101103 réponses à ce sujet

[Aviditie]

Well, they must be very pleased about the speculation then.

I'm not, personally. And I just don't have the faith in them that you are showing, thinking they creatively found a way to extend their ending. Haven't they said there will be no new gameplay in this new ending, and that they won't be changing, but explaining it?

I grew tired of trying to follow and piece together their non-information tweets. They seemed to insult me more with every line and it was exhausting, personally, to keep myself invested in the game of "speculation." All I can say is that, from my standpoint, they didn't have the ending ironed out soon enough in the process to lead me there. If it's indoctrination, it's clever. But I think their fans are more so than they are in that respect.

And also, the speculation thing rankles me. Why should I have to make my head hurt to try and make their garbled mess make a lick of sense so they can be entertained by my speculation? I dunno.

I'm sorry it's offensive, but I really think there's a good bit of evidence that they didn't have enough ironed out earlier. Why so much foreshadowing in the other games about other things that are wrong, only to turn it all on the citadel for their foreshadowing in the last game, ignoring/totally dropping the plots they decided not to use?

Maybe they'll decide to use those for their dlc. But with that ending, or an explanation in which reaper child remains, I won't buy it to find out.

[KevShep]

Atrocity wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Atrocity wrote...

KevShep wrote...
certain aspects of the game WERE done bit by bit as it went along but that does not mean that they did it with everything! Your assuming that there was NO plan at all throughout the whole serise for the main plot....thats just crazy!

EDIT:  BTW They said they wanted speculation about the endings to see what people found and at Pax they were just stating what people are finding as creative.

The rumour has it that there was, but after Karpyshyn left, it was scrapped. IMHO it really doesn't matter in the game, or in general, whether there is a plan if the execution fails to reflect the said plan.

Not that I am blaming ME3 for that really. They just failed to see many foreshadowed things through, a fault that is a straight consequence of the short, short dev time.

From all of the tweets from Bioware seem to say the opposite about the indoctrination, or at least to the current endings not being the real ones.

With all respect, I could do my masters about the tweets and name it "Character limit vs English grammar; twitter and ambiguous structures" and get highest grade possible...

Like it or not...there it is! If you want I can post a video on some of the tweets but its in a pro indoctrination video.

[Goodwood]

@Atrocity: {{Dewit}}

[Aviditie]

Also, their word about what they are going to do with ME3 doesn't exactly hold the sway it used to hold. And if they have something to say that is truly encouraging about the ending, why are all of their press releases basically "no! My art. This game is perfect. See our perfect scores!? Perfect. See them and go away!"?

[Aviditie]

Atrocity - cool masters! Mine first was on periphrastic verb phrases. :-P I think you'd have me beat!

[Atrocity]

KevShep wrote...

Like it or not...there it is! If you want I can post a video on some of the tweets but its in a pro indoctrination video.

And I disagree. With it being in the tweets I mean. Sure, it CAN be there. But the tweets are so ambiguous it is in no way aguable that is their intended meaning. I appreciate that you see them as such, and that you like the indoctrination theory, but to say that it is "the truth", without proper consideration of other possibilities, is just intellectually lazy.

I have nothing against IT in general, it might very well be the truth for this mess, but even in that case BW dropped the ball story- and execution-wise. With ongoing, "neverending" series I can forgive whatever the author/artist/whatever decides to throw in, but the moment you declare you have a set number of installments in mind, and that they do indeed follow the classic definition of series with a main story-arc, you WILL get called out if you don't deliver. And that is precisely the case with ME3, IT or not.

[Aviditie]

Goodwind- I like your tag!

I have to check out. Sleep calls.

[Atrocity]

Aviditie wrote...

Atrocity - cool masters! Mine first was on periphrastic verb phrases. :-P I think you'd have me beat!

I have a thing for pop-culturish research papers. And the fact in English you can actually give your papers a cool name is nice too. One of my teachers mentioned one Dr. degree research paper named "Would the real English please stand up" which was introduced in one of the seminars she attended.

I aim to go funkier when the time comes

[Aviditie]

One more thing - I'm eye to eye with Atrocity about the tweets.

In addition, I think they just want to calm people down and shut them up to keep them from further hurting sales.

But I need to make myself sleep now. *sigh* I'll cost myself a lot of money if I don't get up I time tomorrow/er, later today. So g'night all!

[KevShep]

Atrocity wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Like it or not...there it is! If you want I can post a video on some of the tweets but its in a pro indoctrination video.

And I disagree. With it being in the tweets I mean. Sure, it CAN be there. But the tweets are so ambiguous it is in no way aguable that is their intended meaning. I appreciate that you see them as such, and that you like the indoctrination theory, but to say that it is "the truth", without proper consideration of other possibilities, is just intellectually lazy.

