238 réponses à ce sujet

[9TailsFox]

It's not a free-for-all. Just because it's RPG doesn't mean all possibilities must always be available. If it were, why don't we get jet planes? Why can't we open a business in Thedas?

This is a role in a specifically crafted branch of maybe a handful of variations on a specific story.

In order for that to have emotional weight at each key point and for the story to be as it is, there are forced choices. Like an ad lib. The blank is on the name, not the sentence.

Ad lib:
As Waldo approached the orb his son _________ began to feel strange.

The story is set. You choose which son, but the fact a son must feel strange cannot be deleted.

So you want to fight the actual story. You want to fight a much larger issue on what these games are made of.

I don't know, play Skyrim, or Black Desert Online. Personally, I am happy with this arrangement. I FEEL the weight of the choice, and also the gravity of what's happening in the overall story, when I am forced to choose between Templars and Mages. That's the intention. To realize that in the context of what is happening, dramatically, there can be no third option.

Hawke can have business in Thedas mine, It's more trouble than profit but still we have it.

And Templars vs Mages really should have 3 option.

[xAmilli0n]

I say the game (all games?) should have Fire Emblem style perma-death.  That way, if you are playing on insanity, you can squad wipe during the tutorial and are forced to play the rest of the game solo.

 

It'll make you think twice about taking your LI with you on a missions that's for sure.

 

 

Spoiler

This is a terrible idea.

[Hammerstorm]

gotta win some and lose some.

 

Why? If the only reson people should die is to make me care more about them/the mission, then the writers have failed to make a good story. I play a game to be awesome and cool and undefeated (unlike my real life), so I want to have the option too save everybody.

(And make sure everybody that mess with MY crew suffer greatly. )

[Gothfather]

Why? If the only reson people should die is to make me care more about them/the mission, then the writers have failed to make a good story. I play a game to be awesome and cool and undefeated (unlike my real life), so I want to have the option too save everybody.

(And make sure everybody that mess with MY crew suffer greatly. )

 

 

The power fantasy is the most over used theme in gaming and it is an absolute failure with some narratives. You can't do a horror game or a survival based game using the power fantasy because in a horror game you have to feel near powerless to feel fear and if you feel so damn awesome in a survival game you are not worried about dying and thus the 'survival' aspect is meaningless which is the core of the game.

 

When a game presents a narrative of fighting against all odds, that survival is almost hopeless like the reaper narrative in the first ME trilogy us going around being so damn awesome works at cross purposes of the narrative. This is the fundamental reason why Me3 endings fail because you have a games mechanics giving you the power fantasy narrative and the trilogy's story narrative telling you it is all just a hail mary. yet in me3 by the time you get in priority earth you are not thinking I might lose this but rather "Reapers, smeapers I've got this." With both narratives in the game telling mutually exclusive things there is no ending that can resolve both so you are left with the trilogy unresolved in the subconscious which results in a unsatisfactory ending.

[In Exile]

The power fantasy is the most over used theme in gaming and it is an absolute failure with some narratives. You can't do a horror game or a survival based game using the power fantasy because in a horror game you have to feel near powerless to feel fear and if you feel so damn awesome in a survival game you are not worried about dying and thus the 'survival' aspect is meaningless which is the core of the game.

 

When a game presents a narrative of fighting against all odds, that survival is almost hopeless like the reaper narrative in the first ME trilogy us going around being so damn awesome works at cross purposes of the narrative. This is the fundamental reason why Me3 endings fail because you have a games mechanics giving you the power fantasy narrative and the trilogy's story narrative telling you it is all just a hail mary. yet in me3 by the time you get in priority earth you are not thinking I might lose this but rather "Reapers, smeapers I've got this." With both narratives in the game telling mutually exclusive things there is no ending that can resolve both so you are left with the trilogy unresolved in the subconscious which results in a unsatisfactory ending.

It's worse than that. Because the game's narrative is also a power fantasy. Shepard is - by the very feats required by the story - an ubermensch. The feats are beyond logic. The victories you win are incredible on the narrative scale because of just how overwhelmed you are - quite often you are the lone bright spot for the entire universe. 

