Mass Effect cleanup

I wasn't talking about the overall wording (though I agree, both with your proposals and their reasoning), but the actual potholes themselves. For instance, the Shocking Swerve entry quoted in the first page of this thread:

There's no need for the Diabolus ex Machina pothole in "Catalyst". I'm inclined to feel it is a Diabolus ex Machina (or rather, the blowing-up-the-relays thing is - the Catalyst itself doesn't actually do much more than infodump, and doesn't really count), but potholing it in other entries just comes across as complaining for the sake of complaining and trying to 'force' reader opinion. I generally oppose the potholing of YMMV tropes (especially negative YMMV tropes) unless they're actually relevant to the entry. That instance, and most on the page, aren't.

I'm not sure Screwed by the Network is accurate.

And I'm inclined to just go ahead with what we have now. If the EC proves well-received, we might not even need to keep the pages locked at all.

^^ We should delete any ending examples that currently don't fit and keep the ones that do. If the Extended Cut fixes any of the still kept examples then they should be modified along the lines of "Originally the ending blah blah blah, but the Extended Cut DLC changed it to blah blah blah."

edited 22nd May '12 8:50:18 PM by Spirit

@Spirit, makes sense.

Wait, I thought the question was what to do about the ending now, not about how to reflect what changes the Extended Cut might make?

@Shaoken Budget limitation does not count in my opinion because we are talking of a face flashing up on the screen for 3 seconds. That must not cost more than a dollar to make (it's an in-game, in-engine cutscene, not a movie cinematic).

—

@nrjxll Uh, I am the one who potholed Diabolus ex Machina there. It's mostly because I think it's objectively a Diabolus Ex Machina, I mean, I know that people already expected the Crucible to go wrong in some way, but the most foreshadowing we had about him were some vague words about someone who created the Cycles. Then a blue kid appears and we get handed 3 rather arbitrary options with InferredHolocausts in them. If that pothole were to be removed I'd add a separate entry for Diabolus Ex Machina.

—

I agree wholeheartedly with Spirit.

edited 22nd May '12 8:57:39 PM by Anfauglith

Best Boss Ever bullet two should stay. Whoever put that in there is entitled to his opinion.

I'm not sure that Esoteric Happy Ending actually fits, if only because the writers were probably going for a Bittersweet Ending and not a happy one.

I don't think the bullet under Internet Backdraft about the Game Group retailer belongs because the example applies more to the retailer than the actual game itself.

The third bullet under That One Level should probably be merged with the second, since they refer to the same level.

Does Trope Overdosed actually belong on the YMMV page?

I still think that They Just Didn't Care should only apply to works as a whole, but not strongly enough to press the issue if said view is in the minority.

edited 22nd May '12 9:00:39 PM by lrrose

^^^ He was asking whether or not we should wait on the messing with the ending examples. I responded we should still work on them and be ready to modify them accordingly later on.

edited 22nd May '12 8:58:22 PM by Spirit

There is no such thing as an objective Diablous Ex Machina. At this point you're moving away from what's presented in the game which we are supposed to take at face value and veering into Wild Mass Guessing territory.

edited 22nd May '12 8:59:22 PM by Shaoken

Esoteric Happy Ending works because of the Inferred Holocaust (fleet, galaxy, squadmates, etc.) I would leave it there, the Extended Cut will probably come and Hand Wave them away, but still.

He appears out of the blue without foreshadowing and tells us that synthetics will never make peace with organics, that killing the Reapers will destroy EDI and the Geth, etc. I'd say that's quite objective.

edited 22nd May '12 9:03:18 PM by Anfauglith

Go right ahead; as I said, I think the ending qualifies - although, again, as I see it the Catalyst is really just presenting the options; it's the options and lack of choice in them that's the real problem, so that's what I'd focus on. But potholing it in other entries, unless the pothole is explicitly relevant to that entry, is just making the page more negative than it needs to be.

I forget: does the trope require that the ending be meant specifically as "happy"? I thought it was just a general Ending Dissonance trope, in which case it still might qualify, considering that a lot of people see it as an explicit Downer Ending (not just a bittersweet one).

Incidentally, I'm pretty sure Trope Overdosed ought to be Trivia, but at present it's neither that nor YMMV.

edited 22nd May '12 9:03:08 PM by nrjxll

The Negativity is really subtle in my opinion, but well, what you say makes sense even if I do not fully agree. I wouldn't complain if that pothole goes away. Also take these opinions of mine with a grain of salt because I think that "We are a fan site, we are about liking stuff" is ridiculous.

—

Yes, Esoteric requires the ending to be thought as relatively happy. Otherwise it's Pyrrhic Victory (damn its hard to spell it in english) or Bittersweet Ending. Choobs had made some great points about how the symbolism is very positive, though, and since the Holocausts are inferred I still think it fits as an Esoteric.

—

I'd keep Trope Overdosed as trivia and not link it in any article, It's quite useless in my opinion.

edited 22nd May '12 9:10:39 PM by Anfauglith

The Esoteric Happy Ending page states: "A director/author/etc. writes what he thinks is a Happy Ending. Surely, nobody could think of a more wonderful, uplifting way to conclude this story!" On that basis, I don't think that trope applies; like Irrose said, it's definitely not an outright Happy Ending, considering everything that happens up to the ending. It's more of a Bittersweet Ending with an optimistic tone.

In that case, the example should be cut, although I'm surprised at the fact we don't have a general Ending Dissonance trope.

And Diabolus ex Machina cannot be objective - that's why it's a subjective trope - though I feel the ending meets the requirements necessary to list it.

