inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 27, 2018 20:48:47 GMT
I just don't understand why this push to make Mystique a hero all of a sudden. I don't follow up on current X-Men comics nowadays, but as far as I remember, Mystique was always a villainous character. Even if she had her sympathetic moments, she still was the villain in a lot of X-Men stories. I think there was one point where she joined the X-Men, but that was for an infiltration treasonous reason. ^This is plausible.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 27, 2018 19:46:39 GMT
Nah, it just means that you play Doom with kids gloves. He plays on ultraviolence. But sure. #yourfuniswrong
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 27, 2018 18:18:21 GMT
Oh and Knights of the Old Republic. I just had no clue what was going on so I was a little lost, but I'm watching the movies now so maybe I can revisit it. Oh yeah. My Knights of the Old Republic story is a little different but I suspect just as brief. Now keep in mind this was before I played Mass Effect or had even a passing interest in RPGs. I was playing a lot of Jedi Outcast and Academy though (this is also important). So my friend recommends KOTOR, I spend a grueling half-day installing it... and the rest of the day trying to figure out how to just give myself all the powers, because again, this was before I understood the concept of "classes" or "roles" and it was Star Wars- how dare they try to stop me from being an all powerful, lightning-flinging, Force-choking, double-flipping Jedi, who can also shoot all the guns? Needless to say, that didn't work out too well. Finally I resigned to just play through it normally (for the time being) and got about maybe half an hour in before the game crashed and could not be recovered. Finally I said fuck it and just uninstalled. Otherwise for other MMOs, my friend and I tried DCU Online once. After a day of downloading, we flew around the starting area for a while, and when the novelty of that wore off, promptly uninstalled. The funny part is my other friend, who hadn't had his computer on him at the time downloaded the game and the next time we met up was like "hey I got the game installed, let's play!. Uh, yeah... about that. He wasn't too happy
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 27, 2018 17:09:42 GMT
Incorrect. Apocalypse was good at Apocalypsing, we just needed more of it. Should've done at least a two-parter. Part 1 is mostly the existing movie, with the recruitment and defeating of the Horsemen (except with actually characterization of all 4, not just Magneto) and Part 2 is the final fight with Apocalypse himself.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 27, 2018 16:04:46 GMT
Shi'ar was in the trailer, the woman who told Jean she doesn't belong on Earth. I'm guessing that's her human form, unless the movie is once again grounding the arc to Earth. Well, good on them if they're actually being prudent about their reveals. But given how trailers blow their load in terms of plot points these days I'm not sure it's restraint so much as absence. But we'll see. I still like the X-Men movies. Apocalypse was good, my only real beef was wasting him too soon. Apocalypse is usually Thanos-level as far as X-Men are concerned. A single movie isn't going to do him justice.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 27, 2018 15:53:10 GMT
Hmm, I think most of mine are on console, surprisingly enough.
Shinobi (PS2)- I liked this game, just never finished it. Too hard for me at the time, plus I always rented it. I took a look at some videos recently, it looks a little too dated to try and get into it again.
Some Samurai game (Way of the Samurai?) (PS2)- another rental, thought it'be cool since samurai rule, but it was way too bogged down in mechanics.
Heavenly Sword (PS3)- one of the launch titles and it looked like female God of War (and was before GoW III came out). Never finished the final battle. Too annoying. Every boss was annoying. People praise that game for story and characters but every character other than the protagonist pissed me off. Even Andy Serkis mocap didn't save it. I ended up trading this in.
Batman: Arkham City (PS3)- I liked Arkham Asylum and have every intention of finishing this one. I just haven't, and it's been 6 years. Double sucks that I also sprung for the Batman Beyond costume, which ended up a bust since it doesn't look that great on Bruce (a little too much Bat ass)
Borderlands 2 (PC): I got this because friends, it was going to be our next LAN game. Unfortunately it ran in sideshow mode on my computer, no matter what I did. But it never grabbed me anyway, too much randomly generated content, it felt meaningless. Plus I'm not a huge fan of cel shading.
Pillars of Eternity 2 (PC): Yeah I'm throwing this one on here as well. Real-talk, it was an impulse buy because Critical Role DLC makes it the closest thing currently to a Critical Role video game. But the style and the story hasn't quite grabbed me. I'll try to finish it but I'm not super invested. The voice work is of course phenomenal though.
