475 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

It was always just sort of accepted, even by the Broccoli's, that James Bond in film is not one man. He is, in fact, each of the different men we've seen him as. Sean Connery played one incarnation, Roger Moore another, etc. Each new Bond was the successor to the last agent who was assigned the name to go along with it's correlating 00 designation. Skyfall crapped all over that and essentially invalidated all Bond films that came before Casino Royale. None of the pre-Craig films could have happened, meaning Casino Royale was a total reboot of the franchise. And that causes all sorts of problems on it's own, like M being the same person as in the Brosnan installments and such. It's a mess of Skyfall's making

 

 

Was there ever even a real continuity in Bond movies for Skyfall to crap all over? Until Casino Royale, I was always under the impression that each bond film (that I've seen) never cared about what came before. 

 

In the context of Casino Royale being a reboot, I can't see why retaining M is a problem. She's simply playing the same character in a reboot. 

[Cheviot]

It was always just sort of accepted, even by the Broccoli's, that James Bond in film is not one man. He is, in fact, each of the different men we've seen him as. Sean Connery played one incarnation, Roger Moore another, etc. Each new Bond was the successor to the last agent who was assigned the name to go along with it's correlating 00 designation.

No that's not exactly true.  It's a fan theory that gained traction in the last couple of years because it was in a Cracked article.

[Killroy]

No that's not exactly true.  It's a fan theory that gained traction in the last couple of years because it was in a Cracked article.

The Broccoli's were talking about it back in the 80's.

[Han Shot First]

If this is legit I'm going to join the chorus of people praying that the Cerberus drop ships are just placeholders. This game is a used bargain-bin purchase if those clowns are once again the chief antagonists. Didn't we get more than enough of them in the last two games?

 

Mac, pls....

 

 

How weren't they stupid in ME2? They went from a rogue black ops group to the richest, most resource-havin' group in the galaxy that wastes money bringing people back from the dead, making 2:1 scale reproductions of rekt ships and so many space stations they're disposable, and yet still can't accomplish anything without Space Jesus.

 

That about covers it. They're also a supposedly covert organization that wears uniforms and plasters their logo over everything they own. The level of derp with that is just too damned high!

[Cheviot]

The Broccoli's were talking about it back in the 80's.

What, about how MI6 were hiring a string of agents with the same naval backgrounds, drink preferences and fondness for promiscuity?  Also, For Your Eyes Only starts with a scene where the current Bond (Roger Moore) visits his wife's grave.  His wife died in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, starring George Lazenby as Bond (though OHMSS is probably where the theory started, strangely enough).

[Aimi]

It was always just sort of accepted, even by the Broccoli's, that James Bond in film is not one man. He is, in fact, each of the different men we've seen him as. Sean Connery played one incarnation, Roger Moore another, etc. Each new Bond was the successor to the last agent who was assigned the name to go along with it's correlating 00 designation. Skyfall crapped all over that and essentially invalidated all Bond films that came before Casino Royale. None of the pre-Craig films could have happened, meaning Casino Royale was a total reboot of the franchise. And that causes all sorts of problems on it's own, like M being the same person as in the Brosnan installments and such. It's a mess of Skyfall's making.


No Bond film had ever devolved into a Home Alone sequel until Skyfall. No Bond film had ever tried to pass off a Joker knock-off as the antagonist until Skyfall. No Bond film had ever shown Bond to be a lazy turncoat until Skyfall.


But that's the thing. Those are not always constants and Casino Royale showed that they probably shouldn't be. The fact that after Casino Royale they kept creeping back more and more to the old formula shows that none of the films since have been as inspired or intelligent. Casino Royale made a promise that the franchise couldn't keep. They rebooted the franchise in a really smart, timely way just to veer it right back to Brosnan/Moore territory.

The 'multiple agents' thing is just a fan theory, and there's evidence in the films that directly contradicts it. If you're inclined to view the Bond films as a continuity, then the opening sequence of For Your Eyes Only is incomprehensible: Roger Moore leaves flowers at the grave of George Lazenby's wife, whereupon he is attacked by a figure that is apparently a really incompetent Blofeld in a wheelchair, going for some sort of revenge. Actually, pretty much everything to do with On Her Majesty's Secret Service is incomprehensible, because George Lazenby's Bond appears to have the same relationship with Blofeld as did Connery's, and in Diamonds Are Forever things continued with Connery as though they'd never changed.

Of course, if you're not inclined to view the Bond films as a continuity, then all those problems disappear. Creating some sort of unified lore explanation isn't the point. We're not talking about the DC universe here, we're talking about a bunch of British action movies whose creators borrow from each other and ignore each other as is convenient for them.

