1634 réponses à ce sujet

[Sanrei]

www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/04/17/spoiled-little-emperors-mass-effect-and-the-three-other-most-severe-cases-of-gamer-entitlement/


I'm sure we're all keeping an eye on Forbes and this guy, but I particularly enjoyed this article. Especially where he points out how Bioware hasn't exactly been treating their fans with the same respect they want from us.

[marshkoala]

I didn't see this on your list, please give it a read it's called "On the betrayal of hope....."

http://social.biowar.../index/10289506

[Ibn_Shisha]

Another good thread along the same lines:

http://social.biowar...index/11469070/

[Chronor]

Holding the Line!

[SpeedDevil89]

Bump before bed.

Does the poll show on main forum? Because I think it's kinda lost, somewhere....

[Sanrei]

Bump!

[Ender99]

marshkoala wrote...

I didn't see this on your list, please give it a read it's called "On the betrayal of hope....."

http://social.biowar.../index/10289506

This was one I hadn't read yet. Thanks for the post.

[Ibn_Shisha]

Bump

[Spyre2001]

PedEgg wrote...

www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/04/17/spoiled-little-emperors-mass-effect-and-the-three-other-most-severe-cases-of-gamer-entitlement/


I'm sure we're all keeping an eye on Forbes and this guy, but I particularly enjoyed this article. Especially where he points out how Bioware hasn't exactly been treating their fans with the same respect they want from us.

I think he hits the nail on the head with ...

The simple fact of the matter is this: a customer is entitled to
spend their money however they choose. They’re also entitled to make
their concerns and complaints about a game or any other product known.
Companies themselves are not entitled to much of anything.
They’re not guaranteed sales of the games they make, or a fawning
customer base, or anything else for that matter. They have to earn all that; consumers simply have to buy something. It’s not an even playing field. And it never will be in a market economy.

...

If anything, acts of gamer “entitlement” are mostly attempts at
giving second or third chances to a developer or publisher. It’s a
customer basically telling you exactly what’s wrong with your product
before saying “We won’t buy your product ever again!”
That sort of information strikes me as quite useful, actually. Almost
the sort of data you might pay for. But I’ve never been a big believer
in the value of yes-men.

This is how I feel. We are trying to tell Bioware how they royally messed up and instead they want to pretend like our critisims are completely invalid or simply a matter of opinion as it's "ART". Try telling that to all the Star Wars fans who have had George Lucas trash all over their favorite franchise. Ended up showing that most of what made SW great probably didn't actually come from him. But yet they are treated with a bit more respect then when gamers complain about a bad product.

Companies like BW and EA keep making all these bad choices and then try covering it up with PR spin. There is a reason EA was voted worst company. And all the media outlits who say things are they way they are for some BS reason and we need to just shut up and accept it are full of BS themselves. 

One needs look no further then a game like Skyrim as proof that "conventional" wisdom of gaming industry is not true. Skyrim would of never gotten made by a company like EA. Things like "games need multiplayer to sell" which is why we got MP in ME3 is one of the many "conventional" wisdoms. Skyrim is like a long list of all the things they say would never work for a hugely successful title yet even half a year after release it's still on top sellers list of Steam and in the top 10 of games currently being played on steam. You know they probably got people ready to trip overthemselves for some DLC just like with their Fallout series even though they also provide moding tools for users to make their own content.

That could of and should of been what ME3 release was like. The forums full of people looking forward to some new exciting DLC instead of them begging for DLC to FIX a broken ending. And instead of admitting they messed up like some other more well respected companies would of done they try and pull a George Lucas by defending their break from common sense and good story telling as "stylistic" aka ART.

Though while the SW changes were bad they didn't break the universe the way ME3 ending did. Plus the Pre-Triliage didn't contain many likable chars so it's just a chapter most can overlook. Maybe it's fitting then that Lucas and BW have teamed up .

I don't know about you guys but the announcement that there would be no changes to the ending and simply would add "Clarification" did not sit well with me. It's like they are basically going to add an Animal house style ending and then call it a day. Which if you haven't seen the ME3 Animal house video it's linked in the OP somewhere check it out, it's amusing and is more cannon to me then the current ending in the game.

