Aller au contenu

Photo

The "No support threads" support thread


129 réponses à ce sujet

#76
Anhihi

Anhihi
  • Members
  • 109 messages

Corporal Quarian wrote...

shinobi602 wrote...

Corporal Quarian wrote...

How so? I find hate threads like this one far more rude.


Hate? That's a really strong word, and I don't think comes anywhere near the nature of the OP's point at all. I didn't see any hate.


Well, considering there are posts ALL THE TIME saying "I hate this character", "I hate these fans", or "I hate this thread"... all of which are made just to make said fans angry, I'd call it a hate thread.


This post is not intended to make fans angry. Actually it doesn't have any intention at all, because all the fan threads wont be removed because of this post, im fully aware of that of course. I just wanted to state my opinion about those threads, and I was wondering if people that support those threads are aware they can influence the story in a bad way if Bioware listens to them.

#77
Driving Ghost

Driving Ghost
  • Members
  • 1 358 messages

shinobi602 wrote...

Corporal Quarian wrote...

Well, considering there are posts ALL THE TIME saying "I hate this character", "I hate these fans", or "I hate this thread"... all of which are made just to make said fans angry, I'd call it a hate thread.


Except the OP didn't even mention the word once....all he said was he's worried the story might be worsened by these support things (of which I'm guilty of, not in denial), and he expressed why he thinks so. I don't see why so many people were so inconsiderate and decided to change the topic like that...


Actually he says topics like Keep Tali Alive are retarted. Thats kind of hatefull.

#78
Kordras

Kordras
  • Members
  • 641 messages
Let us pretend for a moment that the thread had not derailed.

What we we talk about?

Modifié par Kordras, 21 février 2010 - 01:58 .


#79
KainrycKarr

KainrycKarr
  • Members
  • 4 819 messages

Kordras wrote...

Let us pretend for a moment if the thread had not derailed.

What we we talk about?


It isn't derailed. We're on-topic. Welcome to a page ago.

#80
shinobi602

shinobi602
  • Members
  • 4 716 messages

Driving Ghost wrote...

Actually he says topics like Keep Tali Alive are retarted. Thats kind of hatefull.


That's...not really hateful at all. He obviously means the concept or idea behind the topics is, well, dumb. Not the fans, not the character, or anything else, but the idea of it.

#81
Kordras

Kordras
  • Members
  • 641 messages

KainrycKarr wrote...

Kordras wrote...

Let us pretend for a moment if the thread had not derailed.

What we we talk about?


It isn't derailed. We're on-topic. Welcome to a page ago.


Glad to be here. B)

#82
KainrycKarr

KainrycKarr
  • Members
  • 4 819 messages

shinobi602 wrote...

Driving Ghost wrote...

Actually he says topics like Keep Tali Alive are retarted. Thats kind of hatefull.


That's...not really hateful at all. He obviously means the concept or idea behind the topics is, well, dumb. Not the fans, not the character, or anything else, but the idea of it.


Guess what? Don't gotta read it.

#83
Anhihi

Anhihi
  • Members
  • 109 messages

KainrycKarr wrote...

Anhihi wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

The deaths were all interchangeable and were not character-specific.

Someone *might* die at point A, B, C, and D, etc.

So...how does this define the story? Anyone could be alive, just as much as they could be dead.

so it doesn't change or hurt the story at all to write that character in as possibly being alive, and therefore being a squadmate option.

]

Please respond.


There are also threads about Joker, and other characters. Indeed, you can keep everyone alive, but maybe this isn't the case in ME3


As of everything we know, and has been revealed, noone was "canon" to die. Death was completely optional. If it was part of the story that someone in particular died, it would have been like virmire.

I.E. either Legion or Tali had to die in the vents. That is a scenario in which it breaks immersion to have them as a potential squaddie. why? because one of them HAD to die. You wouldn't be able to get around it.

This is not the case. It is quite easy to keep everyone alive, and it is obviously the GOAL to keep everyone alive.

Again, please explain how writing out a potential surviving squadmate breaks immersion. You can simply just NOT have them if they are dead in your save.


If bioware listens to the threads, there won't be any choices like in Virmire, because it pisses a lot of fans of.

#84
KainrycKarr

KainrycKarr
  • Members
  • 4 819 messages

Kordras wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Kordras wrote...

Let us pretend for a moment if the thread had not derailed.

What we we talk about?


It isn't derailed. We're on-topic. Welcome to a page ago.


Glad to be here. B)


Have seat. Get comfy. Want some snickerdoodles?

