23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Hexley UK]

Almost 700 pages of mostly good feedback and constructive criticism and still not a goddam word from you Bioware besides "Sucks to be you, you must be all stupid. Heres some free DLC to explain our awesome artistic ending to you stupid people".

No comments, no counter feedback, no defense of the awful ending, no defense of your supposed "artistic integrity"....in fact almost nothing at all from you.

Your community manager has been AWOL during this entire debacle (can only "manage" when everyone is happy it seems) as have the rest of your staff besides 1 brave soul from the DA team of all places.

Soooo 700 pages of wasted effort it seems.......Bioware I am very very disappoint and most of your soon to be Ex-fanbase is as well.

Good luck with that.

[darkway1]

Hexley UK wrote...

Almost 700 pages of mostly good feedback and constructive criticism and still not a goddam word from you Bioware besides "Sucks to be you, you must be all stupid. Heres some free DLC to explain our awesome artistic ending to you stupid people".

No comments, no counter feedback, no defense of the awful ending, no defense of your supposed "artistic integrity"....in fact almost nothing at all from you.

Your community manager has been AWOL during this entire debacle (can only "manage" when everyone is happy it seems) as have the rest of your staff besides 1 brave soul from the DA team of all places.

Soooo 700 pages of wasted effort it seems.......Bioware I am very very disappoint and most of your soon to be Ex-fanbase is as well.

Good luck with that.

700 pages is not a waste........it's a clear message that Bioware/EA are doing/done wrong.

[jeweledleah]

Netherspin wrote...

We're back at the same reason, the reapers don't rebel against the catalyst. They don't know he exist. He doesn't control them or influence them in any way, he simply created them and let them do their thing. Opening the citadel would reveal his existence to the reapers and make them question their paradigm. Could they have created the citadel without knowing they also created an AI more advanced than themselves? No, logic would have that the catalyst created them, and that will according to the catalyst himself inevitably lead to the reapers rebelling against him.

The solutions aren't built in a rush, they were allways there. The crucible involves the catalyst as a key part - mind you the catalysts existence is kept hidden from organics, so why would they build their last hope around it? They wouldn't - the catalyst isn't the failsafe of the reapers, the crucible is the failsafe in case the reapers fail. Plans leaked covertly by the catalyst himself somewhere down the line of cycles in the realization that the reaper solution will proberbly not work forever. This also explains why the catalyst knows how to activate the crucible and what it does.
Indeed the "shoot the tube" onbutton seems out of place at best, but I can give Bioware this in the spirit of having 3 different dramatic deaths for Shepard, and few things are as dramatic as walking in to a sea of flames. It's not a good way to go about it, but I can see why they did it.

we're talking about a different story here with different foreshadowing.  you are taking "catalyst created the reapers" at face value.  to me - this doesn't makes sence because why would it hide itself from the reapers? what's with elaborate very "bad bond villian" like scemes?  again, that renderes Reapers into obedient giant mechs, because if AI, evolving AI, is so dangerous, why the hell to you let it go loose and trust it to do its thing properly without one day deciding that.. why am I wasting time with this crap?  organics are not needed, they are not necessary, lets just destroy them all and call it a day.

Citadel, the building, as a catalyst makes sence.  after all - it can generate massive ammounts of power, it takes Mass Effect core discharges from a LOT of ships, its a very old piece of technology that plays a huge part in technological development of all the species?  why woudln't all these races try to harness it?  after all this sycle did. I mentioned in my later post a foreshadowing of a super weapon, millions of years old. you get hint in ME1, a bigger hint (derelict reaper) in ME2.  this is what crucible should have been, and I'm guessing was planned to be, concidering how far back that foreshadowing goes - a super weapon capable of bringing down the reaper, refined over multiple cycles.  heck it even fits with original "dark energy" ending.

the child as another vigil, another vendetta - makes sence.  child as creator and controler of the reapers?  heh.

but you know what?  I'll see what bioware does with that extended cut.  but just in case, in order to get over this damn franchise once and for all - I'm writing my own story.  me, writing fanfiction.... I've read about a lot of professional writers starting out as readers finishing a story and going "what is this crap, I can write better then that", but I never thought it could ever be me.