Back to the Forbes article, I feel I'm like many here which is at the point of saying give us what we want or we are not buying your products in the future. Which really isn't that hard seeing as DA, ME, and Sim City are the only EA franchises left I had any interested in. BW was a company I bought all their games. But after DA2 and ME3 they are turning out like pretty much every other company's franchises I liked that EA bought out. In regards to SimCity that last POS game Societies shows bad decision making almost on par with the kind that gaves us the ME3 ending. And SC5 sounds a bit like CitiesXL with it's multiplayer and such. Hopes are not high on that one. Then there is Command and Conquer 4. I could go on with all the face palms of other franchises but I won't. Instead I'll link this video

There are only a few companies left that I buy all their games from and that's Blizzard and Bethesda. Though not with WoW expansions since Lich as MMOs get old eventually. And even with all the hate for BW I decided to give TOR a try when they had a free weekend. Let's just say EPIC FAIL. Trail members had their chat disabled so couldn't ask anyone for help on anything. What a great way to intruduce new players to a game by making it so if they are stuck on something (Including a quest that requires a GROUP) they can't ask anyone for help.

Also there was a level cap I hear, what's the point of a limited free trial if your going to have level cap might as well do what WoW does with unlimit trial up to that level. That way maybe new users can try all the classes and find one they like enough to actually PAY to play. But common sense is frowned upon at EA and BW, just look at ME3 ending as proof.

[Spyre2001]

An amusing Read

http://ferretbrain.c...les/article-853


EDIT: Oh was there really forshadowing of this crappy ending back in ME1?!?
http://www.rockpaper...ct-1-after-all/

Modifié par Spyre2001, 20 avril 2012 - 01:51 .

[unoriginalname1133]

Spyre2001 wrote...

An amusing Read

http://ferretbrain.c...les/article-853


EDIT: Oh was there really forshadowing of this crappy ending back in ME1?!?
http://www.rockpaper...ct-1-after-all/

It's a little sad that I can't completely rule this out as a real possibility

[CDRSkyShepard]

unoriginalname1133 wrote...

Spyre2001 wrote...

An amusing Read

http://ferretbrain.c...les/article-853


EDIT: Oh was there really forshadowing of this crappy ending back in ME1?!?
http://www.rockpaper...ct-1-after-all/

It's a little sad that I can't completely rule this out as a real possibility

I can.

There is only one being of light, and he's not protecting us from anything, really. Maybe he's protecting us from ourselves, but I don't think there's that much weight to this...I mean, the original endings had nothing to do with StarChild. There was no StarChild in the original endings Drew wrote up.

I've got some more articles put up, but I think I'll have to wait til tomorrow, because I've got an exam. (EEP) I'll see all you lovely people then!

[Spyre2001]

I can.

There is only one being of light, and he's not protecting us from anything, really. Maybe he's protecting us from ourselves, but I don't think there's that much weight to this...I mean, the original endings had nothing to do with StarChild. There was no StarChild in the original endings Drew wrote up.

I've got some more articles put up, but I think I'll have to wait til tomorrow, because I've got an exam. (EEP) I'll see all you lovely people then!

What I think is more likely is that the many planet descriptions where written up by a team of various writers just for flavor and that one was writen by one of the two guys who decided on the ending. So once they got in charge they thought "Hay wouldn't it be cool to tie things back to this very obscure reference I made back in ME1 that was my own thing and had nothing to do with the actual main plot?"

Even though the description sounds more like a race that would fight against the Repears since they seem to fit the description of Demon Machines.

[Madecologist]

A friend and I discuss this, usually when you write a true trilogy you know atleast the basic story elements of the whole trilogy at the start. Doesn't mean there is no room to grow or change stuff, but overall you know all the major twists.

For example the real motives behind the Reapers should have been determined as early as when they decided the protagonist would be a N7 Soldier and called Shepard. You have to do this to prevent plothole or contrived story telling from occuring during the trilogy.

Someone suggests that "thing A" happens, you should be able to say "nah that won't work because we know at the end what the -real- reason is." This lets you make sure early story reveals won't contridict with later reveals. You can still mislead and trick, but you don't want to flat out contridict yourself.