#85
Keltoris

Keltoris
  • Members
  • 1 526 messages

notphrog wrote...

I'm not asking a lot. I just want to be able to use the squadmates that survived. It's why I worked to keep them alive. Is that little bit of continuity so extreme?

The worst thing they could do would be to kill everyone off at the beginning without being able to avoid it. It would be like giving us a choice and a chance to get our squad out alive, only to say "what you did doesn't matter, we weren't going to let you have them anyway."

I don't want my favorite characters to die. But if they do in the course of the ME3 story, I will be saddened, but I'll accept it as long as I had the chance to save them.

I really don't think I'm asking too much. I don't think letting our choices carry over like this is going to ruin the story.


And I agree entirely. I make sure to save my entire squad every time, and bar Zaeed I expect most of them to hang around for ME3.

Our methods are different. I don't think nagging (which is honestly what the Tali threads feel like to me) is going to improve their odds of living through ME3 as a squadmember. And... godamnit I can smell toast! *goes off in search of toasty smell*

#86
Anhihi

Anhihi
  • Members
  • 109 messages
Oh, and I shouldn't have used the word "retarded" I'm sorry for that. No point in editing it out now tho

#87
shinobi602

shinobi602
  • Members
  • 4 716 messages

KainrycKarr wrote...

Guess what? Don't gotta read it.


Likewise to you :)

#88
KainrycKarr

KainrycKarr
  • Members
  • 4 819 messages

Anhihi wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Anhihi wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

The deaths were all interchangeable and were not character-specific.

Someone *might* die at point A, B, C, and D, etc.

So...how does this define the story? Anyone could be alive, just as much as they could be dead.

so it doesn't change or hurt the story at all to write that character in as possibly being alive, and therefore being a squadmate option.

]

Please respond.


There are also threads about Joker, and other characters. Indeed, you can keep everyone alive, but maybe this isn't the case in ME3


As of everything we know, and has been revealed, noone was "canon" to die. Death was completely optional. If it was part of the story that someone in particular died, it would have been like virmire.

I.E. either Legion or Tali had to die in the vents. That is a scenario in which it breaks immersion to have them as a potential squaddie. why? because one of them HAD to die. You wouldn't be able to get around it.

This is not the case. It is quite easy to keep everyone alive, and it is obviously the GOAL to keep everyone alive.

Again, please explain how writing out a potential surviving squadmate breaks immersion. You can simply just NOT have them if they are dead in your save.


If bioware listens to the threads, there won't be any choices like in Virmire, because it pisses a lot of fans of.


1. It's generally a bad idea to ****** fans off if you're a company trying to sell a product. Just sayin'.

2. THERE ARE ALREADY NO VIRMIRE-TYPE CHOICES IN ME2. Therefore, it does NOT hurt the story to write in OPTIONAL continuation of a squadmate, IF they survived in your save.

#89
KainrycKarr

KainrycKarr
  • Members
  • 4 819 messages

shinobi602 wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Guess what? Don't gotta read it.


Likewise to you :)


But I'm not complaining; i'm simply arguing the point.

People can make whatever threads they please.

#90
Kordras

Kordras
  • Members
  • 641 messages

KainrycKarr wrote...

Kordras wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Kordras wrote...

Let us pretend for a moment if the thread had not derailed.

What we we talk about?


It isn't derailed. We're on-topic. Welcome to a page ago.


Glad to be here. B)


Have seat. Get comfy. Want some snickerdoodles?


:o

#91
Corporal Quarian

Corporal Quarian
  • Members
  • 116 messages

shinobi602 wrote...

Corporal Quarian wrote...

Well, considering there are posts ALL THE TIME saying "I hate this character", "I hate these fans", or "I hate this thread"... all of which are made just to make said fans angry, I'd call it a hate thread.


Except the OP didn't even mention the word once....all he said was he's worried the story might be worsened by these support things (of which I'm guilty of, not in denial), and he expressed why he thinks so. I don't see why so many people were so inconsiderate and decided to change the topic like that...


I don't get why the OP has a problem. If Tali or Miranda or Mordin come back, why is that wrong? He needs to ask himself: Why wouldn't they? Wanting things to happen to characters, and wanting the player to have no choice in a game of choices is ridiculous.

My wording of that sucks, but I can't explain things well with typing.

#92
Nightwriter

Nightwriter
  • Members
  • 9 800 messages
I don't know. I've just never really liked threads that exist to attack or slam other threads. It seems kind of pointless to me. A thread should be more than that.



But hey, it's all good. I'll post if they make a reasonable point.