Otherwise commenting on some of OPs games:
Starcraft- I hate what they've done with the story and the graphics, but the rushing is also annoying. I mean I get Koreans and uber-micro at the pro level, but even casual games seem to be about the rush. I know for the first one I loved maxing the tech tree and building up massive armies/fleets. Playing for ten minutes only to take out your opponent with five marines or twenty zerglings is not my cup of tea. Also protoss FTW!
TOR: The Old Republic has gotten quite a bit less grindy with the increases in XP gain. You can skip most of the sidequests. Of course since the game was build with the grindwheel in mind, skipping most of it may make the game feel a little empty and barebones. But the class stories are still worth it.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 27, 2018 15:21:53 GMT
Sorry, but there it is. You'll rarely find people who are just 'well meh' about Doom 2016, it's very, very divisive, you'll either love or hate it - and I'm a hater. I'd rather suck on the exhaust pipe of a lorry than play Doom 2016 again. If we break it down, we'll see that the people who like it are often the ones who naturally play games quickly and aggressively as a matter of course. They'll blast through maps and levels, running and gunning constantly, strafing around obstacles and never standing still. The ones who hate it are often more like myself - they prefer to take maps and levels very slowly and methodically, sneaking round corners, sniping enemies from cover, setting up ambushes and killing grounds etc. Doom 2016 actively punishes anyone who tries to play it in this manner - which is why I personally don't like it. Doom 3 was far more my cup of tea. I'm mostly meh about Doom'16. I also prefer Doom 3. I don't mind run and gun and faster pace action, but I'm not one of those doing lines of it off a hexagonal mirror. I will suggest doing a new game plus run of Doom'16. You get all the weapons you finished with, including upgrades and runes. Between the scope on the assault rifle and the scope (or even siege mode) on the gauss cannon, you should be covered for sniping. It'll still be fast, but you would have the power to play it closer to your style. Of course that does involve playing it straight at least once- unless you cheat. Because Doom is not a sneaking or sniping game, its a run and gun game and has been since the 90s. Everything is a sniping game now. Even run and gun. And speak for yourself. I was playing Doom II closer to what he's describing.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 27, 2018 14:55:46 GMT
Hmm, i was expecting Shi'ar. Ar they really going to just ground her again?
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 25, 2018 18:00:21 GMT
In terms of some of the weird stuff done in The Last Jedi: - Leia little space flight is not as completely unbelievable as you might think. In Lords of the Sith (a canon novel), Darth Vader actually flew through the vacuum of Space without dying (his suit is not as super protective and airtight as you may think). As for how Leia did that since she most likely wasn't taught that anytime during the 30 year gap between movies, I have no idea. And that's the problem. There is precedent in the EU for Jedi "cold-shirting" it through vacuum. However the two Jedi I know of were Luke Skywalker and Satele Shan- both Jedi Grand Masters.- Force Ghost Yoda being able to strike lightning is a brand new thing to the Star Wars canon. It's important to note that in the universe's history and current canon, the Force Ghost is a relatively new thing, so abilities can be added if they need be. You can also argue that in both Empire and Return, the Force Ghosts tend to have more of a presence and even interact with the physical environment if the planet is strong in the Force, like Dagobah. It would be safe to say that Ach-To, the location of the very first Jedi Temple, is also super strong in the show. Force Ghosts were seen affected by lightning in Force Unleashed (albeit the non-canon dark side AU). As a manifestation of pure Force energy, this is not out of the realm of possibility. That being said, use of lightning (often seen as supremely evil) by Yoda the ultimate good of the series, is pretty much sacrilege- The Force communication between two different people was established in Empire when Luke and Vader were able to contact each other, but in the Last Jedi it was intentionally created by Snoke to lure Rey into a trap. Seems legit- The ability to project yourself over super long distances is also a new thing, but the movie clearly showed that it took a lot of effort for Luke to do it, even killing him. There was a technique to do this, but it was pretty rare, and required projecting onto another lifeform, instead of just mid-air hologram-ing it. There was also a Sith version that tied it to the lifeline of a lifeform, which meant that striking down the illusion would kill the creature it was attached to.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 25, 2018 16:54:03 GMT
