20813 réponses à ce sujet

[Nightwriter]

Collider wrote...

I do wish there was friendship with Jack, but I agree that it may not really fit her.

It’s especially bad considering a Jack friendship could’ve been so AWESOME, Collider.

With either a male Shepard or a female Shepard. Both could’ve been awesome.

With teasing. I want teasing. I want to tease Jack. I mean I want to be there for her too but I want teasing. Where’s the teasing?

“Do not f*ck with me, Shepard. I will mess you up.”

Shepard: “You can’t tell right now, but deep down, I’m petrified.”

“You did not just say that.”

Shepard: “Cuz YOU’RE SO FREAKING BADASS.”

“You will shut up right now.”

Shepard: “I am, like, trembling in my boots. I just have no experience with badassery and you're making me cry."

“I have killed people for less than this! KILLED them, Shepard! I will not put up with your crap!”

Shepard: “You are clearly discriminating against people without tattoos.” 

[Epantiras]

Nightwriter wrote...
Shepard: “You can’t tell right now, but deep down, I’m petrified.”

Nightwriter wrote...
Shepard: “You are clearly discriminating against people without tattoos.” 

that would be awesome
I'm hearing them in Shelpoo's monotone voice in my head right now

Modifié par Epantiras, 10 juillet 2010 - 10:22 .

[Jackal904]

Mondo47 wrote...

There are some folk on this set of boards that like to rant on and on and on and on like stuck f*cking records about how shallow and senseless these new characters are (whoo... like there ever was much to some of those ME1 characters). I'm forced to ask then, if Jack is one of these useless filler-characters, why does she generate such interest in us? Because there's a lot to be intrigued by. Someone made her, crafted her like a part for a big, complex pocket watch, and did it with such skill she keeps the whole ticking (perhaps just for us, but that's an argument you can level at any character). She's not just some typical round wheel, either.

One thing I've noticed with people I've talked to in real life about ME2 (or have watched in videos), is that they never forget who Jack is. They don't just remember her name, they remember what she is about. They will forget the names of other characters and what they're like, but never Jack. I have a friend who is absolutely terrible at remembering characters in games. He has messed up Miranda's name a few times and she's the damn character that brings you back from the dead. But he remembers Jack well.

I think we got lucky with her; Jack could so easily have been just some foulmouthed guntoting cliche. Some might say she is, but if you look closer, just like looking at the tattoos, there's more if you're willing to try and read it.

It's really incredible how well crafted Jack's character is. I can't imagine her having been any different than how she turned out. Everything from her appearance to subtle changes in her tone and expression, all done perfectly. Sure luck has something to do with it, but you gotta give BioWare some credit for being able to create such a deep and memorable character.

So sure, we want her to come back. Give her hair or not. Make her a squadmate or not. Religate her to a cameo or one of those lousy emails if you really must. Or just forget she was ever there. We won't foam rabidly for days or months if it doesn't happen, but we'll certainly mourn. Not the loss of our precious waifu, but a squandered chance to use one of the most interesting moving parts in the Mass Effect universe as it unfolds for us. Because as much as we want to see the story we've experienced across two episodes come to a satisfying and exciting conclusion, what we all want really I think is a chance to see what makes that angry young lady tick. If you don't use her now, BioWare, you really are throwing away something pretty damn amazing.

This is exactly how I feel. You don't get characters with this much depth and potentional very often in video games. BioWare cannot waste such an amazing character.

[Nightwriter]

Jack is a very well-written character.

My only complaint (and worry) is that she feels very disconnected from the plot. I feel a lot of the ME2 characters suffer from this, but Jack in particular does. It makes me concerned about her appearance in ME3.

[aamy]

If Jack is to have a cameo in ME3, it shall be the most epic cameo in a video game ever. Think wrecking 3 Mechs, blowing up a space station, and the "Renegade Thrust" rolled all into one

[Nightwriter]

yorkj86 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Jack is a very well-written character.

My only complaint (and worry) is that she feels very disconnected from the plot. I feel a lot of the ME2 characters suffer from this, but Jack in particular does. It makes me concerned about her appearance in ME3.

ME2 was disconnected from the plot... <_<

The whole thing, yeah.

But it's the worst with Jack.

Sometimes I get scared that a Shepard who doesn't romance her won't be able to bring her back in ME3.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 10 juillet 2010 - 05:10 .

[Epantiras]

Don't worry, Thane was even more disconnected from the plot than Jack and damn, they'd better bring him back in ME3 or I'll riot ;-)

[Collider]

Nightwriter wrote...

Collider wrote...

I do wish there was friendship with Jack, but I agree that it may not really fit her.

It’s especially bad considering a Jack friendship could’ve been so AWESOME, Collider.

With either a male Shepard or a female Shepard. Both could’ve been awesome.

With teasing. I want teasing. I want to tease Jack. I mean I want to be there for her too but I want teasing. Where’s the teasing?

Indeed. From the trailer of Jack before ME2, I thought she be very spirited and fun to horse around with. I envisioned some fun riot grrl that would deviate from the stone faced Cerberus personnel. That didn't really happen in ME2. Not that I really mind (aside from the current inability to form friendships with her). Anyway, as already said, there's potential for friendship in ME3. I can kind of look at someone like Garrus - in ME1 Shepard was kind just a mentor, but in ME2 Shepard and Garrus are supposed to be buds. They could do something like that in ME3 with Jack.

[Pacifien]

I'm not actually responding to anyone in particular, probably just taking everything I've been reading and using that to write something related.

If you're careful about it, you can get the same level of information from a character you have not romanced as one would if they were playing a same-gender character that couldn't do the romance. What do you not get if you don't romance Kaidan? More information about Rahna from BAaT. What do you not get if you don't romance Jack? Well, details about Murtock. What do you not get if you don't romance Thane? What "siha" means.

