StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Losonti Tokash wrote:Uh, too bad that a Hollywood film studio isn't going to make a film based on your character, but the one that Bioware made?

What the fuck? BioWare didn't make a character (as in the marketing guy). They made a mascot.
Oh but hey if you're one of the fucking retards who think there's a canon Shepard I have news for you: If default equals canon, then Mass Effect 2 tells us the canon Shepard is a lazy renegade asshole who killed everyone and let the Council die.
Inspiring.

And my point is not that they should make my Shepard, is that they shouldn't make any Shepard.

General Zod wrote:Uh, yes it does. It means he didn't have a fucking clue how to adapt the dialogue to the big screen. Video-game dialogue can be fucking cringe-worthy and not suitable for use in movies at all.

Which is another reason why the ME trilogy plot shouldn't be adapted to a movie, because it just isn't that great and a lot of the dialog is cringeworthy.

Gramzamber wrote:

Losonti Tokash wrote:Uh, too bad that a Hollywood film studio isn't going to make a film based on your character, but the one that Bioware made?

What the fuck? BioWare didn't make a character (as in the marketing guy). They made a mascot.
Oh but hey if you're one of the fucking retards who think there's a canon Shepard I have news for you: If default equals canon, then Mass Effect 2 tells us the canon Shepard is a lazy renegade asshole who killed everyone and let the Council die.
Inspiring.

And my point is not that they should make my Shepard, is that they shouldn't make any Shepard.

"If we can't have my Shepard we shouldn't have any, baaawwww!"

Which is another reason why the ME trilogy plot shouldn't be adapted to a movie, because it just isn't that great and a lot of the dialog is cringeworthy.

So you change the dialogue. You don't need to copy it exactly to preserve the core plot elements, and it usually works better if you don't, which is why comic book movies are successful.

If you think Bioware doesn't have a Shepard they consider canon, you're a fucking idiot. They're playing it close to the vest since the series is still ongoing, but he exists, just like there's a canon Revan and a canon Exile. The default set up for ME2 is like that to create a setting that's got plenty of conflict for someone who hasn't played at all to jump into.

General Zod wrote:"If we can't have my Shepard we shouldn't have any, baaawwww!"

Fuck you and your bullshit strawman, asshole. That's not my point at all and you know it.

So you change the dialogue. You don't need to copy it exactly to preserve the core plot elements, and it usually works better if you don't, which is why comic book movies are successful.

So why not just focus on another plot entirely?

Losonti Tokash wrote:If you think Bioware doesn't have a Shepard they consider canon, you're a fucking idiot. They're playing it close to the vest since the series is still ongoing, but he exists, just like there's a canon Revan and a canon Exile. The default set up for ME2 is like that to create a setting that's got plenty of conflict for someone who hasn't played at all to jump into.

No, in fact they don't. They've said multiple times that there's no canon, no "right" way.
The default Shepard exists for marketing purposes, nothing more. There has never been a reference to any "canon"; the books steer clear of Shepard.
Citing Revan and the Exile is pointless. That was a decision made by some jackass at Lucasfilm, not BioWare or Obsidian and has no relevance to anyone who isn't an EU nerd.

Gramzamber wrote: Fuck you and your bullshit strawman, asshole. That's not my point at all and you know it.

Sure it isn't.

So why not just focus on another plot entirely?

Either they have to keep the original dialogue or they should change the plot entirely? Why bother if you can make it presentable by modifying the dialogue here and there?

General Zod wrote:Sure it isn't.

I have already stated that even if it were exactly like my Shepard, I still wouldn't like it. Because it's not a movie's place to tell anyone the "right" way to play a game where multiple choice is the order of the day.
But please, continue to think otherwise if it helps you evade the real point.

Either they have to keep the original dialogue or they should change the plot entirely? Why bother if you can make it presentable by modifying the dialogue here and there?

Because retelling the plot of the trilogy is already redundant.
If on top of that they can't even use the dialog as is, why not go into some other part of the Mass Effect universe? Shepard is not the damn alpha and omega of ME.

You are a moron. The books don't mention Shepard because they're for EU nerds and, like I said, the series is still ongoing. But I'm sure that once the trilogy is finished, all this other Mass Effect media (novels, comics, and now a film) will just pretend he doesn't exist or only mention him in passing, since it's totally feasible to essentially write out the main character of the flagship trilogy of the universe and also fail to mention the massive impacts he'd have had on the galaxy.

Edit: And seriously, where the fuck do you get this concept that they'd be dictating to you what is and is not the "right" way to play the game? Are you unable to enjoy KOTOR anymore because someone told you your character was non-canonical? Why would you give a shit?