I think what I'm trying to say is that the Force is capable of a lot of things, sometimes for reasons even the characters don't fully know. As a result, I don't think it's necessarily fair to criticize a narrative if the Force does something super powerful you've never seen before. Nor is it appropriate to just assume that a Force ability presented had to be taught or trained for.If the Force does something super powerful no one's seen before, ideally it should be in a work devoted to explaining how it came about, even if the explanation is nebulous in the vein of A did magic B at time C and according to ancient lore D, therefore conclusion. Any of those points might still be criticized, as might its role in the story, but at least it's better than a pure asspull, followed by "STFU, it's magic". The underlined's where you really lose me though. Regardless of how few rules you think the Force has, one of the already established rules is that the Force requires strenuous training to master even the basic level. So someone pulling off some high level powers with zero training will never fly. Ever. If you like the HP comparisons, that's like first year Harry pulling out Avada Kedavra, because Chosen One. Ridiculous. At best you might have some random, instinctual effects. Lights flicker, things fly at random, glass disappears etc. In the context of Star Wars, that's usually stuff like faster reflexes, abnormally good intuition about things and so on.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 25, 2018 16:19:27 GMT
Well, what about in the worlds that these magic systems inhabit in? In Harry Potter, magic is commonplace and the masters of magic can easily teach people all there is to know about magic. Sure, new discoveries are frequently made, but the magic in Harry Potter is more or less already defined with countless textbooks and professors and whatnot. The Force, in Star Wars lore, is still a major mystery. Even the wisest masters in Star Wars lore don't know everything about the Force, as many records of ancient Jedi practices have been lost in time. Force Ghosts themselves are surprisingly a new thing in the universe's history, with Qui-Gon Jinn being the first to discover it's existence and Yoda being the first to properly complete the training necessary for it. It's also worth noting that unlike Harry Potter, the Force is known to suddenly act out and do its own thing for unknown reasons. Rebels had entire plotline featuring the Jedi characters trying to figure out why the force keeps leading them to specific places or certain characters. While you could make the argument that Harry Potter also has magic that acts out, you can also make the argument it usually happens to young kids and that often times the magic was the result of their intentions, they just don't go they way they planned them. (Harry was made at Dudley for shoving him and wanted payback, snake glass dissapears. Harry was pissed off at this Aunt Marge, she ends up ballooning and flying away). Err not really. Wizards are a minority compared to muggles, it only seems common place because they separate themselves and we only deal with their world. If the Jedi were to Men in Black their existence as well and then we saw a story only from their perspective, it'd be the same thing. The only difference is the Force is a part of all life in teh Star Wars galaxy, whether you can use it or not, whereas muggles may have nothing to do with magic at all. The Force seeming to have a will of its own sometimes and dipping into the role of pseudo-deity is perhaps the one factor that makes it more nebulous than magic but I argue that's only applicable when that dip happens. Even then, its "will" is still rooted in reacting to the actions of its practitioners. The most egregious example is of course the Chosen One. The prophecy, the balance, all that seems cosmic in nature, but if you know the whole story, you know that Anakin really came about because of Plagueis and Palpatine's shenanigans. The action-reaction there is a lot more mechanical than ethereal. Sure, the Jedi would like to believe the Force needs balance (and the light side needs to be on top) but really, a lot of it just boils down to actions, reactions and ripples in the Force. Which makes sense. If everything's connected, you can have butterfly effect-like phenomena occur without any sort of intelligent will, and the system can be understood, even if it isn't by the level of current organic thought. As for the available lore in-universe, wizards have not gone through the several levels