183 réponses à ce sujet

[Vasarkian]

Cell1e wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

That is a fine question but people are taking their inch and trying to stretch it for a mile. BW has always controlled the story and Shepard. They created and breathed life into the character and franchise. It is their right to end things how they want. Gamers do not have a right to write the games and make character changes. If BW caves it will be a blow against any artistic integrity of any media producing company ever. You cannot let the people dictate changes to an already finished IP. Do you get to write your own endings to movies or Tv shows or even change the characters given? Nope. You can have an opinion on disliking the endings and that's fine , but to demand changes and holler and kick a tantrum to get your way is not very mature or sensible. Does BW dictate how you do things in your daily life do they tell you how to do your job at work? No way. You have no right to dictate theirs.

I cannot understand the hate people going it was great until the final ten minutes so this game is trash? So your last bite of lasagna wasn't as piping hot and maybe a little watery from sitting does that make the meal less satisfying? Are you going to never touch lasagne again? Of course not. People are going wild with drama and entitlement mentality. They delivered on most accounts a very fine game which is the job we expect companies to do.

Your job is to buy it or not period. If you don't like it fine as all products have the caveat they aren't for everyone. They owe you nothing and they could have ended the series at ME2 if they wanted. Do you want to be so demanding a fan base BW would gladly ditch you? I think it has reached that point. I would not blame them if they turned a deaf ear to fan demands now. They listened and gave things all these years yet that only increased your appetite for more and bolder demands. You are not armchair game designers no matter how much you want to be. Your job is product consumer period. If you don't play the game again that is your loss from self-inflicted wounds.


Fair game is bugs and poor quality of things like graphics , and gameplay and even story critique. Demanding an ending patch is so over the top spoiled-rotten territory. It is fine to give feedback and likes and dislikes but keep a proper perspective. You are demanding what you want and do not care what BW the actual owner/creator desires. That is egotistical by any measure.


I personally would have preferred some other possible endings being available, but I will be cool with their decision to end their franchise , character, and IP how they choose. I intend to buy it when I have the means to do so. The author has all the rights of creation and that is the natural order of things. Yes I have read in detail the endings so I know what is in store for my playthroughs. Still doesn't dent my desire to play ME 3 in the least.


I empathize not liking something, but once you make your distaste known then that should be the end of it. I've played many good games with bad endings, but I put it in perspective that is a small part of the game. If I enjoyed it up until then then it was a great game and if it had replayability then I would play it again. You have to ask the opposite if you got the ending you wanted and the rest of the game was bad would that elevate the game to game of the year? Ummm no obviously. So fan demands are based on the premise that over inflates the importance of the ending. You didn't get what you wanted so deal with it like any other disappointment that you have no control over. Move on and let the anger and hate go. You only punish yourself for harboring such negative emotions beyond a reasonable time.


ME 3 was a product of many hours of work by many dedicated people and we shouldn't lose sight of that. They are fellow humans with feelings like anyone and to see people trash their hard work because you didn't get what you wanted is a head hanging moment. They should be proud of their work. Have you been praising what you liked or spending more time trashing the small part of the game you didn't?

I don't agree.

Anyone who makes a product and claims to listen and care about its customers as Bioware 'claims' to do, should of course do everything they can to appease the vast majority of their customers. It is in their own best interests after all; they are a business, they are not selling art, they are selling a product which they can and often do adjust to suit their market.

In my opinion Bioware should make all haste to make the appropriate changes and charge their customers for the privilege.

It would actually be MORE ILLEGAL to release an incomplete product as a complete product, then have that paid for as a complete product, then find out is it incomplete despite being sold as incomplete and instead of reimbursing for the product or providing the missing component free of charge, to charge them for the product they already bought that was released incomplete.

This has happened before and it was labeled illegal and MAJOR FINES are made. This is ILLEGAL, to charge us for the fact that assets are factored in and thus the ending has to take account of that like the developers and producers guaranteed would be the case, would be ILLEGAL.

[InvincibleHero]

Farbautisonn wrote...

-Actually they did. On multple occasions they stated that all of the loose ends would be tied up and that we would be "satisfied" with the endings. Now I know that "satisfaction" is highly subjective, but its not satisfactory enough when 89% plus of people polled are dissatisfied.