[Hammerstorm]

The power fantasy is the most over used theme in gaming and it is an absolute failure with some narratives. You can't do a horror game or a survival based game using the power fantasy because in a horror game you have to feel near powerless to feel fear and if you feel so damn awesome in a survival game you are not worried about dying and thus the 'survival' aspect is meaningless which is the core of the game.

 

When a game presents a narrative of fighting against all odds, that survival is almost hopeless like the reaper narrative in the first ME trilogy us going around being so damn awesome works at cross purposes of the narrative. This is the fundamental reason why Me3 endings fail because you have a games mechanics giving you the power fantasy narrative and the trilogy's story narrative telling you it is all just a hail mary. yet in me3 by the time you get in priority earth you are not thinking I might lose this but rather "Reapers, smeapers I've got this." With both narratives in the game telling mutually exclusive things there is no ending that can resolve both so you are left with the trilogy unresolved in the subconscious which results in a unsatisfactory ending.

 

And? What I know so isn't mass effect a horror game, or have I missed that in ALL 3 games? it is a rpg that wants to give the player different options, so why should I not want the power too save as many as I can (or kill as many as i can aka suicide mission in me2)? it gives me more reson to play it again.

 

But in the end this is just one of many opinions.

[Stakrin]

Preferably based on my actions, and I wouldn't say to put it in just so it is in, but it could be a powerful feature if pulled off currectly.

[Lonely Heart Poet]

Being deeply in love not only one but with two squdmates who faced their ends in the trilogy, I am okay with deaths if they are well written.
I never hated the way BioWare decided to write Thane's fate. His story was coherent and bittersweet. Of course there were a couple of annoying details, like him hanging lonely in the hospital (like Jacob) I would write differently, but I got my satisfaction in the Citadel dlc.

Kaidan/Ashley tragedy was, however, a surprising twist in a dramatic mission. But war has victims. It would have been unconvincing if only my closest friends managed to survive from all the Reaper horrors.
 

[Suketchi]

Plus, I have real life to look to find the impotence in front of death. I've had lots of death in my family in the last years, plus family friends.

 

For some may seem strange, but I play videogames to have fun. I have no fun when I can't have some hope at least while I play. I like to have the chance to have a more lighthearted run. Conflicts, revelations, sad moments, plot point don't need characters die no matter what.

 

I found myself cry like a baby in Doctor Who, and basically it never happen that a main character die in that show. There are different ways to give shock and feels without the boring forced death, usually even pointless for the plot.

 

You know, I'm seriously under the impression that the people really big on lots of horrible, unavoidable, pointless death for the sake of realism in games, movies, books, etc.. have never actually had to experience losing a loved one before XD

 

I agree, as far as feels go, there are so many other ways to get an emotional response from your audience. Fairy Tail makes me cry like a baby nearly every episode without having to kill anyone. At this point, killing a character just for the sake of GASP, or THE DANGER IS REAL, feels like a cheap trick to force feels from someone because they aren't skilled enough as a writer to do it any other way.

 

Still, I think having the possibility of characters dying in games is important. Mordin is a good example. It was tragic, but I thought it was well done. It ended his story in a way that completed his character arc, and served narrative purpose. (This coming from someone who really wanted my Shepard to just DIE after Mordin's death because I loved Mordin and the universe sucked without him lol)

 

...Another important part of the process that's often overlooked is giving the other characters (and audience) time to mourn before moving on. When they pretend it never happened, and advance the story from that point without properly addressing the death and it's impact on the narrative, I have a hard time caring about the rest of the movie/game/book.

[Felya87]

You know, I'm seriously under the impression that the people really big on lots of horrible, unavoidable, pointless death for the sake of realism in games, movies, books, etc.. have never actually had to experience losing a loved one before XD

I agree, as far as feels go, there are so many other ways to get an emotional response from your audience. Fairy Tail makes me cry like a baby nearly every episode without having to kill anyone. At this point, killing a character just for the sake of GASP, or THE DANGER IS REAL, feels like a cheap trick to force feels from someone because they aren't skilled enough as a writer to do it any other way.

