batlin wrote...
staindgrey wrote...
I would not. Bugs are not a creative choice; they're a mistake. While I would still say the ending is a mistake from a writer's perspective, it is still a creative choice. They put time and money into the ending, coming up with the music and dialogue and stage layout and overall presentation... It's just something we didn't like.
A bug, by comparison, is caused by time constraints or mistakes in QA. It's their choice whether it's worth fixing or not, but we shouldn't pay for it. Altering the creative premise is a much more involved process, and far less likely to happen. I wouldn't expect them to get all that staff together for free. Plus, remember that the guys in charge thought this ending was good, clearly. They aren't just going to listen to us and say, "Oh, yeah, you're right." It'll pain them to even change it, because (unlike a bug) this was their intention.
So, again, I would totally pay for them to man up, accept that the ending is bad, and offer a superior experience. I would damn well pay for it.
Plot holes too are a mistake. What makes a creative bug any different than a software bug? Software bugs too require time and money to fix. I'm seeing only superficial differences between the two.
That's because you're looking at it with a cause already in mind. The time and money needed to bring in VAs alone will be greater than bug testers, and that's not counting the rest of the staff they'd need to bring in. The key is bringing them back from outside sources when they've already moved onto other projects; bug testing would just be in-house with a smaller, already employed staff. Big difference.
The ending itself has plot holes, yes, as does the rest of the game, and the rest of the series. I definitely think you're underestimating the long, involved process it takes to create the story, and how many hands through which different plots are exchanged, and how many minor lines of dialogue slip through the cracks. As the viewer of the product all at once, of course you're going to catch something that someone who's worked on the same thing for
years is going to miss, much in the same way that a writer needs a fresh set of eyes to question what already made sense to him when he wrote it.
What we're campaigning for isn't something to fill plot holes. It's a new ending that doesn't completely reshape the laws of canon in the final moments. That, again, was a creative decision; not comparable to a bug in this context.
Retour en haut