Well they did explain the purpose of reapers and ended with life still existing. You may disagree with it, but still it is resolved. Where did they promise satisfaction I remember saying there would be options which is delivered.

[Farbautisonn]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Farbautisonn wrote...

We are entitled to what a producer of a product promises us. Nothing more and nothing less. And we can then choose to try to enter a dialgoue with the producer if we feel the product does not live up to our expectations. If the producer disagrees with us, we have a choise to stop buying the product. If the producer agrees with us, it would be natural to assume that changes would be made or perhaps even some reimbursement be set forth. If the producer ignores us, then we have little choise but to ignore him back.

I agree with your stance as it applies to physical products. Broken is broken objectively. Game makers have a right to their choice of story and dialog and direction etc etc. If you don't like how ME 3 went then by all means give a jaundiced eye to their next offerings. However, there is no correlation to whether or not you will like their next game unless they make it in a similar style with similar gameplay. A tv with bad pixels will leave you with many options to choose a new manufacturer. You may however like the next BW game. Quality of IP products is user subjective.

-Sure. Gaming studios have the right to do whatever they want with their IPs. Noone is arguing that right. But that right comes with with the responsibility to recognize that your client base might not like that and then refuse to buy it and lobby against it. Its consumerism. The very foundation of the world as we know it.

The correlation is this: You establish a trackrecord, a reputation. Stay in business long enough and your client base comes to expect certain things from you. I do not go to Mc Donalds for a salad. That they offer salads is nice, but I dont buy em. If I one day go to Mc Donalds and order a cheeseburger but get a salad, Ill take that salad back and ask why I got one. If I am told that Mc Donalds now only serves salads, I want a refund. If the clerk tells me I should have checked the sign outiside first, I tell him that Mc has built a reputation on selling hamburgers and not salads. So give me a refund. If he refuses and I am escorted of the premises, Ill lobby untill I either get my cheeseburger or a refund. The reputation of bioware is that of a gaming studio with great focus on storytelling to the extent that it became the gold standard of the business. I find that since DA2 that focus has shifted. I see this game as yet another validation of said assumption. Especially since I was told up fron that this game would "tie all strings togehter" and "satisfy most fans". I was not satisfied nor did I find that all stings were tied up. I am not the only one with that sentiment. That means that the next time I shop for a Bioware product I will either be sceptical to the point of not buying a product from bioware, or at the very least wait for the opinion of people I trust to go shopping... and then Ill still be very sceptical. Before DA2 I blindly got every Bioware title. I trusted their reputation and I was not let down. After ME3 bioware has to pull some pretty spectacular bunnies out of the hat to convince me that this trend was merely a unfortunate series of events.

[Vasarkian]

Companies are required to provide what they state is in the product, if the product is incomplete it is their responsibility to fix the product so it is complete as they stated in their marketing and product descriptions or interviews. If they charge to fix this incomplete product that was sold as a complete product, that is even more illegal than selling an incomplete product as a complete product.

People have gone to prison for this.

[Cell1e]

kbct wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

I have no ownership over the IP, otherwise the endings given would have never seen the light of day. I do however have ownership over my own voice and my wallet, which I can use to express that dissatisfaction in whatever means I choose, be it this charity organization, a terrible review, amongst others.

I'm not certain why you are so intent on defending the company's artistic right to his product, but not the consumer's right to oppose it. The very idea behind the free market is built on the interactions between the two. Company is entitled to establish terms of sale, consumer is entitled to express desire for a certain kind of product, in addition to refusing to purchase other products from that company.

Well said.

Oh yes very well said!

[kbct]

InvincibleHero wrote...

kbct wrote...

We're entitled to nothing. BioWare doesn't have to do a single thing for us.

However, there is nothing wrong with people expressing their dissatisfaction and trying to affect change.

I see nothing wrong with what you stated. I would however say it depends what you want to change. Broken gameplay= ok. Changing the writing to suit personal taste is not because everyone wants something different. It may make them more mindful in future games that many people hate downer endings, but beyond saying your piece and letting it go which is the mature response people are harping on it as if they can and will make BW do what they want. I hope that fails for integrity of IP (no matter who) holder's sake.

I think BioWare wants their fan base to be happy. I think BioWare wants to make money. I don't think the integrity of their intellectual property is at the forefront of their minds. I bet there is dissention even within BioWare about the ending. I know one writer/employee told everyone to talk to Mac Walters about it. Doesn't sound like solidarity to me.