However I get the feeling a lot of things, important things that should have been decided upon at the start, that we see in 2 and 3 were concieved of during the making of those games. You generally need a basic if not a clear idea of what your ending is even before you get into the meat of the story.

We see what the results are if you don't.

Modifié par Madecologist, 21 avril 2012 - 02:04 .

[LadyWench]

I don't know how I am just now seeing this thread for the first time, but OP...*applause*

Well thought out and put-together. This addresses the issues so well, I agree with all of it and I love the inclusion of the articles to back it up.

Brilliant.

[tier.engel]

BUMP

[Balrogen4]

I really hope extended cut delivers.

Modifié par Balrogen4, 20 avril 2012 - 09:13 .

[Syfoor]

reasonable BUMP, this topic cant die.

[Mev186]

Balrogen4 wrote...

I really hope extended cut delivers.

I honestly cannot see how... It's like if a house burns down. You don't add another room to it, without touching anything else and say it's fixed.

[unoriginalname1133]

CDRSkyShepard wrote...

unoriginalname1133 wrote...

Spyre2001 wrote...

An amusing Read

http://ferretbrain.c...les/article-853


EDIT: Oh was there really forshadowing of this crappy ending back in ME1?!?
http://www.rockpaper...ct-1-after-all/

It's a little sad that I can't completely rule this out as a real possibility

I can.

There is only one being of light, and he's not protecting us from anything, really. Maybe he's protecting us from ourselves, but I don't think there's that much weight to this...I mean, the original endings had nothing to do with StarChild. There was no StarChild in the original endings Drew wrote up.

I've got some more articles put up, but I think I'll have to wait til tomorrow, because I've got an exam. (EEP) I'll see all you lovely people then!

I was actually just making a bitter sarcastic remark about the "leaked" ending DLC script. Should have been more clear. My bad

[The_Other_M]

*bump

[Spyre2001]

Madecologist wrote...

A friend and I discuss this, usually when you write a true trilogy you know atleast the basic story elements of the whole trilogy at the start. Doesn't mean there is no room to grow or change stuff, but overall you know all the major twists.

For example the real motives behind the Reapers should have been determined as early as when they decided the protagonist would be a N7 Soldier and called Shepard. You have to do this to prevent plothole or contrived story telling from occuring during the trilogy.

Someone suggests that "thing A" happens, you should be able to say "nah that won't work because we know at the end what the -real- reason is." This lets you make sure early story reveals won't contridict with later reveals. You can still mislead and trick, but you don't want to flat out contridict yourself.

However I get the feeling a lot of things, important things that should have been decided upon at the start, that we see in 2 and 3, were concieved of during the making of those games only. You generally need a basic if not a clear idea of what your ending is even before you get into the meat of the story.

We see what the results are if you don't.

Well things were mapped out for the full trilogy. The reapers motives was suppose to be releated to solving the Dark Energy problem. There are articles on this out there.

But after the original lead writer left some of his notes were tossed in favor of the current lead writer wanting to tell their own story.

[vv238email]

This deserves a bump.

[Madecologist]

Changed 'drastically' afterwards is just as bad as not having it planned out because it has the same bloody effect. The new idea was never considered when the old writing was done so you are going to get plotholes, contrived elemetns, and a apparent shift of themes that the reader will see.

If you have to pull off something like that for any reason, you need to do a harrowing triple check job to make sure you can fit it in, and do any deconstruction or 'red herring' treatment if neccessary. Sometimes even changing the new idea to something that comprimises with the old one.

I heard the ending was mostly the work of just two people, which means: I am pretty sure they did not make sure if there were any continuity errors (heck even the ending itself has continuity errors with itself). Perhaps they didn't care, this is exactly what M.W wanted and be darned if it didn't sync with the rest of the series or even the game.

Modifié par Madecologist, 21 avril 2012 - 02:12 .

[Sanrei]

I've heard the original choices have something left to be desired as well, but I think that if they had run with it, and let the team hack-it-out they could have whipped up something better, different choices with different consequences, varying from really bad to really good.

Modifié par PedEgg, 21 avril 2012 - 06:56 .