of purges that the Jedi (and especially Sith) have gone through (at least, as far as we know). We're also dealing with 5,000 years of Force-user history where we can confirm different levels of knowledge. While the history of wizards is probably as old as I believe they're implied to have always existed alongside human civilization, there is no ancient times equivalent. It's very possible magical lore was lost in Harry Potter as well. Some lore is actively suppressed (creation of Horcruxes) so it's also possible some knowledge was willingly purged. Finally, spell creation seems to suggest there's no real cap on how much can be known anyway. Thing is, the magical effects of HP, whether they're through spells, enchantments, potions or creatures seem to be a lot more varied, random and spontaneous, whereas the Force seems like a more standardized set with a few esoteric outliers that get forgotten/rediscovered once in a while.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 25, 2018 15:08:16 GMT
Then again, I think it makes better sense in Star Wars because unlike say, Harry Potter, the rules of the Force aren't that well defined. What makes you think the Force is less defined than magic in Harry Potter? Both have several institutions, established for generations specifically for the purpose of research and developing their respective magics, as well as training young initiates in their ways from an early age. Both have specific training regimens, techniques and aspects they can specialize in. In both cases adherents commit their life to studying and expanding their understanding of the magic, as well as practicing their aspect and applying their principles. Well, here the comparison breaks down a little bit as adult wizards are shown to settle into a routine that makes magic almost mundane (self-scrubbing pans anyone?). Indeed the Force is more rigid as there are only a couple of techniques and uses most practitioners use (enhanced senses, telekineses, a bit of healing, lightning for the dark side), with other more esoteric stuff (Force ghosts, battle meditation, Sith Sorcery) being presented as very esoteric, very rare and only available to a handful. Compare that to HP magic, where everyone learns dozens if not hundreds of spells and can pull random enchantments out of their ass at a moment's notice (again, self-scrubbing pans, but also seemingly alive paintings, maps that track people, candy that simulates every conceivable flavor etc) and create their own spells (Sectum Sempra). Effects are also a lot more inconsistent in HP. Harry's invisibility cloak is one of the most power artifacts in that world, possibly once wielded by Death itself, but Weasley's car can turn invisible seemingly as an add-on feature. The design intentions of the magic systems were very different. How does Luke first get trained? Put a helmet over your eyes, while this floating ball shoots at you. Very martial-artsy. What's the first class in Harry Potter? A teacher literally turns into a cat and back again. The Force is much more minimalist, you don't see the really crazy shit on day one.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 25, 2018 14:27:55 GMT
It was the massive amount of Lore collected by Star Wars fans and the adults trying to add logic to a magical space universe that ruined the Last Jedi honestly. God I hate this argument. Magic doesn't mean you can do absolutely fucking anything, because magic! Suspension of disbelief does not work that way!! You have your magical element that does what you establish it does, and everything else follows the natural, logical order of things, unless you establish some other clear reason why it doesn't. Saying, "fuck logic, because magic" to this extreme means you can literally vomit anything on the screen and we can't question it because magic. If absolutely anything can happen, then everything is meaningless. The other implication that better lore "ruined" the Last Travesty, is also terrible, but I can only raise my blood pressure so high.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 25, 2018 14:04:51 GMT
The thing with the prequels is they do great world building and there's a whole bunch of stuff that uses that, or at least that aesthetic that is good and shouldn't be missed, including Old Republic stuff. Hence why I still value them and would include them in the experience.
Besides, with a newbie, you're not going to have years of nostalgia and expectation to give the gravity of disappointment existing fans felt the first time around. You'll instead have three movies with dated CGI, terrible direction, inconsistent plot, stiff wooden dialogue and otherwise good actors going to waste (Ewan McGregor and Ian McDiarmid notwithstanding). Depending on your tolerance for bad movies, it shouldn't be that bad.