There is something wrong when only 2% of the people like the ending. It should be 80%.

[Wise Men]

Interesting editorial about "gamer entitlement"  Here.

Modifié par Wise Men, 13 mars 2012 - 04:32 .

[Vasarkian]

Wise Men wrote...

Interesting editorial about "gamer entitlemen"  Here.

Don't use actual game-reviewer sites, they are paid to product profitable statements.

[zambingo]

Asking for better endings is an artistic/subjective matter and BioWare does not need to acquiesce to these demands. It is also not illegal to produce a story with this type of ending.

It's like demanding that George Lucas not have Anakin turn to the darkside. The story that BioWare wanted to tell, obviously, was a Journey vs Destination tale. Your decisions do matter. You have Shepard develop friendships, rivalries, you make alliances. You develop plans to destroy the enemy. You can't however control everything in the universe, stuff happens. That's life. The game and story is still valid.

HOWEVER sometimes storytellers do make alterations to their stories in the face of fan desires.

Michael Crichton brought Doctor Ian Malcolm back to life after fans loved Goldblum's performance in the Jurassic Park movie.

Stallone rewrote the end of First Blood to have Rambo live. Sly knew that people in general would watch that film and not be willing to accept the ending as written in the book. He was right. The author, David Morrell, has even said as much.

But with that said had these creators stuck to the original ideas that doesn't mean that they would have cheated consumers.

Modifié par zambingo, 13 mars 2012 - 04:39 .

[Il Divo]

Wise Men wrote...

Interesting editorial about "gamer entitlement"  Here.

Honestly, Colin Moriarty lost any chance at respect when he claimed companies have the right to day 1 dlc, but (wait for it)....customers don't have the right to a satisfying product. It would take me an extended essay to explain all the misinformation and stupidity in that video.

Modifié par Il Divo, 13 mars 2012 - 04:37 .

[Mazandus]

I haven't read the thread for fear of spoilers but I do have something to say. First of all, gamers are entitled to a working product that doesn't damage their several hundred dollar console via freezing/crashing/extensive blu ray loading. (ps3 player here). Whatever unholy alliances Microsoft has constructed, there is a real failure here, not just on Bioware or even just EA, but industry wide for studios to be fine with releasing unoptimized, buggy junk. And for gamers to eat it up and reviewers to remain silent. That, to me, is the most important thing.

We shell out $60 + for a game, the product should work. Period. Especially something like this, there's no BF3/COD "competition" going on, any self enforced release date was exactly that, self enforced. What happened to releasing something when its ready? Not before. What happened to giving more attention than simply lazily porting code? As much as I can blame myself and my fellow gamers, much, much more must be thrown towards the media, who often make no mention for fear of publisher retaliation, and for the studio's.

They may have been told to make the ps3 version a pile of ****, (like activision with COD) or they may have been told to cut corners where they could, but to remain quiet about it, like some politician trying to dodge questions about his dead intern, ugh, it just disgusts me.



As far as story? Interaction? Involvement? Player choice? Yeah, I can see where this is going. I think, one of the problems, huge problems, in this industry (and thus genre) is the disconnect between designers and gamers. As much as a sense of entitlement and nerd rage that exists in the gamer, there is equally if not more arrogance and even a disdain on the producer/designer side towards the gamer.

Its just one of those things that due to the high costs involved with making AAA games, and the potential for huge profits, alienation between customer and provider is just the way of the times. They make vague statements to hype up a product, fans latch on to the news, and when the product hits the shelves we find out it was all vaporware or outright deception. It is so goddamned weird.

This hostility between customer, aka guy who buys the **** so your publisher will pay you, and content creator, aka guy who spends hours and hours making the **** to sell to the peons who then cry to him because they couldn't bang the chick with the helmet and are now whining about endings and a lack of emotional payoff despite promises to this and that and t'other thing.


Its a weird, weird, weird thing. In conclusion, we need higher standards for the actual technical quality. We, the consuming public, would never put up with movies or tv that dropped frames, or albums that froze in the middle of a track. And for that the publishers are the ones laughing here. We give them our $$$, they shell out whatever they deem acceptable and since they control all means to communicate with them, they control not only our level of feedback but our ability to demand a better product. I could go make a website railing about ME3 PS3 problems but I doubt EA/Bio would even care. I would just be labeled a "crazy" or another "self entitled ****."


