 

 

Too much bad anime and fanfiction has soured me on player-centered love triangles.

 

What I'm interest in would be the player being the third wheel in a budding companion-companion relationship. Like, if you do nothing then two companions gradually get together over the course of the story (occasionally by dialogue, but also visible in gestures/background scenes during 'key story' cutscenes). But if the player flirts with one or another, you can get dragged into/turn it into a love triangle of sorts.

 

For planning purposes, I'd suggest it only resolve as the two of them or a polyamory, rather than the player getting an 'exclusive' relationship, but it'd be interesting for the player to be a love rival rather than be fought over by other rivals.

[Mcfly616]

Should they give us an Asari squadmate who is like Captain Enyala?

 Her.....or Tela Vasir?

[KaiserShep]

Captain Enyala isn't as polite as the guy whose neck we snap.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Pandas kill more resteraunters than any other animal.

 

You know a Panda is in a resteraunt when it eats, shoots, and leaves.

[Elhanan]

Am wondering what other FTL mechanics may be possible if the past Mass Relay system is no longer available. I mean, humanity may have lost the actual Tech, but not the knowledge gained during the time they were extant.

[Shinobu]

I can be meaningful for the the PCs development in the eyes of the player. How they solve the same problem tells you something about them. The fact that the problem is solved isn't as important as how it is solved. Games are an immersive medium and having choices that affect the thought process of the player help to make the story. That won't always make both options meaningful writing right of the bat, there still has to be some effort into making the player even care beyond "I want to win the game". So having multiple solutions can be meaningful but like most things it has to be handled properly by the writers and in the context of the game.

 

QFT. I liked the ME1 sidequest to return Samesh Bhatia's wife's body to him. It had no real in-game effect if you allowed the Alliance to keep the body or forced them to return it, but it fleshed out Shepard's personality.

[Fredward]

Conflict without resolution is poor writing.

 

Why?

[AlanC9]

No, actually, what I'm arguing is the simple and obvious reality that 'grey' or 'equal' choices or conflicts are not good writing by their mere existence. That, like any conflict or character, the writer actually has to enunciate something meaningful. That conflicts are just conflicts and characters are just characters, and 'greyness' is not some awe-inspiring jaw-dropping revelation that turns morality on it's very head and has the audience gasping in incredulity that such an incomprehensible thing could ever, ever exist.

Was anyone actually proposing these things that you're arguing against?

[BabyPuncher]

Was anyone actually proposing these things that you're arguing against?

 

Yes. Read the scenario at the top of the page.

 

What's there? A 'grey' scenario. A scenario where there is no 'right answer.' That's it. Nothing else. The clear implication is exactly what I said. That 'greyness' is such a jaw-dropping, table-turning revelation its mere existence qualifies as good writing.

[iM3GTR]

 

 

 

[straykat]

QFT. I liked the ME1 sidequest to return Samesh Bhatia's wife's body to him. It had no real in-game effect if you allowed the Alliance to keep the body or forced them to return it, but it fleshed out Shepard's personality.

 

Would've been better if you got some badass bonus in the Lazarus project later. ... if you were a jerk in ME1.

 

j/k

[von uber]

Pandas kill more resteraunters than any other animal.

 

You know a Panda is in a resteraunt when it eats, shoots, and leaves.

 

You know, in the UK the joy is far cruder and sexualised. Funny that in the US it is based around violence, and in the UK sex. Explains the other thread.

[Dermain]

Why?

 

I take it you're not familiar with him?

 

He's an expert on heroism, writing, toggles, and all manner of other topics.

[dragonflight288]

I take it you're not familiar with him?

 

He's an expert on heroism, writing, toggles, and all manner of other topics.

 

And dismissing anyone who disagrees with him. 

[Fredward]

I take it you're not familiar with him?

 

He's an expert on heroism, writing, toggles, and all manner of other topics.

 

I know he has  ~views~, I'm more interested in how he got them and what supports them.

[ZombiePopper]

Upcoming thread;

"I'm hung over and want to sleepy!!!"

[pdusen]

I take it you're not familiar with him?

 

He's an expert on heroism, writing, toggles, and all manner of other topics.

 

Also programming and human resources management.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Do you even understand what resolution I'm talking about?

 

I'll humor you. Okay, you have a problem that can be solved two different ways. Both have consequences. The actually important question is - so what? What is this supposed to do or mean? Why should I care? Is the existence of a problem that can solved in two different ways supposed to meaningful or powerful by its mere existence? What is it about this that makes it meaningful writing or a good story?
 

 

Explosions.

[Il Divo]

I know he has  ~views~, I'm more interested in how he got them and what supports them.

 

Someone should make a documentary about it. ​

[FKA_Servo]

I take it you're not familiar with him?

He's an expert on heroism, writing, toggles, and all manner of other topics.

I actually do think his perspective and opinions provide valuable feedback.

Of course, that feedback is more along the lines of "what NOT to do," but still.