The same goes for the sorts of devices and ideas employed in the films. So Bond never did a 'Home Alone' sequence before? So what? There was never a major boat-chase scene in a Bond film until Live and Let Die. Gadgets in general didn't take center stage until Goldfinger, with Bond's briefcase making a minor cameo in From Russia With Love. (Back in Dr. No, all Q gave Bond was a standard-issue Walther PPK to replace Bond's beloved Beretta, and M was really the one who drove that conversation.) Knock-off antagonists? We've had plenty of those, too; anyone who believes that Franz Sanchez or Kananga were sui generis is deluded, and Max Zorin was a fairly transparent excuse to get Christopher Walken to play a Christopher Walken character. And I don't even know what 'lazy turncoat' is supposed to mean, and neither do the vast majority of people who watched Skyfall.

And about the last thing...uh, let me know when you find a Bond film with a main character that isn't all of those things that I mentioned.

Look, I agree with you that Skyfall is overrated, that Spectre was kind of bad, and that A View To A Kill was hot garbage. I agree that there are a large number of terrible Bond films. (There are four categories of James Bond film: bad, hard to watch for me personally because of horrendous amounts of misogyny, both, and Casino Royale.) But sometimes criticizing things goes way too far. Skyfall can be overrated without being a betrayal of the franchise or whatever.

[Mdizzletr0n]

I agree with most of this post but I frankly don't understand how the quoted part is even a criticism. The Bond films kind of have a lore, but not really, and it's cavalierly thrown out or outright played with when necessary. And "tone" changes wildly between different directors, let alone lead actors. From Russia With Love was significantly dissimilar to Goldfinger and Thunderball; it's only loosely related to A View To A Kill and is almost nothing like Die Another Day or Casino Royale. Often, the films are campy and stupid, but not always. There's usually a Bad Guy and a Chief Henchman, but not always. The secondary and tertiary characters have changed dramatically; Lois Maxwell, Caroline Bliss, Samantha Bond, and Naomie Harris have all played quite different Moneypennys, and Bernard Lee had a much different M than did Judi Dench. Tanner was sort of a thing for awhile, then there was Robinson, and then we got Tanner again.

That's just kind of the way the films are. Bond is a white, heterosexual, more-or-less posh, conservative British man with an overactive sex life who works as a hired thug for MI-6 and extols the virtues of British imperialism, and those are the only things that have stayed constant across every film. Frankly, a lot of those things could stand to be dropped by the wayside, too.

So... Idris Elba confirmed? Lol

[Han Shot First]

This is why ME should adopt what Dragons Dogma did. Allow for different body types. I'm not built like Male Shep was but nor am I "obese" or a "string bean." Why can't people with different builds save the day or excel at um...pathfinding? I get that ME is more cinematic than Dragon's Dogma but still... Does being thinner or wider really effect things THAT much? Sure, DA:I had an issue with this but those things could be fixed by now couldn't they? It is the same engine after all.

 

Technical issues aside, a very wide range in body types would strain suspension of disbelief a bit if the protagonist is Special Operations, as this rumored leak suggests. If you're going to have adjustable body types in the character creator for a military protagonist, it should only run from lean and fit to muscular and fit. Fitness is part of the job. 

 

Now if the protagonist was just some merchant captain hauling cargo that gets pulled into extraordinary events...sure, I can buy the guy or gal who looks like he/she would wheeze after a sprint. 

[Mdizzletr0n]

Is the protagonist in SpecOps? Also, there are people in the military that aren't lean. They can't do anything like fly jets but they're there. I saw plenty of them growing up. Some people just won't ever be lean from a genetic standpoint but it doesn't necessarily mean they can't run a 4-5 min mile.

[Getorex]

Is the protagonist in SpecOps? Also, there are people in the military that aren't lean. They can't do anything like fly jets but they're there. I saw plenty of them growing up. Some people just won't ever be lean from a genetic standpoint but it doesn't necessarily mean they can't run a 4-5 min mile.

The mil guys who aren't lean and fit aren't the front liner combatants. No fat pilots, no fat SEALS, no fat Rangers, and wheezer and over weights are highly frowned upon and put on "the program" to lose weight and STOP wheezing. It is not acceptable on many levels. Not on the functional level, and not on a public perception level. There are RULES on appearance that are beyond haircut and facial hair that apply to physical appearance, that apply to presenting a favorable appearance. You have to look good in uniform. Or you go into the program. We called it the Fat Boy program.