I can't help but feel you obviously don't spend much time on fansites.

It was a snarky remark about the nature of "fan"doms (which I felt was particularly suitable for this discussion), not a literal critique of your comment.

edited 22nd May '12 9:18:55 PM by nrjxll

The description of the trope is hyperbolic, but I don't think that trope should be restricted for (supposedly) sunshine and rainbow endings. Incidentally, if we don't have an Ending Dissonance trope we should turn Esoteric into one.

That was a quote from Fast Eddie in one of those stickies about complaining. Not related to this issue but the problem the forum has is that I think there's bias against complaining itself, when the bias should be against complaining without providing an argument (I mean, criticism is awesome, and not always "lol sucks"). But I digress.

Edit: Ah nevermind then I was in a defensive mood because of the arguments in this thread. Sorry.

edited 22nd May '12 9:20:29 PM by Anfauglith

With the split between normal Nightmare Fuel and High Octane Nightmare Fuel I would like to look over the pages to see what goes where.

They are merged now.

Last I checked they had the same examples. Shouldn't they be split and normal Nightmare Fuel go on the Nightmare Fuel page and, y'know, the High Octane Nightmare Fuel go on High Octane Nightmare Fuel?

We just merged High Octane Nightmare Fuel and Nightmare Fuel - thread

Technically, we merged Accidental Nightmare Fuel and High Octane Nightmare Fuel. Nightmare Fuel was a redirect and then a disambig and shouldn't have been in use anywhere, but very little cleanup happened after the ANF rename.

edited 23rd May '12 3:45:35 PM by ccoa

On the subject of the YMMV page for ME3, I was thinking on an addition of an Unfortunate Implications trope and wondering what anyone else thought on it:

• Unfortunate Implications: While all of the ending choices can be obtained through normal gameplay, there is another tier of endings that can only be reached through playing multiplayer or the Infiltrator and Datapad smartphone games. All of the endings are identical on the highest and second-highest tier with the exception of the Destroy ending, in which Shepard lives. None of the other choices are changed on the highest tier, giving the impression that the "best" ending is one where Shepard lives at the expense of countless synthetic lives.

While I'm loathe to disagree with anyone with such fine taste in avatar selection, I don't think that would fall under Unfortunate Implications today, particularly as artificial lifeforms don't actually exist. I think that example would fall under What Measure Is a Non-Human? instead.

I also think the proposition that the "Destroy" ending in any form is actually meant as the 'best' is highly YMMV - my understanding seems to be that it's Synthesis which seems be (meant as) the best possible ending.

Edit: Also, stepping back to last page for a moment, does anyone disagree that the Han'Gerrel Moral Event Horizon bullet should be removed?

edited 23rd May '12 6:43:11 PM by nrjxll

What Measure Is a Non-Human? can also apply. I was leaning towards Unfortunate Implications because of the characterization given to synthetic characters (particularly EDI and Legion) and the geth race (who are portrayed in a more sympathetic light than the quarians). What Measure Is a Non-Human? isn't on either the Main or YMMV pages and it would be a good addition, in regards to the choice of siding with the quarians against the geth and possibly valuing Shepard's life over that of countless synthetic "lives". Also, =^_^=.

That's why I included the pot hole for Earn Your Happy Ending—the "Shepard lives" ending requires the highest Effective Military Strength of any of the endings and the only difference in that tier of endings (4000+ vs. 2800-3999) is that Shepard lives in the Destroy ending. It's common in video games with multiple endings that the "best" or "happiest" ending is the one that takes the most effort to achieve. Earn Your Happy Ending also applies to the Synthesis ending as well, as it requires the second-highest tier (at least 2800) to reach, at which point you'd have the best outcome of Destroy (sans Shepard survival) and control.

Well, the problem with using Unfortunate Implications is this - what real world group does it make unfortunate implications about? It has to be a real world group - there are no artificial people to get offended by a game equating thousands of artificial beings as less than one human. You can make an argument that a real world group could take unfortunate implications from such a portrayal, but only if there are clear parallels between said group and some real world group (for example, if they all had darker skin, were owned by other sophonts until they rebelled, and had other clear parallels to those of African descent). But if not, you can't cite to Unfortunate Implications.

Of course, I do avoid citing to that trope in general because it's simply fraught with landmines. What Measure Is a Non-Human? is much safer to cite to... also, it's not a YMMV trope, so it's fraught with much less controversy.

EDIT: is probably a better source of appropriate tropes for the situation. I'm solely going on what's been said in this thread, although I do have enough about the controversial tropes to know when not to use them.

edited 23rd May '12 7:36:25 PM by 32_Footsteps

But the general... portrayal - for lack of a better word - given to Synthesis is more in line with the Earn Your Happy Ending thing then the "Shepard lives" ending. The former is described as a unique, never-before-conceived solution (or some such); the latter is just a five second clip with no explanation. I feel like it was basically put in there for those players who absolutely could not accept losing their protagonist and were willing to do well enough to avoid it, but I don't really feel like it was meant as the 'best' ending.

I think a What Measure Is a Non-Human? entry for the geth-quarian war is also a little difficult, because it's more of an audience thing then an in-game stance. The game doesn't present either side as really preferable - the trope largely comes in because it seems like most players that aren't able to make peace choose to side with the more humanlike quarians, even though they're probably in the wrong.

I agree with 32 Footsteps that Unfortunate Implications is not the right trope - regardless of one's own feelings on AI rights and the game's overall depiction, if it's not a real life issue it doesn't count.

edited 23rd May '12 7:28:26 PM by nrjxll