125 réponses à ce sujet

[MonkeyLungs]

Hebrew42hammer wrote...

Im taking this in a software development mindset as a person who has worked on video games.

I already know, if you make all fans happy you make money, and profit.

Is it ok for a game company to say we have a vision for our game and it will end like this regardless how the fan base feels about it? Kind of a, we will hurt a few but keep what we think an artwork perfect to us. In bioware's case, did they trick us into think the ending should of been more flexible then we thought it was going to be?

Im curious for some discussion on this because one day I may be making games that are in wide distribution played by commuinities like this one, and i'd like to know how the community feels.

We have beaten the horse to death on plot holes and happy endings, but is some of the blame also on the consumer for hoping an ending would be a specific way? Even though I dislike how the ending felt, I know the game dev's love this game and series, anyone does who works on a project like this.

They can do whatever the heck they want. it's their story. We don't have to like it or support or shut up about though.

What's your point anyway? People are really upset that this long running RPG campaign came to such an end that is dissatisfactory to the vast majority of people I have spoken with/read reaction by ...

[sorentoft]

No. It is their choice if they wish to loose a great amount of consumers or not.

[Meltemph]

We have beaten the horse to death on plot holes and happy endings, but is some of the blame also on the consumer for hoping an ending would be a specific way?

To me it is not about getting the ending I wanted(I had 0 expectations) it was the fact that the endings were nonsensical and bad. Ignoring the plot holes even, it was bad, ignoring that the army we gathered didn't really matter, it was bad, ignoring the reaper god kid, it was bad.

The endings for the most part just straight up dont make sense with-in the world of mass effect.

[Hebrew42hammer]

I think Bioware 100% liked this ending. Not duue to them being navie. We just didnt feel it like they did. They live the game world more then us, so maybe they have a level understanding that lets the fit in the pieces they left out.

Can you hate Bioware for making that choice and thinking it was good at the time? Bioware so far has not given us a responce to our claims... would them working with the community save them face with the new anti-bioware people?

Im just wondering how many people are in the population that turned anti all bioware games. If the magority, then it means developers realy do need to listen to any demand of the community if they can switch from love to hate to love so easily. Wish there was any easy way to figure out if the anti bioware community is large enough to take down the company because of their choices. I guess if they dont do something and bioware lays off some devs, we know that answer.

[Sorayai]

it's just that ME3's ending didnt go with the themes of the other games -- that Shepard was a beacon of hope, a symbol of strength and triumph despite being thrown against impossible odds ... showing up alive, keeping his/her crew alive through everything.

it made me happy because it was full of hope, and it was awesome. then everything Shepard worked for in the end, everything he/she wanted to protect, was taken away?

Shepard sacrificed a lot... he/she accomplished things NO ONE else could do. Shepard deserves to be happy in the end and just retire or whatever.

I would have been fine if Shepard lived (in the destroy ending only if you have enough points) and was found in the rubble by his/her crew

(why the hell did the crew end up on Eden Prime..?)

or even if Shepard was found by the crew, injured and taken to the Normandy... then they ALL arrive in Eden Prime. I dunno, just something... I think Shepard deserves better, that's all

[Whybother]

Meltemph wrote...

Whybother wrote...

No.

But as an ex-game dev, I would have been remiss in not giving my loyal fanbase a satisfying and, yes, "happy" ending.

I disagree that a "happy" ending was needed.  Just a good one that made more sense.  DNA/Matter changing(Killall synthetics or merge organics and synthetics) lasers a coherent ending it is not.

I think all the endings need to make sense.  Happy should be one that you need to work for, and it may not be 100% "happy" - e.g. you may still lose significant Sword and Hammer forces, and Earth may take a while to recover. 

Having the main character dead 99% of the time, and probably separated from his/her love interest, is not a good ending.

[Ariaya]

No, I do not think that companies should be forced to do everything that the fanbase wants. First of all, that's impossible--way too many individual needs to satisfy--it wouldn't be possible to please everyone.

Game companies don't have any obligation to do anything. In the end, Bioware/EA can do whatever they please.