Losonti Tokash wrote:You are a moron. The books don't mention Shepard because they're for EU nerds and, like I said, the series is still ongoing. But I'm sure that once the trilogy is finished, all this other Mass Effect media (novels, comics, and now a film) will just pretend he doesn't exist or only mention him in passing, since it's totally feasible to essentially write out the main character of the flagship trilogy of the universe and also fail to mention the massive impacts he'd have had on the galaxy.

Don't be retarded. One of the books happens before the trilogy, another happens between 1 and 2. If there was a canon Shepard and a canon outcome for 1 they would fucking say so in those books, the outcome of 2 and 3 would have no bearing on that.
Yeah, they'll mention Shepard only in passing. Because that's how the GAME trilogy works. If they wanted a set character and outcome they would've MADE a set character and outcome.

Gramzamber wrote:So why not just focus on another plot entirely?

Oh for fuck's sake. Gramzamber, stop threadshitting my thread. If you think a major Hollywood studio has bought the rights to the game just so that they can tell a story that has only a tangenital relationship to the fucking game, you're fucking deluding yourself. This is the same studio that adapted 300 and Watchmen, and also did TDK, and the guys so far attached to it have made it their business to adapt source material from other media onto the big screen.

It'll be a big screen adaptation of the games, and Shepherd is the face of the game, if there's going to be a movie OF COURSE it's going to have Shepherd as the fucking main character.. Deal with it. Anything else - lol First Contact war lol - is just nonsense.

So, in response to "the novels have nothing to do with the games because the games aren't finished yet and they're just backstory crap that won't interfere" your response is...exactly what I just said? Congratulations!

Gramzamber wrote: I have already stated that even if it were exactly like my Shepard, I still wouldn't like it. Because it's not a movie's place to tell anyone the "right" way to play a game where multiple choice is the order of the day.
But please, continue to think otherwise if it helps you evade the real point.

So ignore the canon? I mean you're really just grasping for excuses to hate the movie.

Because retelling the plot of the trilogy is already redundant.
If on top of that they can't even use the dialog as is, why not go into some other part of the Mass Effect universe? Shepard is not the damn alpha and omega of ME.

Except for the games explicitly mentioning how important he is over and over. Whoops.

Stofsk wrote:

Gramzamber wrote:So why not just focus on another plot entirely?

Oh for fuck's sake. Gramzamber, stop threadshitting my thread. If you think a major Hollywood studio has bought the rights to the game just so that they can tell a story that has only a tangenital relationship to the fucking game, you're fucking deluding yourself. This is the same studio that adapted 300 and Watchmen, and also did TDK, and the guys so far attached to it have made it their business to adapt source material from other media onto the big screen.

It'll be a big screen adaptation of the games, and Shepherd is the face of the game, if there's going to be a movie OF COURSE it's going to have Shepherd as the fucking main character.. Deal with it. Anything else - lol First Contact war lol - is just nonsense.

Yeah, maybe that's what will happen.
And if it does, it'll be fucking retarded. So I hope it doesn't. Those other adaptations are comic books anyway, not videogames with multiple outcomes.
They can tread on that, and people won't like it. There is no reason why a non-Shepard ME would work other than fannish shit about Shepard being the face of ME.

Losonti Tokash wrote:So, in response to "the novels have nothing to do with the games because the games aren't finished yet and they're just backstory crap that won't interfere" your response is...exactly what I just said? Congratulations!

Hey that's totally not what I said at all. I said that the novels have nothing to do with the games because the games are based on player input and decisions.

General Zod wrote:So ignore the canon? I mean you're really just grasping for excuses to hate the movie.

What canon?

Except for the games explicitly mentioning how important he is over and over. Whoops.

Yes Shepard is important. FOR THE PLOT OF THE GAMES.

Gramzamber wrote:Yeah, maybe that's what will happen.
And if it does, it'll be fucking retarded. So I hope it doesn't.

So you've made your point... three pages ago. People disagree with you. Why are you continuing to justify your subjective dislike for the concept? Like I asked you before, why can't you separate your fannish obsession with Shepherd from the games to a hypothetical Shepherd in a hypothetical movie based off of the games? Why is it 'offensive' to you that Bioware want to broaden the appeal of their creation so that it reaches more fans and especially in a mainstream setting?

Those other adaptations are comic books anyway, not videogames with multiple outcomes.

Bullshit. Spider-man has gone through so many different writers, artists, periods, events, transformations and what-not that adapting him to the big screen is roughly analogous to any hypothetical big screen adaptation of the Mass Effect franchise, and yes that includes Shepherd.

They can tread on that, and people won't like it. There is no reason why a non-Shepard ME would work other than fannish shit about Shepard being the face of ME.

So instead lets have the studio spend tens of millions if not hundreds on a big screen movie that tells an obscure story that's background filler in the game itself? Yeah, we're the ones being fannish.

