13369 réponses à ce sujet

[Omega Torsk]

Ziggybits wrote...

 As a Huge Bioware fan, and even Bigger Mass Effect Fan, I am completly dissapointed in Bioware. As of 5 mins ago, I have canceled my preorder from gamestop, and WILL NOT be purchsesing one of my favorite games of all time.

Totall Biscuitt pretty much sums it all up, and will be supporting him 100%



I hope you guys learn from this mistake, or else your just going to alienate your selvs with your greed and bad marketing decisions.

What a sad day from Mass Effect Fans!  

Your loss, bro...

Modifié par Omega Torsk, 23 février 2012 - 07:03 .

[ArkkAngel007]

MartinDN wrote...

rainasa wrote...

MartinDN wrote...

So how do you know this ? Because bioware stated it ? Yeh but they did not explain why the prothean and the voice code was in the early script. Like i said before, its almost guaranteed they lied, but no one can prove it, which its why its a masterstroke by bioware. You either believe them or you dont, and i would if if they was the same company they was 6 years ago.

the prothean was a main plot point in the FIRST leaked script, and was was totally absent from the second, this could mean they removed it due to time constraints or because they didnt feel the quality of his story wasnt up to par, but instead of just gutting him they planned for him to be released as DLC. I dont see how this is so shocking. content that was cut from early stages of planning being added into the game later as a DLC or an expansion isnt exactly a new thing.

So you dont see anything wrong with that ? How could you possibly rationalize it ? A PROTHEAN, they made him integral to the story, with voice code and everything to fit as a normal squadmate, suddenly cut him ? And then later turn him into the focal point of the CE and day 1 DLC. Im sorry you say they could cut him due to time constraints or the quality etc...i say how about purposefully cutting him for DLC ? Neither of us can say it with certainty, but THAT IS THE PROBLEM, its not that we dont get it for free its that they removed him and CHARGED US FOR IT.

He wasn't in the game at all past the first script though.  No work on him outside of concept and writing was done until later with the current script, where they were actually coding the bloody game.

And for those who read the first script, it's really clear why he was taken out, and that we were lucky to even get him as DLC instead of being scrapped all together.

[LinksOcarina]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Ok this is what I've come up with so far.

2 Versions of ME 3 one complete, another incomplete. You need to pay $10 to complete it and depending on if you can get the defination to fly, that is illegal.

citation to wherre that is  illegal then.

cause that is nonsense to say such a thing without proof.

[Farbautisonn]

Goth Skunk wrote...

GuyIncognito21 wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...
And where do you get off complaining on a forum?

That's what forums are for: so customers can express their views on the game, including expressing their frustration with unscrupulous money-grubbing businesses trying to ruin something into which people have invested a lot of time over the last 5 years.

They're also a place where other consumers can tell you to man up, grow a pair, and call you 'princess' in a condescending manner.

-I love those consumers. They are usually so easy to goad into a frenzy. Buttons all over. You keep pressing the buttons and watch them self destruct in indignant zealous white knight rage. Very funny.

[AkiKishi]

To prove that an advertisement is false, a plaintiff must prove five things: (1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity; (2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience; (3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience; (4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce; and (5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff. The most heavily weighed factor is the advertisement's potential to injure a customer. The injury is usually attributed to money the consumer lost through a purchase that would not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading. False statements can be defined in two ways: those that are false on their face and those that are implicitly false.

Read more: http://www.answers.c...g#ixzz1nEWoskV4

Would you say it was a reasonable expectation that a game you bought would be complete ?

Modifié par BobSmith101, 23 février 2012 - 07:05 .

[WizenSlinky0]

OSE Killer wrote...

Are people still ****ing? You should have bought the collectors edition then... Lol

The collectors edition would have cost me $20 for the same content I'm going to pay $10 for, so no I shouldn't have.

I don't need all that physical stuff which would just be shoved in a corner of my room somewhere. Nor do I need alternate apperences or robotic dogs or extra weapons.

So I'm getting off cheaper

[Daywalker315]

Ziggybits wrote...

 As a Huge Bioware fan, and even Bigger Mass Effect Fan, I am completly dissapointed in Bioware. As of 5 mins ago, I have canceled my preorder from gamestop, and WILL NOT be purchsesing one of my favorite games of all time.

Totall Biscuitt pretty much sums it all up, and will be supporting him 100%



I hope you guys learn from this mistake, or else your just going to alienate your selvs with your greed and bad marketing decisions.

What a sad day from Mass Effect Fans!  

How sad. Please come back when we're all here discussing how awesome it is. Boycott FTW!

[fropas]

Goth Skunk wrote...