But it's worth it for the world building. Assuming you're invested in teh world. Hmm, this may answer my question. If you watch the OT and you're invested enough to keep going, ask yourself what you care about. If it's the characters, go to Thrawn. If you want to see more of the world, do the prequels (and then go to Thrawn). It'll be a good palette cleanser and it'll hopefully undo the damage of the prequels. Then depending on your interest you can dive into other things.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 25, 2018 13:25:50 GMT
As someone who's never seen it knowing where to start is the problem. It's an incredibly daunting franchise with prequels, sequels, books, pre-Disney, post-Disney etc etc. Is it as easy as following the chronological order of release? lol and speaking of... Ok, let's try this. Start with the originals, of course. Episode IV: A New Hope Episode V: Empire Strikes Back Episode VI: Return of the Jedi Then it gets tricky. Are you interested in Star Wars in other media, such as books, games etc? That may be something you can answer better once you've seen the movies. Assuming yes, the true sequels to the trilogy is the Thrawn trilogy novels by Timothy Zahn: Heir to the Empire Dark Force Rising The Last Command They've the very height of the Expanded Universe in terms of quality storytelling. Otherwise you can do the prequels. I'd pretty much watch them in chronological order as well, since they do get better (well, relatively speaking): Episode I: Phantom Menace Episode II: Attack of the Clones Episode III: Revenge of the Sith I'd say start with that, and then check back for further recommendations.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 25, 2018 12:54:47 GMT
Hmm, interesting to think about how to introduce someone to Star Wars. Start with the OT of course. But then? Prequels or Thrawn? The tricky thing about the former is getting someone to accept the era, despite the faults and pitfalls of the movies themselves. And of course, nothing after 2014.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 24, 2018 17:40:15 GMT
It doesn't really, because Shepard going into the beam and then the game fading to black with a caption of "You won, now imagine what happens" wouldn't have satisfied anyone, you included I bet. No, but defeating the Reapers and then letting the player decide what happens next to Shepard would have been awesome. Rather than, you know, forcing an outcome. Yeah, and there weren't calls for for "Be more like The Witcher" alongside those demands for variations. How exactly, in the context of depicting things? I think Witcher fans scream "be more like The Witcher" at well, anything that isn't the Witcher. Well, according to him that wasn't the case. Here's a couple posts from him on the subject. Does not contradict my speculation as to the motivation behind the ambiguous-ness. Except if you interpret the second post as "we really didn't have the time/resources/inclination to do more with this character so we just left it open-ended"
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 24, 2018 17:00:53 GMT
You don't have to have Kelly do the striptease for the romance to continue in ME3. But even ignoring that, her romance absolutely works if you don't assume sex. It's worked for me for nearly a decade now since the game came out. How is it weird to fraternize to the point of having romantic feelings for each other, but not weird to fraternize to the point of sleeping with each other? That kind of makes it sound like the only reason you are fraternizing with them is to get in their pants, which no offense but comes off as a bit disturbing. No, but the fact that you can makes it batshit to then turn around and go "but no boning!" If it was just "feed my fish, come to dinner" then yeah, it could be anything but as it is... I suspect the only reason the writer called it ambiguous was the cheating angle. True, but that only reinforces my point in such situations needing to be open to player interpretation. Players want to imagine their characters doing X (or not doing X as the case may be). Forcing sex scenes into romances takes that degree of agency away from the players. Frankly, the more into sex scenes Bioware has gotten, the more derided their romances have become as being "dating sims" so I don't think adding sex to the game is helping at all on that front... It doesn't really, because Shepard going into the beam and then the game fading to black with a caption of "You won, now imagine what happens" wouldn't have satisfied anyone, you included I bet. I don't think it's the sex scenes specifically that's brought about the "sex sim" criticism. If anything it's the fanbase's fixation with romances and their constant demand for more, more choices, more variations. Interestingly, "more sex" is not on that list, apart from in the most comparative sense i.e. why does x show this much but y doesn't.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 24, 2018 16:20:55 GMT
You could say the same about most other aspect of the games. Such as? I can't think of many aspects that are as emotionally charged as sex. The ending? Yeah, this isn't an absolute standard. "Portrayed fully" can mean different things, depending on the context of the story, and its focus. The story of how x and y first met? Chances are they didn't bang the first date, so yeah, sex might be not be shown. Yet the start of their romance, being the focus of the story ends up "portrayed fully". Unless of course, the characters involved are supposed to be promiscuous for some reason, or sex addicts, or they simply did bang the first date, in which case, yeah show at least enough of that to be understood. I'm not saying "every" anything. I'm saying the context suggests it more than anything. I'm also saying that sometimes sex, the lead up and payoff to can substitute for shorthand "they're in a relationship"- again in a context where the story wants to say