Mr.House wrote...
Aristobulus500 wrote...
Adas18 wrote...
Can someone tell me why bioware dropped the number of DLC compared to DAO? I mean especially after 3 successful game launches. Furthermore, previously I asked why the "extended cut" dlc would take until summer and got the answer "to make sure it's good". I believe that it's to retain game player attention so they can draw money from the resurgence pack and MP until then.
But this still begs the question "why hasn't there been anymore single player DLC?" aside from on disc content which was developed long ago. I want another LotSb.
It's my hope that the ending DLC *is* another LotSB...
It won't be. All this dlc is doing is adding new cutscenes. No new dialog, no new endings, no gameplay parts. It's best we make our own headcanon for our Shepard and Liara. I doubt Bioware will deliver with this dlc.
This is definitely possible, but consider this - we've been blatantly lied to by the marketing team before. You can point to countless interviews and statements that are a direct contradiction to what we got in the end. You know, things such as "the end won't just be 'choose a/b/c'".
But now, we have to take their statements to heart? They can lie to us for negative results, but not for positive?
Further - and the
main reason I have hope - Weekes and the actual writing team
are competent. When they were allowed to actually do their jobs, they produced high quality content that, for the most part, conveyed that they had a handle on, and understanding of, the lore and the characters, and what fans wanted to see. I mean, look at Tuchanka, which was written by Weekes and the rest of the writing team as a, you know,
team.
Also, these writers have a history of understanding fan criticisms too, and being able to address it. Look at Lair of the Shadow Broker, which was almost directly made to address complaints people like me had with Liara's encounter in vanilla ME3. It drastically improved upon her character and her relationship with Shepard because people complained about it - so they listened, and made a DLC that addressed those complaints very aptly.
This is the
same thing - fans have a complaint about the story, and all they have to do is the same thing. Listen, and address it.
I have absolute faith that Weekes and co. are just as bugged by the ending as any fan, if not more so. There is absolutely no reason to think they don't completely understand the many flaws inherent in the ending, and that they don't know what needs to be done to make a good ending that would satisfy people.
The only issue I see, is if they are given the freedom to actually do their jobs and write a good ending. The more restricted they are, the worse the ending will be.
I'm aware of that statement from Bioware too, the whole use of the word "clarity" and such, but that's actually
very vague. Keep this in mind, what they have said is actually
so vague they could release an ending that's atrocious, or an ending that's amazing, and they would not have technically lied no matter which extreme they go to.
As an example? Here's something I thought up very quickly in the span of a few minutes that I think is at least decent that still fits the vague requirements they set down.
The 3 original RGB endings are unchanged. Shepard is simply offered a 4th choice to deny the star child, and refuse to take any of those options. Then the fleets fight for themselves and their success is determined by your EMS, and results of that afterward also depend on your paragon/renegade.
Say, more EMS means more people - including Shepard and such - can survive - lower EMS means the Reapers can even win. Paragon/Renegade affects the aftermath. Paragon leads the galaxy in rebuilding in harmony, Renegade helps humans take control afterwards.
That's just a quick example. It would fit their requirements of not changing the original endings, yet still allows for more.
Retour en haut