You have to pass fitness tests (that are getting harder as time passes), get weighed, and if you are over a certain point then out comes the calipers or measuring tape to determine fat percent. If over the top allowed (not a lot of excess allowed) then it's Fat Boy Prog for you. You can fail to get promoted, even get booted out if you keep failing the tests and regs.

Few yrs ago I knew a full bird colonel, woman. She couldn't do a single pushup. That had been allowed in previous years but then the REQUIREMENTS tightened up. Wheezers NOT allowed. She simply could never get out any pushup and had problems with the run too. She had to retire because the slack went away. The requirements tightened even more recently. Fat wheezers not allowed anymore.

[Mdizzletr0n]

There's also no lady seals.. But I digress.

"Fat Wheezer" is just plain mean. I know that winter is coming but that doesn't mean you can't have a little warmth in your cold, dead heart.

[Han Shot First]

Is the protagonist in SpecOps? Also, there are people in the military that aren't lean. They can't do anything like fly jets but they're there. I saw plenty of them growing up. Some people just won't ever be lean from a genetic standpoint but it doesn't necessarily mean they can't run a 4-5 min mile.

 

There are no obese people in the military. Or at least no obese people in any military organizations that have stringent physical standards. That is certainly going to be the case with any active duty combat arms unit and particularly with special operations. Some degree of physical fitness is literally necessary for the job. 

 

The only people in the military I ever saw who looked like they could stand to lose a few pounds were National Guardsmen, who are really only soldiers for one weekend a month outside of a major war, and the occasional sailor, who aren't doing any ground-pounding. Even then chubby sailors would never make it as a SEAL. The physical demands would be too high.

 

It would probably even be a challenge to intentionally get fat within an active duty military unit that has stringent physical standards. Besides needing to pass annual physical fitness tests, your diet is strictly controlled  (unless your married, your meals are provided by the military) and part of your daily routine involves strenuous physical activity.

 

In basic training all the recruits who weren't in superb physical condition before they arrived either gained weight if they were very thin (from muscle mass), lost weight if they were on the chubby side, or simply couldn't meet the physical requirements and washed out.

[Getorex]

There's also no lady seals.. But I digress.

"Fat Wheezer" is just plain mean. I know that winter is coming but that doesn't mean you can't have a little warmth in your cold, dead heart.

 

 

I was paraphrazing the previous comment about chubby guys in the military who looked like they would wheeze if they ran a mile.  They no longer exist in the US military, and then only in the Guard or Reserves in the PAST.  The rules have tightened up a LOT over the last 10-15 years even for the Guard and Reserves (they now make them pass the same requirements as active duty full-timers).  You're chubby or wheezy, you will either get UN-chubby and UN-wheezy or you get out (or get put out).  During my service there was a war game this one time just before the standards started kicking into much higher gear where we were all gearing up and getting ready to haul our gear out to a waiting plane on the tarmac.  It was hotter then hell and humid that day.  The commanding officer commented we all need to be careful and not push it because we don't want anyone having a heart attack or straining themselves getting their gear out the plane.  I mentioned that if anyone was going to have such problems getting their gear to the plane probably shouldn't be in the service at all.  They looked at me like I was being a "big meanie".  I was being realistic.  If someone is going to stroke out just getting their gear across the tarmac and into a plane in an exercise then they sure as hell weren't in any kind of shape to do their jobs for REAL.  If they cannot even handle walking out to a plane in practice, then how the hell were they supposed to handle real combat?  There's no "take it easy" then, it's haul ass and get the job done.  There's no waiting around for some dude to catch his breath.  "Hey hold up guys!  Can we stop the shooting and blowing sh*t up for a sec and take a breather?"  

 

I am not being "mean" about this, I am making practical comment about the actual reality.  There are simply no more chubby wheezers allowed in the service anymore.  Things have tightened up a lot over the last 10 years in particular.  Before that they tended to let some things slide a bit (but even then if you couldn't do your fitness run you were OUT if you didn't pass in a do-over about 6 months later).  Now they've just tacked on a lot of other physical fitness test components that either get you in much better shape or get you out.  If you fail parts of the test you can still pass the overall test and even still get promoted but you better ace all the rest of it and if you fail the run, you cannot possibly pass at all. That's just the way it is.  They even started tracking progress so if you failed part of the test last year then you MUST show improvement the next year or promotion and a good EPR or OPR (enlisted performance report or officer performance report) was then in question.

[Mdizzletr0n]

My "mean" statement was pretty much tongue in cheek.