GuyIncognito21 wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...
And where do you get off complaining on a forum?

That's what forums are for: so customers can express their views on the game, including expressing their frustration with unscrupulous money-grubbing businesses trying to ruin something into which people have invested a lot of time over the last 5 years.

They're also a place where other consumers can tell you to man up, grow a pair, and call you 'princess' in a condescending manner.

OMG that is so mean LOL. This is why I love the interwebs.

[AlanC9]

beetlebailey123 wrote...

It's interesting to say the least. My major question is how did a Prothean show up in present time.... That's like defying physics.

Nah -- the protheans had stasis technology; we know this from Ilos. They just didn't have enough power to actually keep the Ilos pods operating long enough to be rescued.

So somewhere else, some protheans had a better power source. Not even all that surprising, really.

[DarthSliver]

And here i thought the BSN might not complain for once in its lifetime. And there is a difference from criticism and flat out complaining.

But lets lay down what is happening, if you watched the opening of ME3 video you would see that you get an online pass. People who buy the game used will have to get that online pass on the PSN on Xbox Marketplace for 10 bucks. This online pass allows you to play ME3 MP and that is the incentive to buy the game new, The Prothean is incentive to buy the Collectors edition but also be offered for 10 bucks for the people who buy regular.

[GuyIncognito21]

LawRecordings wrote...
2. Supply & demand and basic economics apply here.

And the relevance of this is what, exactly?  As I've said repeatedly in this thread, digital entertainment consumers have a unique economic luxury not afforded to consumers in most other markets: if they don't like the way they're treated, they can get the product for free.

"Basic economics" dictate that given the above reality, it doesn't make good business sense in the long term to alienate and antagonize your consumer base, driving them to access your content absolutely free of charge when they otherwise would have paid you for it.

Ask the RIAA and MPAA how their antagonistic economic model worked out for them.  The RIAA spent something in the neighborhood of $65 million in litigation costs trying to sue their customers and they recovered about $2 million.  You don't need an economics degree to figure out that's not a good model for your business.

As I said earlier, supply and demand says that if I have water and you're dying of thirst, I have all the leverage.  Supply and demand ALSO says, however, that if it starts raining and you can have the water for free, I'm screwed.

Modifié par GuyIncognito21, 23 février 2012 - 07:09 .

[AlanC9]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Would you say it was a reasonable expectation that a game you bought would be complete ?

Sure. And ME3 will be complete.

[MostlyAutumn]

beetlebailey123 wrote...

It's interesting to say the least. My major question is how did a Prothean show up in present time.... That's like defying physics.

Well, they had statis pods that kept 12 Prothean apostles scientists alive for 400 years.

[ArkkAngel007]

BobSmith101 wrote...


To prove that an advertisement is false, a plaintiff must prove five things: (1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity; (2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience; (3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience; (4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce; and (5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff. The most heavily weighed factor is the advertisement's potential to injure a customer. The injury is usually attributed to money the consumer lost through a purchase that would not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading. False statements can be defined in two ways: those that are false on their face and those that are implicitly false.

Read more: http://www.answers.c...g#ixzz1nEWoskV4

Would you say it was a reasonable expectation that a game you bought would be complete ?

Would be a textbook case, except one problem?  There is no case.

You weren't lied to.  The DLC was intended as DLC.  Plain and simple.  I don't know how many ways it has to be said for people to understand it.  

[LinksOcarina]

BobSmith101 wrote...


To prove that an advertisement is false, a plaintiff must prove five things: (1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity; (2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience; (3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience; (4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce; and (5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff. The most heavily weighed factor is the advertisement's potential to injure a customer. The injury is usually attributed to money the consumer lost through a purchase that would not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading. False statements can be defined in two ways: those that are false on their face and those that are implicitly false.

Read more: http://www.answers.c...g#ixzz1nEWoskV4

And the proof that the game is illegal? The concrete proof, actually. implicitly false statements are at the mercy of the judge hearing the case.

So point 1 never happened, or is very thinly defined, Point 2 is debatable, and point 5 will never happen. You got 2/5 points to make a case so far.

I am not impressed.

[AlanC9]

GuyIncognito21 wrote...
"Basic economics" dictate that given the above reality, it doesn't make good business sense in the long term to alienate and antagonize your consumer base, driving them to access your content absolutely free of charge when they otherwise would have paid you for it.

Are they alienating their customer base, or just GuyIncognito21and a few people who agree with him?

[fropas]

BobSmith101 wrote...