Still, I think having the possibility of characters dying in games is important. Mordin is a good example. It was tragic, but I thought it was well done. It ended his story in a way that completed his character arc, and served narrative purpose. (This coming from someone who really wanted my Shepard to just DIE after Mordin's death because I loved Mordin and the universe sucked without him lol)

...Another important part of the process that's often overlooked is giving the other characters (and audience) time to mourn before moving on. When they pretend it never happened, and advance the story from that point without properly addressing the death and it's impact on the narrative, I have a hard time caring about the rest of the movie/game/book.

That's my Impression too. I've suffered enought in RL lately, so I would enjoy more a less depressing game.

I quite despite death that are not plot relevant. I liked Mordin and Legion death, For example. Both were well done, and functional to both plot and personal history.
But I felt with Thane failed, thanks to the complete absence of reaction to bis death, and consideration.

I like/don't mind if characters Death is based on choices. I liked how Iron Bull's phate was handled, for example. I even don't mind choices like Virmine. I play the game more than one time,so I enjoy differences in playthrought.

[Quarian Master Race]

^actually, I thought Legion's "death" in all but the choosing the quarians outcome is a perfect example of contrived nonsense to generate pointless "sacrifice" feels, and I don't even like the character. 

 

It was ill elucidated and felt forced. You can't share some files without breaking, Robo Jesus? Even my desktop can do that.

[KaiserShep]

Yeah I don't like Legion's death. It should have just been part of the wipe-out-the-geth outcome. Personally I thought it would've been interesting to have a final dialogue with Legion via holo-messenger like the other former companions. 

[SKAR]

It's not a free-for-all. Just because it's RPG doesn't mean all possibilities must always be available. If it were, why don't we get jet planes? Why can't we open a business in Thedas?

This is a role in a specifically crafted branch of maybe a handful of variations on a specific story.

In order for that to have emotional weight at each key point and for the story to be as it is, there are forced choices. Like an ad lib. The blank is on the name, not the sentence.

Ad lib:
As Waldo approached the orb his son _________ began to feel strange.

The story is set. You choose which son, but the fact a son must feel strange cannot be deleted.

So you want to fight the actual story. You want to fight a much larger issue on what these games are made of.

I don't know, play Skyrim, or Black Desert Online. Personally, I am happy with this arrangement. I FEEL the weight of the choice, and also the gravity of what's happening in the overall story, when I am forced to choose between Templars and Mages. That's the intention. To realize that in the context of what is happening, dramatically, there can be no third option.

I'm not gonna lie ma'am, you make a good point.

[prosthetic soul]

Only if said party member has plot armor for most of the game.  Then it would be extra satisfying to see them buy the farm.

 

I never got to kill off Liara.  Why?  WHY?

And no the laser beam of doom doesn't count.

[Felya87]

^actually, I thought Legion's "death" in all but the choosing the quarians outcome is a perfect example of contrived nonsense to generate pointless "sacrifice" feels, and I don't even like the character.

It was ill elucidated and felt forced. You can't share some files without breaking, Robo Jesus? Even my desktop can do that.

It wasn't perfect, but had meaning. It wasn't the "retarded moment" Like with Thane (were Shep forgot she wasn't watching a movie). His Death, as strange as it was, and badly explained, At least was quite moving and well done, and moved forward the plot.
I agree the explanation on why a mix of data have to dissolve in a download was bad.

[Prince Enigmatic]

Pah toaster or not, cheap sacrifice or not, contrived writing or not, Legion's dissemination still got to me man. 

 

Then I'm an emotional loofah when playing Mass Effect. I cry when Leaving Earth, so that should say a lot as to how well adjusted a human being I am.

[Gothfather]

And? What I know so isn't mass effect a horror game, or have I missed that in ALL 3 games? it is a rpg that wants to give the player different options, so why should I not want the power too save as many as I can (or kill as many as i can aka suicide mission in me2)? it gives me more reson to play it again.

 

But in the end this is just one of many opinions.