The second issue, I feel, will only be resolved after the first. Until we can control the quality of the technical side, its little use arguing or getting upset about the quality of the actual interaction. Honestly I think its the designers themselves and the publishers well established practice of only hiring established designers. You get the same people moving around making the same things for the same masters. Just look at the major releases this year. Are any of them not sequels?

Once you get new blood making things, maybe not every game has to be about shooting, maybe not every "romance" is a series of awkward dialogue options with a hilarious "sex scene." Maybe that all enveloping feeling of a galaxy at war with species fighting extinction will be actual and not just background while you go around playing delivery man for everyone with spare credits. I love ME, I do, really. But, jesus. I thought the Reapers were destroying all civilization, not hanging out sipping margaritas while I complete every side quest imaginable.

Wow. Epic. Length.

[InvincibleHero]

Doctor Moustache wrote...

We are entitled to disappointment, sadness, and the ability to vent it in public forums. Thats what.

Are we literally entitled to demand they change the game? No. Would it be smart for them to do it anyways? Yes.

Also, some of you still have this whole thign wrong. Most people are not demanded a "good" ending as in fairy tale happily ever after blah blah blah (although it sure would of been nice). All most of us wanted was an ending that reflected our choices the entire series has been built around and closure to the relationships we forged throughout our journey, not cheap ambiguity and a single concrete nonsensical ending that has nothing to do with a single choice you made throughout the series.

I don't think it would be wise to do so. It would violate their artistic integrity and validity of their game making ability to be second guessed by a small vocal faction of their fanbase. Even if 40% of the actual game buyers hate the ending most of them do not register and gripe about it. That still doesn't mean they should change it even with that mass. Even if 95% hated it they should stick to their guns. The ME is BW's statement to make.

I would guess BW thought the ending concluded things logically for their characters and universe. If it had as amny problems as you stated they couldn't possibly fix that without rewriting major portions of the game and retroactively to ME and ME 2. It would boil down to simple changes only and what would you want changed?

I disagree everything built to ending reaper threat. I'd say conclusively threat averted by ME3 endings.

[Vasarkian]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Doctor Moustache wrote...

We are entitled to disappointment, sadness, and the ability to vent it in public forums. Thats what.

Are we literally entitled to demand they change the game? No. Would it be smart for them to do it anyways? Yes.

Also, some of you still have this whole thign wrong. Most people are not demanded a "good" ending as in fairy tale happily ever after blah blah blah (although it sure would of been nice). All most of us wanted was an ending that reflected our choices the entire series has been built around and closure to the relationships we forged throughout our journey, not cheap ambiguity and a single concrete nonsensical ending that has nothing to do with a single choice you made throughout the series.

I don't think it would be wise to do so. It would violate their artistic integrity and validity of their game making ability to be second guessed by a small vocal faction of their fanbase. Even if 40% of the actual game buyers hate the ending most of them do not register and gripe about it. That still doesn't mean they should change it even with that mass. Even if 95% hated it they should stick to their guns. The ME is BW's statement to make.

I would guess BW thought the ending concluded things logically for their characters and universe. If it had as amny problems as you stated they couldn't possibly fix that without rewriting major portions of the game and retroactively to ME and ME 2. It would boil down to simple changes only and what would you want changed?

I disagree everything built to ending reaper threat. I'd say conclusively threat averted by ME3 endings.

Assets were not factored in, despite potentiall y large fleets and armies, these were ignored despite the game being about building them. Because interviews from the lead producers and writers said they would matter and that the ending would account for them and change based on them and it doesn't actually account for the giant fleets taking on the Reapers and in the end the Reapers win anyway except for the multi-colored beam, this product does not actually meet requirements to be complete.

It is incomplete because it does not do as marketed and thus because of this it is illegally sold.

[zambingo]

Vasarkian, you are stuck in a circular argument and despite what you think you don't have a legal argument.

[Farbautisonn]

InvincibleHero wrote...
Well they did explain the purpose of reapers and ended with life still existing. You may disagree with it, but still it is resolved. Where did they promise satisfaction I remember saying there would be options which is delivered.