I have nothing against IT in general, it might very well be the truth for this mess, but even in that case BW dropped the ball story- and execution-wise. With ongoing, "neverending" series I can forgive whatever the author/artist/whatever decides to throw in, but the moment you declare you have a set number of installments in mind, and that they do indeed follow the classic definition of series with a main story-arc, you WILL get called out if you don't deliver. And that is precisely the case with ME3, IT or not.

Ive always considered other possibilites, Ive been on both sides of this debate at one point or another. The evidence is stacked up too much in favor of the I.T. for me to stay neutral. Have you seen ALL of the evidence?

[Atrocity]

KevShep wrote...

Ive always considered other possibilites, Ive been on both sides of this debate at one point or another. The evidence is stacked up too much in favor of the I.T. for me to stay neutral. Have you seen ALL of the evidence?

I have. And I do not think it is solid enough to base any real definite conclusions on.

edit. ok, time for class now, cya later people.

Modifié par Atrocity, 03 mai 2012 - 08:51 .

[g_bassi13]

Atrocity wrote...

Aviditie wrote...

I dont really know what I'd think about the ending if it weren't mass effect. Think it would completely ave to lead me there. But I seriously can't imagine a green beam that turns the galaxy into cyborgs as cool or Art. Or Shepard waking up in armor after the destroy ending as art. Or any part of what happened on the Normandy as art.

I don't really see how that ending could be framed as Art in any context.

But I d agree in that the reason fans care so much that the did that with the ending is context. We weren't led there nor did w realize we were purchasing ME goes Art.

I thought the fact that the had a non-human centric galaxy was pretty revolutionary.

I guess I'm really forgviging when it comes the time to decide whether something is art or isn't...

The point I was trying to make, that if the ending was slapped to another game, or maybe if the fundamental delivery of the story of ME was changed radically, the ending would be good, or at least appropriate. If the game had foreshadowed a feeling of "wrong" or discrepancy throughout the series, an ending where you can't be certain of anything anymore would be a good choice. It would be art in the context of gaming in general, where the majority of things can be taken at face value, and should be taken at face value.

However, the comments about 'humming' aside, this has not been the case, or my perception has been warped and mind numb for quite a few years now.

Heck, if ME had been your regular semi-realistic war-game, even then then some of the aspects of the ending would have been borderline artsy, since in war a soldier can hardly make any difference at all, even if given an illusion of contrary. BUT it is not. And Shepard never was your regular soldier Johnny either.

You can't rip out the conclusion of something and study it on it's own, because it's supposed to be reflective on the events that had preceded it. It it cannot even match the context of the rest of the material, then it has failed. And there's so much more wrong here than just a broken narrative.

You can say the ending might work in the context of a game that had built up to it.... but the fact of the matter is that such a game would just be horrible. Which all calls back on how much of a failure the ending really is.

[HITMAN629]

Since this thread deals with a disapointing matter, I'll drop this off here as well.

Modifié par HITMAN629, 03 mai 2012 - 08:55 .

[Atrocity]

@bassi
I disagree on both accounts. You can look at entities with and without their context, and sometimes it is even good to do so. And such a game is not necessarily bad.

[evisneffo]

KevShep wrote...

It fits perfectly because it alows Bioware to use indoctrination (something that Shepard has not faced yet) as the ending to MAKE US BELIEVE THAT WE ARE NOT INDOCTRINATED when we are infact indoctrinated by Bioware's artistic intergity while having OUR shepard indoctrinated by the reapers. To indoctrinate YOUR shepard the writers have to also indoctrinate YOU the player with shepard or it does not work!...Period!

The anti-I.T. people have been indoctrinated by artistic intergity. They claim its just bad writing AND CANT FIGURE OUT WHY BIOWARE IS SUPPORTING ARTISTIC INTEGRITY....Sound like they dont see the creativeness from Bioware after all.

Mountains of circumstantial evidence or not, I'm afraid you'll never win the likes of me over with this. Are we looking at the same definition of indoctrination? Ripping out the "true" ending of a game for which customers have paid in full leaving in its place an illogical and artistically poor something that's bound to make players justifiably angry and calling it a stunt isn't indoctrination. I think the term you'd want there is "ripping off".

What, by the way, is the proof for the statement that Shepard indoctrination "does not work!" without pissing off the player?

People have made great arguments for IT. People have also ripped down the worth of those arguments by implying that anyone who doesn't believe them is a blinded idiot. At this point, does it really matter whether or not we believe that BW planned this? The time for a prank like this has come and gone. Telling people that BW are now sitting on our money and trollololing at our stupidity brings about as much comfort as falling in a drain. Ripping off your customers isn't clever.

Modifié par evisneffo, 03 mai 2012 - 09:28 .

[g_bassi13]

Atrocity wrote...

@bassi
I disagree on both accounts. You can look at entities with and without their context, and sometimes it is even good to do so. And such a game is not necessarily bad.