 

Player options in and of themselves have no special validity. Adding something to the game just for options is a pointless argument because you can use that to justify anything. I want to be a umpa lumpa Jedi master in ME:A because you know OPTIONS and this just gives me an added reason to play it again. Yet it is impossible to simply add everything players want one because of budget restriction but more importantly players want mutually exclusive things so again player options can't be used as justification because which players get their options? What you think you are so damn special that YOUR options should be catered to and frak the rest?

 

Desire for 'options' means jack sh!t. Mass effect isn't a horror game, congrats you figured that out. However the NARRATIVE of the story is SURVIVAL which is the second genre where the power fantasy is incompatible at least with regards to the narrative. Mechanics have a narrative in and of themselves, and tell us a lot about the game space just by what you can and can not do.  Wanting to save as many as you can isn't at issue bioware allowing you to save everyone is a failure of mechanics in relation to the narrative the game keeps hitting us over the head with. The reapers have destroyed every advance race for millions of years, thousands of cycles in the ENTIRE galaxy, they are a threat so large that we should never feel like they are push overs. yet they are punching bags. For two fraking games you can go with ZERO fatal casualties on the Normandy. Not single squadmate or crewmember can die for two games post opening cutscene of ME2. Every scripted death is of an EX-crewmember/squadmate. When this happens over and over again the reapers lose any sense of danger or power. They become pixel punching bags which isn't bad in and of itself because the power fantasy isn't wrong in games it simple can't work in all narratives and it fails in the original Mass effect trilogy which is why the endings are so deeply unsatisfying.

[Gothfather]

You know, I'm seriously under the impression that the people really big on lots of horrible, unavoidable, pointless death for the sake of realism in games, movies, books, etc.. have never actually had to experience losing a loved one before XD

 

I agree, as far as feels go, there are so many other ways to get an emotional response from your audience. Fairy Tail makes me cry like a baby nearly every episode without having to kill anyone. At this point, killing a character just for the sake of GASP, or THE DANGER IS REAL, feels like a cheap trick to force feels from someone because they aren't skilled enough as a writer to do it any other way.

 

Still, I think having the possibility of characters dying in games is important. Mordin is a good example. It was tragic, but I thought it was well done. It ended his story in a way that completed his character arc, and served narrative purpose. (This coming from someone who really wanted my Shepard to just DIE after Mordin's death because I loved Mordin and the universe sucked without him lol)

 

...Another important part of the process that's often overlooked is giving the other characters (and audience) time to mourn before moving on. When they pretend it never happened, and advance the story from that point without properly addressing the death and it's impact on the narrative, I have a hard time caring about the rest of the movie/game/book.

 

FRAK OFF.

 

This is such a fraking ignorant position. And it is manipulative as well trying to use tragedy as a reason your opinion is 'objectively' superior. 'You hold said position because you haven't suffered loss.' Frak you and the horse you rode in on. You don't know what any single person has suffered and it is arrogance beyond fraking belief to assume because they don't hold the same opinion as you that they can't have suffered loss.

 

'Combat in a MATURE rpg should be consequence free.' Combat is costly and that cost is paid for in blood so MATURE ADULT titles shouldn't ignore this cost and shouldn't pretend that the player can stop loss from happening due to combat. It isn't pointless it is to show people that solving problems with lethal violence is LETHAL to all parties involve. And don't counter with, 'we know this we don't need it in our games.' You know that saving someone you care about gives you are warm fuzzy feeling as well so by that logic you don't need it in your games either.

 

Mordin is one of the worse examples of a character death, death 99.99999999% of the time is brutal and there is no time for speeches and it happens as a shock. Mordin's death is the most contrived and unlikely of all the deaths the entire problem with all the scripted deaths in ME3 is that they were these huge heroic successes. No one ever died just doing their duty, in a non grand fashion they were all over the top spectacle that actually minimized the tragedy of the loss because of the huge gains made in place of their loss. Saving a member of the council, curing the genophage, giving individual consciousness to all geth programs. Death isn't like this it isn't some glorious act, it it brutal and painful and a mature RPG shouldn't be rainbows and unicorns. 