Shepard is important to the whole fucking galaxy and everything in it, you dumbshit. Without Shep, rocks fall everyone dies.

Stofsk wrote:So you've made your point... three pages ago. People disagree with you. Why are you continuing to justify your subjective dislike for the concept? Like I asked you before, why can't you separate your fannish obsession with Shepherd from the games to a hypothetical Shepherd in a hypothetical movie based off of the games? Why is it 'offensive' to you that Bioware want to broaden the appeal of their creation so that it reaches more fans and especially in a mainstream setting?

And they can't do that by delving into another part of the ME universe why?
This isn't about my Shepard/s. It's about everyone's. Everyone has a slightly different Shepard. Even the ones who use the default guy will play him differently.
Why does there have to be a movie with a "canon" way?

Bullshit. Spider-man has gone through so many different writers, artists, periods, events, transformations and what-not that adapting him to the big screen is roughly analogous to any hypothetical big screen adaptation of the Mass Effect franchise, and yes that includes Shepherd.

Spiderman was not designed to be a player-created character. However many writers and concepts he goes through, he's still a character the reader passively observes and doesn't have a hand in.

So instead lets have the studio spend tens of millions if not hundreds on a big screen movie that tells an obscure story that's background filler in the game itself? Yeah, we're the ones being fannish.

Obscure to what? The game. Hey, newsflash: If they flesh out the first contact war into a movie then it will no longer be obscure.

Losonti Tokash wrote:Shepard is important to the whole fucking galaxy and everything in it, you dumbshit. Without Shep, rocks fall everyone dies.

So is Luke in Star Wars, and yet there comes a point where making everything about Luke is redundant and boring because there's, you know, a whole galaxy of stories out there.
How would making the movie not about Shepard diminish Shepard's importance in any case?

Gramzamber wrote: And they can't do that by delving into another part of the ME universe why?
This isn't about my Shepard/s. It's about everyone's. Everyone has a slightly different Shepard. Even the ones who use the default guy will play him differently.
Why does there have to be a movie with a "canon" way?

Why the fuck does it matter if there is? How does this impact the way you play the game at all? Just compartmentalize the damn thing and treat them as separate entities.

It'd be pretty fucking absurd to have anything set after Mass Effect 3 and not mention anything other than him defeating the Reapers. You'd have to avoid talking about the Council, the battle at the Citadel against Sovereign, the Rachni (the omission of which could even be a hint), Clan Urdnot, any of the party members from Mass Effect 2, along with Elysium/Torfan/Akuze. It's a long fucking list of things they can't tell stories about because they absolutely cannot even imply some of Shepard's actions by your standards.

Again, there is no Mass Effect canon so far. Even marketing Shepard doesn't go into what you do in the game.
I would feel unfcomfortable with a movie going on the big screen representing the "right" path of the Mass Effect plot, because that path is ours, the players, to make.

Losonti Tokash wrote:It'd be pretty fucking absurd to have anything set after Mass Effect 3 and not mention anything other than him defeating the Reapers. You'd have to avoid talking about the Council, the battle at the Citadel against Sovereign, the Rachni (the omission of which could even be a hint), Clan Urdnot, any of the party members from Mass Effect 2, along with Elysium/Torfan/Akuze. It's a long fucking list of things they can't tell stories about because they absolutely cannot even imply some of Shepard's actions by your standards.

And it just so happens that the first contact war neatly avoids all of this by being set way before any of it.
It also has the advantage of introducing the Turians and other ME races without making moviegoers feel like they don't know shit.

Gramzamber wrote:

Stofsk wrote:So you've made your point... three pages ago. People disagree with you. Why are you continuing to justify your subjective dislike for the concept? Like I asked you before, why can't you separate your fannish obsession with Shepherd from the games to a hypothetical Shepherd in a hypothetical movie based off of the games? Why is it 'offensive' to you that Bioware want to broaden the appeal of their creation so that it reaches more fans and especially in a mainstream setting?

And they can't do that by delving into another part of the ME universe why?
This isn't about my Shepard/s. It's about everyone's. Everyone has a slightly different Shepard. Even the ones who use the default guy will play him differently.
Why does there have to be a movie with a "canon" way?

Because not every fucking person has played the game. The point of making a movie is to broaden the story and appeal so that it gets widespread mainstream attention.

Bullshit. Spider-man has gone through so many different writers, artists, periods, events, transformations and what-not that adapting him to the big screen is roughly analogous to any hypothetical big screen adaptation of the Mass Effect franchise, and yes that includes Shepherd.

Spiderman was not designed to be a player-created character. However many writers and concepts he goes through, he's still a character the reader passively observes and doesn't have a hand in.