You can look at entities without their context, but not conclusions. They can be open ended, and the can be completely allegorical, but if it's not representative of the content that came before, then it is a failure. Such is true of even surrealist work (well, good surrealist work). It's one thing that cannot be analyzed entirely independently.

Also, such a game would not be good, lol. Perhaps there's a chance it would make a decent story, but not a good game. Certainly not the kind of game people here would be paying for.

[g_bassi13]

evisneffo wrote...

At this point, does it really matter whether or not we believe that BW planned this? The time for a prank like this has come and gone. Telling people that BW are now sitting on our money and trollololing at our stupidity brings about as much comfort as falling in a drain. Ripping off your customers isn't clever.

This. Exactly this.

[Atrocity]

@bassi
And I disagree still let's leave it at that

[Goodwood]

g_bassi13 wrote...

Atrocity wrote...

@bassi
I disagree on both accounts. You can look at entities with and without their context, and sometimes it is even good to do so. And such a game is not necessarily bad.

You can look at entities without their context, but not conclusions. They can be open ended, and the can be completely allegorical, but if it's not representative of the content that came before, then it is a failure. Such is true of even surrealist work (well, good surrealist work). It's one thing that cannot be analyzed entirely independently.

Also, such a game would not be good, lol. Perhaps there's a chance it would make a decent story, but not a good game. Certainly not the kind of game people here would be paying for.

I'm pretty sure that Atrocity agrees with you on pretty much all counts with regards to the ending being a craptastic example of misplaced hipsterism. That said, she is correct in the literal sense of picking apart the bits and pieces that make up a story and analyzing them separately. Stories, no matter the medium in which they are presented, can be broken down into constituant parts, the most basic being beginning, middle, and end. Even bad stories, if they can be judged to be "complete," have these elementary segments. Though the game's conclusion is dreadful in context, ME3 does indeed have a separate end sequence that can be picked apart by its own merits and deficiencies.

[g_bassi13]

Atrocity wrote...

@bassi
And I disagree still let's leave it at that

Sure.

I'm trying to thing of a segue onto something on topic... but we already were, lol. So, uh, how about that Starchild. Sucks, doesn't he?

[Atrocity]

@Goodwood
I blame my scientific mindset. As a player I share bassi's anger, but the scientist in me does not allow me to ever express anything but objectivity and if not that, arguments I can back up in a uni debate x) I know objectivity is the lowest form of wit and the last bastion of a hipster, but I can't help it ;__;

[Astralify]

Aviditie wrote...

Yeah but how does technology go BACKWARDS and give up guns that require bullets. And if it's really thermal clips, why can't I elect NOT to use them and use the good old standard guns?

My dad is an avid gun collector. He always liked to show them to any guy I brought home, but he also taught me to use them. They aren't as fun in real life. The dont just hit the stuff you mean to hit. You can hurt somebody! (sry had to say that :-P)

At some point in the game Shepard explains to Conrad Verner this. After this technology upgrade the guns are more powerfull and by replacing the thermal clip you can use the weapon instantly instead of waiting the weapon to cool down which it makes sense I think. ;]

g_bassi13 wrote...

Who knows maybe and it's a big maybe the sort out the ending we might get a ME3 Enhanced Version in 2yrs time.

1. Longer opening sequence - For new players the opportunity to make decisions like the cartoon strip for PS3 players in ME2 and for the rest a trial going over the choices we made. Longer level and tougher fight for Shep trying to leave Earth which could include Vega and give us a chance to figure out why Shep seems so friendly with him at the beginning.

2. More planets to land on and do proper side quests rather than scan or using MP levels. Travel to Dekuuna and actually land and see what the home world of the Elcor is like. More HUB worlds.

3. More squad members having those from ME2 join us like Miranda, Grunt, Jack plus we could still do their individual quests.

etc. I could go on.

You have no idea how much I want to see this.

[Goodwood]

Atrocity wrote...

@Goodwood
I blame my scientific mindset. As a player I share bassi's anger, but the scientist in me does not allow me to ever express anything but objectivity and if not that, arguments I can back up in a uni debate x) I know objectivity is the lowest form of wit and the last bastion of a hipster, but I can't help it ;__;

There's absolutely nothing to blame, Atrocity, or to be ashamed of. In fact, you're probably one of the cooler heads on this entire forum, probably due to your objective nature. We could sometimes use a little less emotion and a little more logic, but sadly that's much easier said than done what with us being hard-wired to be social creatures.

[Atrocity]

But my fanaticism with logic can lead to horrible places
I just meant to show that I know damn well how annoying it is when you are ranting and some arse comes along and chooses to be clever about it. You chose to rant, not do an academic paper on the subject damnit!

Not that I plan on stopping being that arse, mind you

[VivaLaWhatsername]

Only been lurking for a bit now but....

I am off to watch game of thrones.

So you guys keep holding the line, while I watch stuff and drink lemsip
*hugs to all*