Take your pick from this thread. Or see if this article is precise. Im pretty certain I saw a video with Casey saying something about satisfaction but I cant find it at this moment. Ill find it eventually though.

The logic of the endings suck. What happened at the end of arrival apparently doesnt happen now. Space magic I suppose. As is alot of the game.

Modifié par Farbautisonn, 13 mars 2012 - 04:48 .

[Il Divo]

zambingo wrote...

Vasarkian, you are stuck in a circular argument and despite what you think you don't have a legal argument.

Agreed. I really don't think anyone is going to get anywhere with false advertising claims.

[OMTING52601]

Gamers are entitled to whatever they think they are entitled to, just like every other consumer. And BW/EA is perfectly entitled to change their product or not. However, this company isn't entitled to sell a subpar product and get away with it anymore than any other company is entitled to sell a subpar product and get away with it, if that is indeed what the consumer reaction determines is the case.

It's just business. I understand why the OP and others in this thread have emotional input into the topic, whichever way one may lean, but the truth is the only sleep anyone in the company is missing is sleep over whether this is going to affect stock price, whether or not those 3.5 mil units that were shipped are going to get cold on the shelf, or if someone might be losing a job. They aren't worried, as a whole(I'm sure there are individuals who are upset so many consumers are upset - I'm not trying to imply that the actual independant people who work for the company are robots - they are not) about anything more than profit and loss.

It's business. I'm entitled to the same thing from this company as I am from the next. If they can't deliver, then I find someone else that does, just like every single one of us does, every single day, because this is a free market, consumerist, society.

I'm not going to feel sorry for some company and buy stuff they put out that I have no use for or that fail to satisfy whatever need I had when I purchased them because someone's feelings would be hurt. If it doesn't cut the mustard, I'm returning the product and getting my money back and looking for some other company that makes a similar product and seeing if theirs is better.

Entitled, as far as I'm concerned has no bearing on the equation. A video game isn't disability payments for someone who can't work. A video game is a commodity and it will make money and sell or not and fail based on whether consumer demand exists - notice it's is supply and demand, not supply and entitle, IMO, FWIW, and YMMV.

Modifié par OMTING52601, 13 mars 2012 - 04:48 .

[Vasarkian]

Il Divo wrote...

zambingo wrote...

Vasarkian, you are stuck in a circular argument and despite what you think you don't have a legal argument.

Agreed. I really don't think anyone is going to get anywhere with false advertising claims.

It is false advertising though, textbook case.

Regardless, it remains illegal, and in a legal sense it is confirmed that it is illegal, as much as a run on sentence as that is.

[kbct]

Vasarkian wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

zambingo wrote...

Vasarkian, you are stuck in a circular argument and despite what you think you don't have a legal argument.

Agreed. I really don't think anyone is going to get anywhere with false advertising claims.

It is false advertising though, textbook case.

Regardless, it remains illegal, and in a legal sense it is confirmed that it is illegal, as much as a run on sentence as that is.

I disagree too. I think your views are more extreme than most. I don't think this should be a legal argument. It's a loser.

[freche]

Cell1e wrote...
Anyone who makes a product and claims to listen and care about its customers as Bioware 'claims' to do, should of course do everything they can to appease the vast majority of their customers. It is in their own best interests after all; they are a business, they are not selling art, they are selling a product which they can and often do adjust to suit their market.

In my opinion Bioware should make all haste to make the appropriate changes and charge their customers for the privilege.

However, minority of those that actually plays the game writes on the forums and it's much easier to complain the praise.
They sit there and play their highly anticipated and hyped game and then they come across something they didn't like, they will imediatly go to the forum and start a topic "HOW CAN U DO THIS TO MEEEE!!!!!1111 <CRY CRY>". And you will never see the same person post something like "I was playing through this chapter and I really liked what you did with it", in fact you see very few of those posts even though I'm sure many parts of the game deserves them.

[OMTING52601]

Vasarkian wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

zambingo wrote...

Vasarkian, you are stuck in a circular argument and despite what you think you don't have a legal argument.

Agreed. I really don't think anyone is going to get anywhere with false advertising claims.

It is false advertising though, textbook case.

Regardless, it remains illegal, and in a legal sense it is confirmed that it is illegal, as much as a run on sentence as that is.