 

Maybe some of us that have experience actual loss are tired of ADULT RPGs making death into a sham and a mockery and that is why we want to see a more honest portrayal of it in our games?

[Cyonan]

So I'll say that I don't mind if squadmates die via cutscene, so long as it makes sense. Thane's death just felt like they wanted some forced feels and it got some feels but if they wanted to do that there was better ways that didn't leave me afterwards thinking "Wait... Shep could have saved Thane if they didn't temporarily become stupid for the duration of one cutscene".

 

That said, Mass Effect isn't a game that's trying to mimic real life and the only real message it seems to want to give is one of unity and what we can accomplish by working together. Since the story of Shep(and the new "not Shep" protagonist) is one of us getting to be the big goddamn hero I see no issue with a squadmate dying while going out in an epic fashion. That's still generally a good way to hit most players right in the feels when you pull it off right.

 

As for any ideas about squadmates dying during combat, the combat itself is designed in a way that makes me say I would hate that.

[Eelectrica]

Have an ironman mode where what happens in a mission happens in a mission. if squadmates die on a mission, they're gone for the rest of the game.
Main character dies in the mission, that's it, game over.

Probably been playing too much X-com 2 where squadmates do die. Of course we can also recruit more in that game, but still can be a pain losing high level squad mates due to bad luck, or making a silly mistake.

[Statichands]

Maybe on the hardest difficulty, when a squad mate is downed more than once, they have to be evacuated. Imagine fulton extracting a krogan 

 

Krogan: Woah what are you doing? ಠ_ಠ

 

Me: You afraid a heights boy? 

 

[Hammerstorm]

 

Anger issues?

 

I don't really know what you want with all that ranting about, but I'm happy that you got that out of you without choking.

 

And I don't see why you think being condescending and think you have some superior viewpoint will help you in any way.

 

THIS WHOLE THREAD IS ABOUT OPINIONS!!!! See? I can also be emotional.

 

On topic: But if opinions don't mean a thing, why do you voice your? Be a good boy and sit in a corner and chill. (I can be condescending too)

[Gothfather]

I don't really know what you want with all that ranting about, but I'm happy that you got that out of you without choking.

 

And I don't see why you think being condescending and think you have some superior viewpoint will help you in any way.

 

THIS WHOLE THREAD IS ABOUT OPINIONS!!!! See? I can also be emotional.

 

On topic: But if opinions don't mean a thing, why do you voice your? Be a good boy and sit in a corner and chill. (I can be condescending too)

 

What afraid to actually quote me because people would read your comments in light of what I said and think you have no leg to stand on?

 

 

READ my post.

 

Options =/= opinions

 

 

op·tion

ˈäpSH(ə)n/

noun

plural noun: options

1.

a thing that is or may be chosen.

 

o·pin·ion

əˈpinyən/

noun

plural noun: opinions

a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

[mopotter]

Eh, I thought there were some pretty decent substitutes. Padok Wiks is very distinctive from Mordin, Wreav is a huge departure from Wrex, and while Geth VI does use a similar model to Legion, its dialogue is also much different. I don't really remember the krogan that takes Grunt's place, but I doubt he's anything like our tank baby. 

 

It's been awhile, but I do remember having some issues with Kadian and Ash in ME2 but that was a whole different set of issues.

 

I definitely agree about the other replacements.  They did a nice job with that.  After meeting Wreav I was very glad Wrex only died in one game and it was nice to see the major in the game Thane was dead but was sorry he didn't make it.  

[Hammerstorm]

 

What afraid to actually quote me because people would read your comments in light of what I said and think you have no leg to stand on?

 

 

READ my post.

 

Options =/= opinions

 

 

op·tion

ˈäpSH(ə)n/

noun

plural noun: options

1.

a thing that is or may be chosen.

 

o·pin·ion

əˈpinyən/

noun

plural noun: opinions

a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

 

 

The reason I didn't quoted the whole rant, was because I believe most people are able to use their brains (unlike some people apparently).

 

And your OPINION is about OPTIONS. Good, now we know.