I'm sure there's no obese people in the military. I'm more saying that a person can be chubby and still not be a "Wheezer" with a strong cardiovascular system and body strength. We see it in sports (I know I know its not bombs and hoohah. So its not EXACTLY analogous). Sure they won't be the absolute elite Seals, Rangers or whatever other **** like that but it doesn't mean that they can't be a good soldier does it? Some people will just never be lean from a genetic standpoint. No matter what they do.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

If you're going to have adjustable body types in the character creator for a military protagonist, it should only run from lean and fit to muscular and fit. Fitness is part of the job. 

I would love even this. Having options go from lithe to amazonian and everything in between.

Though I hope there would be more we could do than just our musculature. 

 

Is the protagonist in SpecOps?

According to this leak the Pathfinder is or was a N7 Operative, so yes they are Special Operations. 

[AlanC9]

Honestly, I don't see why we should worry about unfit-looking PCs. Players who might be bothered by a fat PC wouldn't make one.

But I don't know if this is worth the dev time. Sure, ideally, there should be fat NPCs. But I'd rather have more varied aliens than fat human NPCs.

[SnakeCode]

Yeah they had me hooked at petite buxom blonde.

 

Don't get your hopes up. That and Cerberus are what people are complaining about.

[Wolfryck]

Don't get your hopes up. That and Cerberus are what people are complaining about.

 

Those SJW would ruin our Gaming soon man.

Since when blondes with racks are a no no?

 

[Master Race]

No blonde, no buy.

[Han Shot First]

Honestly, I don't see why we should worry about unfit-looking PCs. Players who might be bothered by a fat PC wouldn't make one.

But I don't know if this is worth the dev time. Sure, ideally, there should be fat NPCs. But I'd rather have more varied aliens than fat human NPCs.

 

I'd be worried that it would also be applied to NPCs, most of whom would also be made in the same character creator. That sort of broke my immersion a bit in SWTOR, where you occasionally have Republic or Empire military NPCs who have the body fat slider maxed out.

 

On the other hand it would probably be more immersive to have some shop keepers, politicians, and the like who don't look they run 3 or 4 miles before breakfast every day.

 

Win some, lose some I guess.

[Getorex]

No blonde, no buy.

Console? Blonde hair is an easy texture mod to employ if a PC and Shepard was able to be blonde. Conrad was blonde, other NPCs were. There was a blonde Miranda mod that made her look even more like Strahovsky. What's her name at Grissom Academy (Anderson's past love) was blonde.

As for the changeable body thing with making your lead a fat boy or girl, that turns the game into a comedy, like making Newman from Seinfeld into James Bond. Or Galefenakis as an action hero. A joke/comedy.

[Ahriman]

Don't get your hopes up. That and Cerberus are what people are complaining about.

Meh. People were complaining about silly catsuits and breath masks in vacuum. I have nothing against pretty characters. I see enough of ugly characters in my own life.

I'd be worried that it would also be applied to NPCs, most of whom would also be made in the same character creator. That sort of broke my immersion a bit in SWTOR, where you occasionally have Republic or Empire military NPCs who have the body fat slider maxed out.

Oh yeah, those fat sith. Guys clearly joined the Dark Side for cookies. Didn't bother as much as plot written by 15 years old fanfiction writers though. 150 millions and they couldn't hire enough writers with some decent skill, what a shame.

[SnakeCode]

Meh. People were complaining about silly catsuits and breath masks in vacuum. I have nothing against pretty characters. I see enough of ugly characters in my own life.

 

Check a few pages back. Some posters definitely took issue with the blonde character being described as "buxom."

 

 

 

Regarding the whole body type thing, if "realism" or "believability" or whatever you want to call it was a legitimate concern of mine, having attractive female characters in the game would come right near the very bottom of things i'd take issue with.

[SnakeCode]

I'd be worried that it would also be applied to NPCs, most of whom would also be made in the same character creator. That sort of broke my immersion a bit in SWTOR, where you occasionally have Republic or Empire military NPCs who have the body fat slider maxed out.

 

On the other hand it would probably be more immersive to have some shop keepers, politicians, and the like who don't look they run 3 or 4 miles before breakfast every day.

 

Win some, lose some I guess.

 

With the BSNs obsession with inclusiveness and diversity, i'm surprised we don't see demands for fat sliders and things of that nature come up more often.

[Ahriman]

Check a few pages back. Some posters definitely took issue with the blonde character being described as "buxom."

Please, that's a total minority. I was talking about endless threads with hundreds of people back then, and they were mostly about things I mentioned.