#93
herbie dog

herbie dog
  • Members
  • 1 873 messages
Posted ImagePosted Image

#94
shinobi602

shinobi602
  • Members
  • 4 716 messages

KainrycKarr wrote...

But I'm not complaining; i'm simply arguing the point.

People can make whatever threads they please.


I think he's also arguing the point too. At least that's what I got from:

"if BioWare really listens to them, they totally screw up the great
storyline that BioWare has no doubt already planned. They can't let any
main character die now because each character has a whole fanbase
backing them up, kinda forcing them to do a (way too happy) ending in
ME3. Also they kinda have to use the same teammembers in ME3 now.

If a character has to die for a good reason and great storytelling, so be it.. please don't interfere with this."


#95
Anhihi

Anhihi
  • Members
  • 109 messages

KainrycKarr wrote...

Anhihi wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Anhihi wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

The deaths were all interchangeable and were not character-specific.

Someone *might* die at point A, B, C, and D, etc.

So...how does this define the story? Anyone could be alive, just as much as they could be dead.

so it doesn't change or hurt the story at all to write that character in as possibly being alive, and therefore being a squadmate option.

]

Please respond.


There are also threads about Joker, and other characters. Indeed, you can keep everyone alive, but maybe this isn't the case in ME3


As of everything we know, and has been revealed, noone was "canon" to die. Death was completely optional. If it was part of the story that someone in particular died, it would have been like virmire.

I.E. either Legion or Tali had to die in the vents. That is a scenario in which it breaks immersion to have them as a potential squaddie. why? because one of them HAD to die. You wouldn't be able to get around it.

This is not the case. It is quite easy to keep everyone alive, and it is obviously the GOAL to keep everyone alive.

Again, please explain how writing out a potential surviving squadmate breaks immersion. You can simply just NOT have them if they are dead in your save.


If bioware listens to the threads, there won't be any choices like in Virmire, because it pisses a lot of fans of.


1. It's generally a bad idea to ****** fans off if you're a company trying to sell a product. Just sayin'.

2. THERE ARE ALREADY NO VIRMIRE-TYPE CHOICES IN ME2. Therefore, it does NOT hurt the story to write in OPTIONAL continuation of a squadmate, IF they survived in your save.


I don't think you get my point. Let's say, you can have Tali as squadmate in ME3, but at one event she sacrifises herself to save the Flotilla (in an epic way of course). At least, this was Biowares plan, before there was this thread counting 2000 pages of people stating that they loved Tali, want her as squadmate in ME3 and, of course, want her to survive ME3.

So they remove this epic part of the story, just for the sake of keeping fans happy. I personally don't want this, I want what Bioware thinks is best for the story.

#96
KainrycKarr

KainrycKarr
  • Members
  • 4 819 messages

shinobi602 wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

But I'm not complaining; i'm simply arguing the point.

People can make whatever threads they please.


I think he's also arguing the point too. At least that's what I got from:

"if BioWare really listens to them, they totally screw up the great
storyline that BioWare has no doubt already planned. They can't let any
main character die now because each character has a whole fanbase
backing them up, kinda forcing them to do a (way too happy) ending in
ME3. Also they kinda have to use the same teammembers in ME3 now.

If a character has to die for a good reason and great storytelling, so be it.. please don't interfere with this."



Except that what's written is already written.

2. THERE ARE ALREADY NO VIRMIRE-TYPE CHOICES IN ME2. Therefore, it does
NOT hurt the story to write in OPTIONAL continuation of a squadmate, IF
they survived in your save.

#97
shinobi602

shinobi602
  • Members
  • 4 716 messages

Corporal Quarian wrote...

I don't get why the OP has a problem. If Tali or Miranda or Mordin come back, why is that wrong? He needs to ask himself: Why wouldn't they? Wanting things to happen to characters, and wanting the player to have no choice in a game of choices is ridiculous.

My wording of that sucks, but I can't explain things well with typing.


I don't really agree with the OP either, I'm just saying I think it's childish to just come in and be in "olollol this iz now about waffless!!#$!" and whatnot....

#98
herbie dog

herbie dog
  • Members
  • 1 873 messages
Posted ImagePosted Image

#99
KainrycKarr

KainrycKarr
  • Members
  • 4 819 messages

Anhihi wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Anhihi wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Anhihi wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

The deaths were all interchangeable and were not character-specific.

Someone *might* die at point A, B, C, and D, etc.

So...how does this define the story? Anyone could be alive, just as much as they could be dead.

so it doesn't change or hurt the story at all to write that character in as possibly being alive, and therefore being a squadmate option.