Smart and talented game companies will deliver games with good gameplay, well conceived and consistent storytelling, and meaningful content. This kind of commitment to excellence can help ensure a dedicated fanbase and good sales.

[kramerfan86]

"forced"? No not exactly, but this is a capitalist system, if the fans vote with their wallets the company still isnt truly forced to do anything but its ill advised not to.

[Drake_1000]

Not do everything. Just do what they have say in the past. The ending is the worst a ME fan should expected. It's a total failure.

[Hebrew42hammer]

MonkeyLungs wrote...

Hebrew42hammer wrote...

Im taking this in a software development mindset as a person who has worked on video games.

I already know, if you make all fans happy you make money, and profit.

Is it ok for a game company to say we have a vision for our game and it will end like this regardless how the fan base feels about it? Kind of a, we will hurt a few but keep what we think an artwork perfect to us. In bioware's case, did they trick us into think the ending should of been more flexible then we thought it was going to be?

Im curious for some discussion on this because one day I may be making games that are in wide distribution played by commuinities like this one, and i'd like to know how the community feels.

We have beaten the horse to death on plot holes and happy endings, but is some of the blame also on the consumer for hoping an ending would be a specific way? Even though I dislike how the ending felt, I know the game dev's love this game and series, anyone does who works on a project like this.

They can do whatever the heck they want. it's their story. We don't have to like it or support or shut up about though.

What's your point anyway? People are really upset that this long running RPG campaign came to such an end that is dissatisfactory to the vast majority of people I have spoken with/read reaction by ...

point? talk about something other then bioware sucks? We are right now in a waiting point where bioware can make a move to fix this. I just wonder if its the right thing to make a move, if its too drastic will there be a vocal community against them? I know how I think, but finding out how you guys think interests me. And honestly, I think im done talking about the reasons why I disliked the ending but rather slowly move on.

[stwu]

Burnham1 wrote...

Nobody is forcing them to do anything, because they always have the option to ignore the pleas of their fan base. The problem is they have to deal with whatever the repercussions of that will be. This is a huge issue. It isn't something small they can blow off and expect no negative side-effects. People will abandon ship and stop supporting the company because of this issue. The question is simply, how many, and will it be enough to put a dent in Bioware's future profits for their up-coming games in the next few years? Are they wiling to risk alienating their fans and assume the negative backlash won't be enough to hurt the company, or are they going to try to appease the people they should be creating the games for and give the community the product they want?

I may be naive but I don't see how they can thrive with a reputation like this.Sure they have my cash now but they won't in the future. I don't wish anyone any ill will but I would be completely restructuring everything if I was in charge, heads rolling.

[gmboy902]

 I just don't like the idea that companies think they're entitled to something for creating the game. They create a game, we pay them money for the rights. Ergo, it is an equal trade. The company isn't superior to the customer. The customer isn't superior to the company. In this case, we feel jipped.

At the very least, I would buy a 5-10 dollar DLC just to rectify this ending. So there, have your money BioWare. Just give me some resolution.

[Meltemph]

Can you hate Bioware for making that choice and thinking it was good at the time? Bioware so far has not given us a responce to our claims... would them working with the community save them face with the new anti-bioware people?

Atleast for myself. I don't hate Bioware at all for the ending, but when a movie company makes a bad ending, they hear about it, when a book has a bad ending, the writer hears about it, when a video game has a nonsensical ending, they hear about it.

And I honestly don't understand how they thought a DNA or Matter detecting/changing beam that gets shot through the galaxy was a "good" ending for stopping the reapers. There is no indication that something like that should even be in the ME universe.

[Meltemph]

Having the main character dead 99% of the time, and probably separated from his/her love interest, is not a good ending.

Completely disagree with you here. Game companies NEED to start breaking away from this idea so stories can grow. Nothing wrong with having the protagonist die to save the world. All you have to do is look at movies to see how not getting what you wanted in a ending CAN be more powerful then "happily ever after". I dont care if you lost ALL of Sword and hammer forces... if you and your LI live that and save the galaxy that IS a happily ever after video game trope.

