10 réponses à ce sujet

[Archereon]

Let's face it, Electronic Arts is one of those publishers known for milking franchises until they're no longer profitable; they've spearheading the effort to convert games into as many microtransactions as possible for years.

Given this, and given how controversial the endings are, I've wondering if it might be possible that BioWare might have intentionally written the endings the way they were in an attempt to kill off the franchise and prevent milking.

I'd really, really like to hope this is true.

Modifié par Archereon, 09 mars 2012 - 10:36 .

[Tsantilas]

Everything EA touches turns to ****. I find it extremely unlikely that Bioware would tank ME3 on purpose. They probably were forced to cut corners by EA/shareholders.

[Archereon]

The game's hardly tanked, and up until the endings I found it a lot better than ME2, but the endings are really, really ****g hard to follow up, due to their weirdness and poor quality, enough to make me wonder if Bioware wrote them like they did to ensure ME3 would end the series.

The other side of me wonders if BioWare did that so they could follow in the footsteps of Fallout 3 and use the bad endings to sell DLC to us.

Modifié par Archereon, 09 mars 2012 - 10:40 .

[AxisEvolve]

Not kill. But I think they are trying to wipe everything out so they can start over new with far less variables. I think they feel overwhelmed and boxed in by all of the choices..

Also, this thread will probably be locked soon.

[Archereon]

Really? Oh yeah, I forgot EA cracked downed on any criticisms on their official forums.

[Mathias]

"Trying" to kill. No probably not. They genuinely thought these endings were good, which is even more shocking. But whether they are trying to or not, they did kill Mass Effect in the same way Midochlorians killed Star Wars. The franchise might still be around so it can milk more money, but the heart of it is gone.

Modifié par Mdoggy1214, 09 mars 2012 - 10:46 .

[Archereon]

^ Unless they outright retcon the endings, there's not much that can happen after ME3, the endings are so out there that making anything take place after that would be practically impossible.

[Harbinger of Hope]

I have a theory that they purposefully made these endings bad just so they could charge us another 10 dollars for the good endings.

[Captain_Obvious]

I don't know, but the small and conspiracy-oriented part of my brain is telling me it's sort of like the old proverb: you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar, but if you rip their wings off they'll eat anything you give them.

[Sajuro]

Archereon wrote...

^ Unless they outright retcon the endings, there's not much that can happen after ME3, the endings are so out there that making anything take place after that would be practically impossible.

Like  Dean said in another topic, the races can and will rebuild, if not the relays then they'll move torwards a better form of FTL. We are no longer confined by the technological path that the Reapers set before us and we are free to develop along our own lines.

[Archereon]

^ The problem is the endings are far to different from each other to Hand Wave away with ease. We'll either have a canon ending declared (Control probably since its the only one that doesn't completely annihilate the status quo of the franchise's setting), or retcons (or an expansion on the ending), possibly in the post ending DLC everyone's asking for. That's if EA decides to continue the series past the end of ME3.

I'm more of the mind that ME will catch a case of Metroid/40k Syndrome; all future games will be prequels, and the plot will never advances beyond ME3's endings.