Way to miss the point. Spider-man has a devoted fanbase that is widely varied and the fact is you can't make a Spider-man film without pissing off one set of fans while pleasing another set. Your Shepherd is going to be different from my Shepherd, but both Shepherds save the day at the end. If there was no canon direction there wouldn't even be a Shepherd. You can choose the details up to a point, at some point Shepherd can be boiled down to a pretty basic archetype.

So instead lets have the studio spend tens of millions if not hundreds on a big screen movie that tells an obscure story that's background filler in the game itself? Yeah, we're the ones being fannish.

Obscure to what? The game. Hey, newsflash: If they flesh out the first contact war into a movie then it will no longer be obscure.

Jesus fuck. It's a goddamn one-liner that gets tossed around by a handful of characters, its there as background filler, nothing more. It's like in Star Wars when Obi-wan mentions the Clone Wars - oh yeah, that's interesting, maybe Lucas will write another movie about that, but it's not the focus of Star Wars now is it? Stop pretending like this isn't anything other than a fannish obsession on your part.

The biggest problem with the First Contact War is that it was fast, short, and anticlimactic. Turians blow up some explorers, capture Shanxi, humans kick them out, and before there's an actual fight the Council tells the Turians to cut it out. It'd be alright for one of the filler novels they've got, but I doubt you could anchor a movie around it. The end of the Krogan Rebellions could be interesting, but at the same time there's no humans involved so the appeal there will also be limited.

Gramzamber wrote:Again, there is no Mass Effect canon so far. Even marketing Shepard doesn't go into what you do in the game.
I would feel unfcomfortable with a movie going on the big screen representing the "right" path of the Mass Effect plot, because that path is ours, the players, to make.

LOLOL. Are you fucking serious? It makes you uncomfortable that BioWare might have a "true" ending in mind for its own IP? LOL.

Stofsk wrote: So instead lets have the studio spend tens of millions if not hundreds on a big screen movie that tells an obscure story that's background filler in the game itself? Yeah, we're the ones being fannish.

To the vast majority of movie audiences, all of Mass Effect is obscure. Shephard might be the "face of the game", but for 99% of people who would see a movie based on it he's no face at all, a complete unknown, they won't look at a poster for the movie with him on and say "I know what that guy is about" like they would with Spider-Man or any other character who actually has a public perception.

Vendetta wrote:

Stofsk wrote: So instead lets have the studio spend tens of millions if not hundreds on a big screen movie that tells an obscure story that's background filler in the game itself? Yeah, we're the ones being fannish.

To the vast majority of movie audiences, all of Mass Effect is obscure. Shephard might be the "face of the game", but for 99% of people who would see a movie based on it he's no face at all, a complete unknown, they won't look at a poster for the movie with him on and say "I know what that guy is about" like they would with Spider-Man or any other character who actually has a public perception.

So your point is lets make a movie about Mass Effect that has nothing to do with Mass Effect? Big screen adaptations have to deal with this all the time, especially when the source material is obscure. Sure everyone knows who Spider-man is, but not everyone is a fatty nerd that buys Spider-man comics every month.

Jesus, look at Watchmen. Who the fuck read that comic prior to watching the film other than fatty nerds like me? Or were the only people who did watch it comic book fans already? It turns out movies based on adaptations occur all the time.

EDIT: incidentally, the fact they're making a movie does suggest there's enough popularity for the games to make it a bankable risk to take. I'm not saying Mass Effect is so widely popular that a movie will auto-crit the box office or anything, but it's hardly as obscure as you make it out to be when Bioware can put up the cinematic trailer for ME2 during a Superbowel ad break.

Ugh. Why is this debate even happening? The movie will most likely turn out like the Doom movie. Which is to say, it will take a few names, themes and visual designs, but otherwise roll out a Hollywood stereotype story and cast with little relation to the source material. Debates about which decisions were canon are irrelevant when the difference between the movie and the game will be much bigger than the difference between different playthroughs of the game. I am almost certain that there will be enough changes that that the two could not be considered part of the same canon.

Watchmen and other comic book inspired films are not a decent counterargument. For whatever reason, movie writers/directors/producers respect that source material more, possibly because there's more crossover in staff between the two mediums. The games industry is treated like a shitty cash-in sideline that has somehow coughed up a property worthy of a third-rate reverse cash-in movie. These films are usually have a crappy yet egomanical director who is convinced that his vision is better than any video game 'writers' could have.

Losonti Tokash wrote:GR, Femshep is a way better experience than with a male Shepard. Mark Meer does an okay job, but Jennifer Hale's acting totally blows him out of the water.

I must be the only person in the universe who doesn't think this. I don't think Meer was very good in ME1, but I certainly didn't think Hale did a superior job at all. I just think she's shit.

And they should get Denzel Washington to play Shepard.