[Darth Malignus]

Hebrew42hammer wrote...

Im taking this in a software development mindset as a person who has worked on video games.

I already know, if you make all fans happy you make money, and profit.

Is it ok for a game company to say we have a vision for our game and it will end like this regardless how the fan base feels about it? Kind of a, we will hurt a few but keep what we think an artwork perfect to us.

They could do that, if they don't want that fanbase to stick around. Sure, no problem.

[Hebrew42hammer]

could maybe this issue be publisher based? Are major publishers with vast chains that can put more games in more stores in bigger areas a bad thing? Maybe EA said, ok script leaked, the game still releases or we're upping our fee to use our suppy chains.

If thats the case, we are attacking bioware when they were rushed to give us content. It would explain almost identical cutscenes. But I dont think that will ever become our knowledge if true, EA's deal with bioware is probably to good to tarnish.

But if we didnt have mega corps like EA, games would get to less countires so all gamers living with few game stores might not get the games they want. :\\

[Adamantium93]

They shouldnt be allowed to lie to us. They said there would be many, vastly different endings based on your choices. That is just untrue

[fish of doom]

Meltemph wrote...

We have beaten the horse to death on plot holes and happy endings, but is some of the blame also on the consumer for hoping an ending would be a specific way?

To me it is not about getting the ending I wanted(I had 0 expectations) it was the fact that the endings were nonsensical and bad. Ignoring the plot holes even, it was bad, ignoring that the army we gathered didn't really matter, it was bad, ignoring the reaper god kid, it was bad.

The endings for the most part just straight up dont make sense with-in the world of mass effect.

THIS

they just plain don't make sense, period.

[Deemz]

Hebrew42hammer wrote...

I already know, if you make all fans happy you make money, and profit.

.

That is they key. You can do what YOU want or you can do what your customers want. Since the customers have the money that you want then it is usally the safer bet to give them what they want. 

[wirelesstkd]

Hebrew42hammer wrote...

Is it ok for a game company to say we have a vision for our game and it will end like this regardless how the fan base feels about it? Kind of a, we will hurt a few but keep what we think an artwork perfect to us.

Yes! This is exactly right! I want to believe that game designers/film makers/novelists/etc. are writing the stories they WANT to write, not writing based on what tests well for focus groups. That means that we won't always be happy, but it's also how we get diverse, artistic storytelling.

I'm always reminded of the movie City of Angels. It's one of my favorites - extremely well told, beautiful in every way. It also has one of the most depressing endings ever. So sad, but with a slight glimmer of hope about the meaning of life and humanity. In the director's commentary they talk about how they did an alternative cut where they end at this very happy moment (essentially just lopping off the last 10 minutes or so), but how it represented everything they didn't want to make. Then, in Hollywood fashion, they screened the original (sad) movie and got TERRIBLE feedback. The audience hated it. But the director talks about how they were so proud that studio stood behind them and let them go out with the movie THEY wanted to make, despite the fact that it could have hurt their sales. This is the world in which I want to be a consumer, not the one that's focus tested to blandness.

[Feops1]

Well there's really two questions here. This is pretty close to home as I do project works for software myself.

First is "do the developers care what the fan base wants?"
Second is "do the developers understand what the fan base wants?"

The answer to the first question is that the developers are under no obligation whatsoever to release anything agreeable to anyone. The balance they have to work out amongst themselves is that as a business they ideally want to release a product that people will purchase, and even more, they want to develop a loyal fan base. Any business knows that the value of retaining a customer is much greater than the effort of recruiting a new one. So when they chase after an ideal of sorts they have to temper it against the reality of business. Mass Effect has an interesting position that they were pretty much assured success on the game itself, but they faced an immense amount of attention regarding their fan base and long term prospects. Will people be interested in Bioware's next game or series? It will depend a lot on their thoughts on ME3 and DA2. My own opinion is that if Bioware goes on to release a Dragon Age 3, that they will suffer much diminished profits owing to negative user feedback from DA2. So it goes.