]

Please respond.


There are also threads about Joker, and other characters. Indeed, you can keep everyone alive, but maybe this isn't the case in ME3


As of everything we know, and has been revealed, noone was "canon" to die. Death was completely optional. If it was part of the story that someone in particular died, it would have been like virmire.

I.E. either Legion or Tali had to die in the vents. That is a scenario in which it breaks immersion to have them as a potential squaddie. why? because one of them HAD to die. You wouldn't be able to get around it.

This is not the case. It is quite easy to keep everyone alive, and it is obviously the GOAL to keep everyone alive.

Again, please explain how writing out a potential surviving squadmate breaks immersion. You can simply just NOT have them if they are dead in your save.


If bioware listens to the threads, there won't be any choices like in Virmire, because it pisses a lot of fans of.


1. It's generally a bad idea to ****** fans off if you're a company trying to sell a product. Just sayin'.

2. THERE ARE ALREADY NO VIRMIRE-TYPE CHOICES IN ME2. Therefore, it does NOT hurt the story to write in OPTIONAL continuation of a squadmate, IF they survived in your save.


I don't think you get my point. Let's say, you can have Tali as squadmate in ME3, but at one event she sacrifises herself to save the Flotilla (in an epic way of course). At least, this was Biowares plan, before there was this thread counting 2000 pages of people stating that they loved Tali, want her as squadmate in ME3 and, of course, want her to survive ME3.

So they remove this epic part of the story, just for the sake of keeping fans happy. I personally don't want this, I want what Bioware thinks is best for the story.


The thread is about Tali continuing INTO ME3, not past.

I am fine with the whole sacrifice thing; as long as it is optional and a player choice.

That is the point of it. It is not a linear story, and not meant to be.

This means that if Bioware wanted to do that, that would be fine; if the outcome depends on the player's choices.

Simply having something that major happen, without player input or influence, goes against what Bioware has and have said many times what they want to do.

It is the player's story.

If you think it makes sense for Tali to sacrifice herself in your story, then do so.

I simply want an alternative choice.

This is not unreasonable, or immersion breaking. Because the alternative only affects my particular story.

Modifié par KainrycKarr, 21 février 2010 - 02:12 .


#100
Corporal Quarian

Corporal Quarian
  • Members
  • 116 messages

Anhihi wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Anhihi wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Anhihi wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

The deaths were all interchangeable and were not character-specific.

Someone *might* die at point A, B, C, and D, etc.

So...how does this define the story? Anyone could be alive, just as much as they could be dead.

so it doesn't change or hurt the story at all to write that character in as possibly being alive, and therefore being a squadmate option.

]

Please respond.


There are also threads about Joker, and other characters. Indeed, you can keep everyone alive, but maybe this isn't the case in ME3


As of everything we know, and has been revealed, noone was "canon" to die. Death was completely optional. If it was part of the story that someone in particular died, it would have been like virmire.

I.E. either Legion or Tali had to die in the vents. That is a scenario in which it breaks immersion to have them as a potential squaddie. why? because one of them HAD to die. You wouldn't be able to get around it.

This is not the case. It is quite easy to keep everyone alive, and it is obviously the GOAL to keep everyone alive.

Again, please explain how writing out a potential surviving squadmate breaks immersion. You can simply just NOT have them if they are dead in your save.


If bioware listens to the threads, there won't be any choices like in Virmire, because it pisses a lot of fans of.


1. It's generally a bad idea to ****** fans off if you're a company trying to sell a product. Just sayin'.

2. THERE ARE ALREADY NO VIRMIRE-TYPE CHOICES IN ME2. Therefore, it does NOT hurt the story to write in OPTIONAL continuation of a squadmate, IF they survived in your save.


I don't think you get my point. Let's say, you can have Tali as squadmate in ME3, but at one event she sacrifises herself to save the Flotilla (in an epic way of course). At least, this was Biowares plan, before there was this thread counting 2000 pages of people stating that they loved Tali, want her as squadmate in ME3 and, of course, want her to survive ME3.

So they remove this epic part of the story, just for the sake of keeping fans happy. I personally don't want this, I want what Bioware thinks is best for the story.


I think you are crediting fans with more power than they actually have. But I see some point to this. I personally like the whole idea of a Virmire situation, and the idea of squadmates needing to die. I think you should always, as the decision making player, have a say in the matter though, like on Virmire.

I see the support threads as more of a plea of "Don't kill/remove this character without a way for my player character to have some say in the matter"