Some of these I can see not being revealed to someone who was not on intimate terms with Shepard. Kaidan wouldn't want to reveal the pain he suffered when Rahna rejected him. Jack isn't going to tell you what Murtock's message did to her. I don't necessarily see why Thane couldn't have told you what "siha" means considering he'll could still call you that at the conclusion of the dialogue tree.

The problem is that if you're not going to get the romance dialogue, the development between the two characters simply stops. Perhaps this would have been fine if it weren't for the fact that people know there are more details to be had if you had continued with the romance. It's like seeing a paragon/renegade option greyed out -- it tempts you with the fact there is more you could have seen, but it will be denied you until you meet certain requirements. Realistic perhaps, but also felt like a punishment that they would force you to take the lesser path.

The only way I can see this being corrected is if, instead of cutting off the dialogue tree when you choose not to pursue the romance, it diverges such that you get a different type of dialogue. Have there be the same number of conversations for both, but one takes you on a more intimate romantic path while the other takes you on a friendship or rivalry path. The end priiize to the romance path is the final scene in the captain's quarters.

Basically, never make the player feel like they're being punished for the choices they make. Don't make them feel like they're missing out simply because they didn't pursue a romance. Don't make them get less results simply because they were more neutral rather than uberparagon/renegade. If the developers do want there to be consequences, make them consequences you cannot avoid no matter what kind of Shepard you were playing.

[Pacifien]

JohnnyDollar wrote...
I am for more dialog, of course. However, I don't feel that the dialog between romantic and platonic, should equal the same amount (i.e. same # of convos).   Why should it?

Because then people feel cheated. You could tell them to suck it up or you could provide them with something equal but different.

Everyone wants more conversations anyway. Except that one guy.

[Pacifien]

yorkj86 wrote...
Inspires loyalty to the romance, makes breaking it up seem more weighty and serious.  People reveal some information about themselves only to people they trust.  The trust of romance exceeds the trust of friendship, and incorporates it, but shouldn't be less important than it.  It is separately important.  That is why there should be more friendship dialogue and more romance dialogue.

I don't think friendship dialogue needs to get into more intimate details. People who romance Jack can learn about Murtock. People who are friends with Jack can talk Poker.

[Gethforceone]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Pacifien wrote...

JohnnyDollar wrote...
I am for more dialog, of course. However, I don't feel that the dialog between romantic and platonic, should equal the same amount (i.e. same # of convos).   Why should it?

Because then people feel cheated. You could tell them to suck it up or you could provide them with something equal but different.

Everyone wants more conversations anyway. Except that one guy.

More conversations are good, but romance does not equal friendship.  They both need more dialog, but they are not equal, nor should there be an attempt to make them so.  I am not saying that there can't be an equal # of convos with a specific character, or there could even be more platonic than romantic convos with a specific character for example, but a quota system only makes the RPG more generic I think, and cheapens it.  It already exists, it doesn't need to be exacerbated. 

I don't fully understand what you're saying, could go into a bit more detail?

[Mondo47]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

I also see the romance as special.  You form a romance with someone, you are more intimate with one another, you share a bond with one another that is not necessarily shared with friends.  There are cases where the romantic dialog would be greater than platonic dialog, and should be I think.  Perhaps even one of the characters would be better fitted with more
platonic than romantic dialog with Shep.

Bravo, Johnny. I think you just hit the nail on the head there

[Gethforceone]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Gethforceone wrote...

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Pacifien wrote...

JohnnyDollar wrote...
I am for more dialog, of course. However, I don't feel that the dialog between romantic and platonic, should equal the same amount (i.e. same # of convos).   Why should it?

Because then people feel cheated. You could tell them to suck it up or you could provide them with something equal but different.

Everyone wants more conversations anyway. Except that one guy.

More conversations are good, but romance does not equal friendship.  They both need more dialog, but they are not equal, nor should there be an attempt to make them so.  I am not saying that there can't be an equal # of convos with a specific character, or there could even be more platonic than romantic convos with a specific character for example, but a quota system only makes the RPG more generic I think, and cheapens it.  It already exists, it doesn't need to be exacerbated. 

I don't fully understand what you're saying, could go into a bit more detail?

Most members agree that the amount of dialog that we have with the characters is inadequate.  It would be nice for it to be increased, whether it is in pursuit of friendship with that character, or romance.

I don't think making platonic and romantic dialog proportional to one another is needed though. Yes, they both need to be increased, but this should be implemented on a case by case basis, not an across the board approach imo. 

An example would be Jack's character.  She doesn't seem to be open to friendship with others, and this seems to match her character and personality.  It fits right into her back story.  We can increase her platonic dialog, but it doesn't have to equal romantic dialog, and it certainly shouldn't change the characteristics of the character, in order for the player to be able to be friends with her.  Because then you're not just adding dialog, you're changing the character. 

I also see the romance as special.  You form a romance with someone, you are more intimate with one another, you share a bond with one another that is not necessarily shared with friends.  There are cases where the romantic dialog would be greater than platonic dialog, and should be I think.  Perhaps even one of the characters would be better fitted with more
platonic than romantic dialog with Shep.

Now I see what you're saying, I agree 100%

Modifié par Gethforceone, 11 juillet 2010 - 01:48 .

[axl99]

On that note -



Considering Shepard's usually going where an LI is on the ship and would go through all the dialogue options, you'd figure that after the game is done and you can call an LI to your cabin that the two of you can have even more intimate convo on the couch or something.



Watching recycled animations for each LI in the cabin is just heart wrenching because some of it feels out of character with certain people.

[Collider]

The problem with the cuddling post-suicide mission would only increase had there been same sex romances. Who sits on who's lap?