The answer to the second question is usually the job of an analyst or project lead of some sort to figure out what a customer really wants when they ask for a given thing (this is what I do actually). Customers are a huge and varied group, and you cannot possibly make everyone happy, but there are common themes that will appease the majority of fans and attract new ones. Getting the exact ending that everyone wants is more or impossible, but getting an ending that the majority of customers appreciate and understand as consistent to the themes of the game, and living up to the marketing of choice and impact, are reasonable goals and reasonable expectations. This is why there is such a resonance of disappointment from the fan base - the details are almost irrelevant, but the end result that was given was sloppy and made little sense so nobody appreciated it.

[Wattoes]

fish of doom wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

We have beaten the horse to death on plot holes and happy endings, but is some of the blame also on the consumer for hoping an ending would be a specific way?

To me it is not about getting the ending I wanted(I had 0 expectations) it was the fact that the endings were nonsensical and bad. Ignoring the plot holes even, it was bad, ignoring that the army we gathered didn't really matter, it was bad, ignoring the reaper god kid, it was bad.

The endings for the most part just straight up dont make sense with-in the world of mass effect.

THIS

they just plain don't make sense, period.

^^^^^

The absolute worst ending to a videogame of all time.

I half expected shepard do go waterskiing in his leather jacket over a shark in the epilogue.

Modifié par Wattoes, 11 mars 2012 - 05:43 .

[Hebrew42hammer]

wirelesstkd wrote...

Hebrew42hammer wrote...

Is it ok for a game company to say we have a vision for our game and it will end like this regardless how the fan base feels about it? Kind of a, we will hurt a few but keep what we think an artwork perfect to us.

Yes! This is exactly right! I want to believe that game designers/film makers/novelists/etc. are writing the stories they WANT to write, not writing based on what tests well for focus groups. That means that we won't always be happy, but it's also how we get diverse, artistic storytelling.

I'm always reminded of the movie City of Angels. It's one of my favorites - extremely well told, beautiful in every way. It also has one of the most depressing endings ever. So sad, but with a slight glimmer of hope about the meaning of life and humanity. In the director's commentary they talk about how they did an alternative cut where they end at this very happy moment (essentially just lopping off the last 10 minutes or so), but how it represented everything they didn't want to make. Then, in Hollywood fashion, they screened the original (sad) movie and got TERRIBLE feedback. The audience hated it. But the director talks about how they were so proud that studio stood behind them and let them go out with the movie THEY wanted to make, despite the fact that it could have hurt their sales. This is the world in which I want to be a consumer, not the one that's focus tested to blandness.

Thats the kind of studio I would want to work for in the gaming industry. Its depressing to hear people post comments "well if you want to be successful, better do what they dollars tell you." I dont know many people in my career field that go, "I want to make game only for popularity" that go on to get jobs at any companies of note. Now, I would love to make a game that everyone loves... but only if they love my vision.... not because I created their vision from games that already existed.

[Mhgasa]

Wattoes wrote...

fish of doom wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

We have beaten the horse to death on plot holes and happy endings, but is some of the blame also on the consumer for hoping an ending would be a specific way?

To me it is not about getting the ending I wanted(I had 0 expectations) it was the fact that the endings were nonsensical and bad. Ignoring the plot holes even, it was bad, ignoring that the army we gathered didn't really matter, it was bad, ignoring the reaper god kid, it was bad.

The endings for the most part just straight up dont make sense with-in the world of mass effect.

THIS

they just plain don't make sense, period.

^^^^^

The absolute worst ending to a videogame of all time.

I half expected shepard do go waterskiing in his leather jacket over a shark in the epilogue.

Even worse is the fact that you really cant tell the endings apart, since there is no epilogue at all. Different color beams and glowing eyes in one ending

[MPSai]

There comes a point where a property becomes a cultural phenomenon, and at that point it belongs just as much to the fanbase. I think by that point a company owes it to the fans to ship a quality product and a story with a satisfying conclusion. They should want to do it for their art as well. Listening to some of the devs lamely defend the ending makes me think they know its crap but they didn't have the time to come up with anything better.