If you really feel that way, you should absolutely contact your local state/country Consumer Protection/Advocate agency and, if applicable, your state/country Attorney General and file a claim. You can also file a complaint with the BBB in the US, if the company is a member. They'll help to determine whether or not their is a case of false advertising.

I personally think you might find more closure if you returned the product, wrote/called the company and complained, and then made sure you do what all consumers do when they are unhappy and spread your opinion via word of mouth, but those are things that might work for me and I'm not judging how any feels. Everyone has to do what s/he thinks is best, whether we agree or we do not.

[Vasarkian]

OMTING52601 wrote...

Vasarkian wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

zambingo wrote...

Vasarkian, you are stuck in a circular argument and despite what you think you don't have a legal argument.

Agreed. I really don't think anyone is going to get anywhere with false advertising claims.

It is false advertising though, textbook case.

Regardless, it remains illegal, and in a legal sense it is confirmed that it is illegal, as much as a run on sentence as that is.

If you really feel that way, you should absolutely contact your local state/country Consumer Protection/Advocate agency and, if applicable, your state/country Attorney General and file a claim. You can also file a complaint with the BBB in the US, if the company is a member. They'll help to determine whether or not their is a case of false advertising.

I personally think you might find more closure if you returned the product, wrote/called the company and complained, and then made sure you do what all consumers do when they are unhappy and spread your opinion via word of mouth, but those are things that might work for me and I'm not judging how any feels. Everyone has to do what s/he thinks is best, whether we agree or we do not.

I want them to fix this quickly so I don't have to get into a legal battle with them, I "liked" BioWare, they are one of the few remaining quality-story companies left, but this is getting really bad when they start releasing illegally incomplete products.

That's why I haven't done that just yet.

[Farbautisonn]

Got it.

"We want the outcomes to be satisfying to the player. That doesn't
necessarily mean they're all going to be happy or positive, but they
have to be satisfying. Players have to understand that the choices
they've been making in this game and in previous have had an impact, and
that they're an architect in what happens."

To me that statement was not delivered upon with the endings. On the contrary I feel that the the above statement directly contradicts my ME3 experience.

[Edhriano]

Hmm let me put it this way.

I see a cheese burger seller.
I order cheese burger.
I pay good money for cheese burger.
I got the burger but no cheese.
I ask where is the cheese?
The seller said available as DLC,

me :

[InvincibleHero]

philippe willaume wrote...

You are not wrong, but I think you kind of missed the point.
To start with I work as an IT consultant, and it does not mater how long or how much of my little heart I spend on a project I am judged on what I deliver. And that the way it should be.
 
I totally agree with creative direction being what BW sees fit however. Their job is to give an anding that stand on its own leg and cater for the different play through especially since that was one the selling point of ME3.
 
It does not mean taking in account every several decision across the 3 games, but it does mean that from creative direction taken they needed to take in a count mores possible play through. IE not having different endings per se, but telling the ending according to the play through.
 
Most of us are not after a Disney ending.  And in fact we are ready to pay for the extra content.
 
The ending as it is, does not really makes sense for several types of play through. It does in some case, as  it did for my super paragon siding with every misunderstood species so the green ending is spot on.
 
So either you don’t let me choose the blue and the red ending or if I can choose either of those it need to match I have made in the game that concern the path I am choosing
 
Ie for example
If you take the red ending and that you have humanised a certain AI  and sided with particulat lamp post
A few flashback/future with the said AI  dying contrasted with her telling you that she kissed someone then the N7lamppost  saying I or the lamposts  coming to the rescue contrasted with boy dying in the into.
Before we actually taked the red route  a look at the other options and we see the one  as turning into a husk and the other as ending up as the elusive man.
 
As the Normandy cut scene does not make sense with the way the ending is told,
And we need to know what happened to the companions, it has much shep story as theirs and they deserve a nice offing.
 
Phil

I am not saying they cannot criticize the game at all. I am saying they should not be demanding a rewrite of the endings.
There are three unique playthroughs and someone stated BW claimed 16 variations. So how many more should they put in to account for all possibilities given BW determines what is possible ending to their game? You may want something but that doesn't mean you will get it.

Why do you need to know their fate? Maybe that will be touched upon in a new game or not. You can decide they live since it is not shown they die conclusively. They also have a ftl capable ship and can make it to familiar environs. I like how they leave some things up to player interpretation instead of handholding and creating canon which many here seem to loathe.