To prove that an advertisement is false, a plaintiff must prove five things: (1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity; (2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience; (3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience; (4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce; and (5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff. The most heavily weighed factor is the advertisement's potential to injure a customer. The injury is usually attributed to money the consumer lost through a purchase that would not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading. False statements can be defined in two ways: those that are false on their face and those that are implicitly false.

Read more: http://www.answers.c...g#ixzz1nEWoskV4

Would you say it was a reasonable expectation that a game you bought would be complete ?

Is ir false though? You can still beat the game with the SE. . .It's not like you can't beat the game. You just can't do it as stylishly as I can because you didn't buy all the features.

[AkiKishi]

AlanC9 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Would you say it was a reasonable expectation that a game you bought would be complete ?

Sure. And ME3 will be complete.

How do you conclude that ? Playable and complete are not the same thing.

Only the CE will be complete. The SE can be complete for an additional £10.

[WizenSlinky0]

GuyIncognito21 wrote...
  Supply and demand ALSO says, however, that if it starts raining and you can have the water for free, I'm screwed.

The bottled water industry disagree's.

[NoxJuked]

Should make this a poll I feel like it's 50/50 split right now those for it those against it

[CommanderCoffee]

BobSmith101 wrote...


To prove that an advertisement is false, a plaintiff must prove five things: (1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity; (2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience; (3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience; (4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce; and (5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff. The most heavily weighed factor is the advertisement's potential to injure a customer. The injury is usually attributed to money the consumer lost through a purchase that would not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading. False statements can be defined in two ways: those that are false on their face and those that are implicitly false.

Read more: http://www.answers.c...g#ixzz1nEWoskV4

Would you say it was a reasonable expectation that a game you bought would be complete ?

DLC = miniature expansion pack, nonvital to the core game
From Ashes = miniature expansion pack, nonvital to the core game

The game is complete, there's just extra content that adds peripherally to the universe of the game and doesn't make the core game complete by, say, allowing you to complete it. In other words, you can beat the game without From Ashes.

[Daywalker315]

TheStoner wrote...

Daywalker315 wrote...

fropas wrote...

MostlyAutumn wrote...

Aargh12 wrote...

transcendent12 wrote...
Bioware could well be lying. But until that can be proved (which it can't) Your argument has an invalid premise and is therefore void.

Sure, the leaked script and beta/demo files are not proof/. Sure.

And of course Kasumi and LotSB don't count as counter-arguments. Because everything is already obvious to you.

Wait, was ME2 not a "complete" game because it lacked kasumi and LotSB? Because it didn't feel incomplete when I blew up the collector base.

To Aargh12: I've said this about 100 times but people don't seem to grasp it. Words on a page and a few lines of recorded audio does NOT prove that the entire character and Eden Prime mission were content complete, polished, and ready to be played before the game went off for certification and manufacturing. You can't go from A to Z like that and just assume that a few dialogue lines and words on a script means it's playable. Use common sense, people. It's not so hard.

It doesn't matter if it was fully complete by the time it went to certification it still means it was worked on before certification and they probably had gotten pretty far to have gotton voice acting done.

It actually DOES matter if it was fully done or not before certification. If it wasn't, then it takes the "this should have been on the disc" argument off the table. It wouldn't be possible. That only leaves the other lackluster arguments people are coming up with.

[ArkkAngel007]

AlanC9 wrote...

beetlebailey123 wrote...

It's interesting to say the least. My major question is how did a Prothean show up in present time.... That's like defying physics.

Nah -- the protheans had stasis technology; we know this from Ilos. They just didn't have enough power to actually keep the Ilos pods operating long enough to be rescued.

So somewhere else, some protheans had a better power source. Not even all that surprising, really.

That and keeping one alive is less taxing than trying to keep hundreds/thousands of them alive.

[Pygmalin]

 So now I am curious is if the CE squad member will be different. 

[rainasa]

MartinDN wrote...

So you dont see anything wrong with that ? How could you possibly rationalize it ? A PROTHEAN, they made him integral to the story, with voice code and everything to fit as a normal squadmate, suddenly cut him ? And then later turn him into the focal point of the CE and day 1 DLC. Im sorry you say they could cut him due to time constraints or the quality etc...i say how about purposefully cutting him for DLC ? Neither of us can say it with certainty, but THAT IS THE PROBLEM, its not that we dont get it for free its that they removed him and CHARGED US FOR IT.

Do you know how silly this sounds? the prothean was planed on being a main point in a script that was acknowledged to being a very old version. having major content cut and streamlined is not new (deus ex: HR for example had TWO major hubs cut due to time for example) but instead of just getting rid of him completly they made him into a character like shale, someone who provedes alot of valued lore and a unique perspective, but not required at all in the main story.