that but can't or won't devote the full rom-com treatment to it. Ultimately it's up to the creators as to what story they want to tell, and what elements they want it to contain. And if romance is one of those elements, sex is fair game. For the record the best romance I've ever seen in a game is still Jackie Estacado and Jenny in The Darkness. The grand total of their scene together is her making you a cake for your birthday and then cuddling on the couch and watching To Kill a Mockingbird (and you can choose to watch the whole movie in the game lol). Some real shit goes down later, but that's all that happens "romantically"- and it's one of the most heartfelt scenes I've ever seen. That game is also a very personal, torturous journey for the protagonist, with an emphasis on atmosphere and making you feel what's going on (and it's not even an RPG, though you do get a few dialog choices). Other games that have made other choices as to themes, atmosphere, scope and feel would not necessarily pull that off, sex scene or no. But the choices they made perhaps would benefit from a more explicit pointer to sex. Each of the games in the ME trilogy for example work better with a sex scene/clear indicator of sex. The way those romances are set up play with the tropes of letting of some steam, the last chance before the expectation of death etc, as well as some specific ones, depending on who you chose. I don't disagree that showing the two characters engage in sex can be shorthand for them being in a relationship. What I disagreed with is the notion that it is a critical element for any romance and thus needs to be in all of them. For some characters it makes sense, and for other characters it doesn't. Yet the poster I was talking to said it should be a certain way for all romances and that Bioware should stop doing ways where sex isn't a part of it or even have that option. As for Mass Effect Trilogy being set up for those kinds of romances, I disagree it works better that all the romances require sex. First there is Kelly, whose writer explicitly stated the romance was written to be ambiguous on that front. Second, the romances in ME2 don't require it since they can be done at any time, either before or after the final assault which gets rid of those reasons like "we may die tomorrow". Finally, I just disagree in principle since forcing the sex in the relationship ruins some things about the rest of the story about those characters. For example Tali. Her romance would have been a perfect case for a non sexual one since she is stuck in her suit, but they just decided that taking enough medication will let her be fine which completely harms that part of the Quarian's story since apparently the outside world isn't as much of a threat as the rest of the games imply. It can be argued that on limited resources/focus, efficiency and generic mass appeal need to be emphasized. So, if you do want to have some romance content but aren't making a whole damn romance sim, you go for the most obvious and generic romance path that most people will understand and respond to. So in that light, talk-talk-bang is that generic path. There is no argument for an absolute requirement for sex in any romance conceivable. But we're not talking about any romance conceivable, so that path is moot. This is getting into personal opinions here, but Kelly absolutely does not work better if you do not assume sex, given you can get her to do a striptease. This is not a comment on strippers of course, but Kelly isn't a stripper. She's a subordinate you fraternize with, but only to a point? Yeah that's weird. As for the other romances, they're written with the assumption that they culminate before going through the Omega 4. So "we might die" is perfectly in effect. The fact that you can leave romances un-progressed and finish them after the mission is no different than finishing sidequests after the suicide mission- it's gameplay, not canon. There's no before and after variances there. Unlike the DLCs which do have before and after variations. Tali, I'll give you, sex with her makes no sense and is pure fanservice, but I suppose if they were so inclined they could've explored a romance where physical intimacy is an impossibility. But again, they opted for a generic formula where they just plugged different characters in.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 24, 2018 15:09:18 GMT
Such specificity as merely showing the damn thing? Sure. How many people who romanced Miranda think it's silly they they go at it right there in engineering, after all? Sex is a very personal thing. Where and when and how are very much up to individual tastes. There is no "merely showing" it. Nah, you can show it just fine, one odd example does not a rule make. Just because you'll dismiss every scene because it doesn't appeal to your sensitivities does not exclude a worthy mass appeal scene from existing, nor is that an argument against creating one.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 24, 2018 14:19:31 GMT
Surely we play these games to see the visualisation of choices coming to life. Not to such specificity. Some details simply won’t be done “right” Such specificity as merely showing the damn thing?
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 24, 2018 13:17:25 GMT
Why?
I mean, what makes a sex scene so vital to watch? Isn't it better to just let the imagination run wild?
Surely we play these games to see the visualisation of choices coming to life.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 24, 2018 13:15:14 GMT
Mace Windu Obi-wan Kenobi Rahm Kota
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 24, 2018 12:33:18 GMT
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Sept 22, 2018 21:53:50 GMT
Ah, so you guys are doing the “I reject your reality and substitute my own” thing. Kind of destroys any chance of actual discussions, but whatever. Technically Mickey's doing that, though.
|
|