P.S.  I understand exactly why bioware made the scenes the way they did.  and it was nothing particularely artistic or deep.  it was all about "the rule of cool"  all 3 of the scenes, the cutscenes, the whole deal.  it was all about Michael Bay style visuals.  except transformers sequels suck.  but who cares - the explosions looks spectacular, amirite?

[noivoieidoi]

Netherspin wrote...

Edit: As for the repeated question about why the reapers doesn't rebel against the catalyst, if the created will allways rebel against the creator, Soverign gives us the answer to that on Vermire - the Reapers believe themselves to be the first, counterintuitive as it may seem, they think they evolved on their own and created by noone.

Moreover, Sovereign says something along the lines: ‘you [organic species] just use the mass relays and the Citadel; they’ve been built by our kind’.

Then the Catalyst says:
- 'the Citadel is my home' and 'it's part of me' 
- ‘the created will always rebel against the creators’ and ‘I control the Reapers; they are my solution’. 

If any creator-created relationship exists between the Reapers and the Catalyst, then the Catalyst is the created. So, if ‘our kind’ means ‘the Reapers’ exactly, that would make the Catalyst the rebel and a very interesting character.

[noivoieidoi]

darkway1 wrote...
700 pages is not a waste........it's a clear message that Bioware/EA are doing/done wrong.

That depends on context. In this small world, would seem so. But seeing that the whole established and respectable mass media vastly ignores the complaints on 700 pages (thousands when adding other websites).... it's a clear message that most of the complainers are doing something terribly wrong. That leads back to the concept of waste.

Personally, I couldn't find, so far, any reason why the endings would be objectively awful. Everything has been dismissed already as wrong reasoning, unintentional blindness, bias when making the ending worse than the rest of the series etc. That leads to personal preferences and the largely agreed upon conclusion: a significant majority of the complainers just don't like an unhappy ending, or one where they have to do some thinking on their own. Not psychologically correct, but I might add here the lack of the riot police in a virtual world, unlike the football or hockey matches in real world

Modifié par noivoieidoi, 16 avril 2012 - 04:10 .

[LiarasShield]

noivoieidoi wrote...

darkway1 wrote...
700 pages is not a waste........it's a clear message that Bioware/EA are doing/done wrong.

That depends on context. In this small world, would seem so. But seeing that the whole established and respectable mass media vastly ignores the complaints on 700 pages (thousands when adding other websites).... it's a clear message that most of the complainers are doing something terribly wrong. That leads back to the concept of waste.

Personally, I couldn't find, so far, any reason why the endings would be objectively awful. Everything has been dismissed already as wrong reasoning, unintentional blindness, bias when making the ending worse than the rest of the series etc. That leads to personal preferences and the largely agreed upon conclusion: a significant majority of the complainers just don't like an unhappy ending, or one where they have to do some thinking on their own. Not psychologically correct, but I might add here the lack of the riot police in a virtual world, unlike the football or hockey matches in real world

again more people making giant assumptions no if you have been paying attention you know that the reason we are upset is that none of the actions during the previous mass effects or even most of the ones you do in the final game do not change the endings besides different colored explosions that and certain characters were broken to create the adam and eve illusion on some lost planet here I'll break it down for if you played me and me2 you know that joker has been very loyal and would never abandon you joker even stayed around to get you and your squads ass off the collector base before it exploded while you were getting shot at and even during the fight with soverign so why in the most important battle would joker and the rest of your crew just do a 180 and abandon you and the rest of the fleets to rot in space when that is not like them or also why shepard would submit without fighting back or looking for another way because in the previous mass effects shepard has always kept going and fighting for another way not just submitting or giving up they broke shepard and joker towards the final ending



and The created don't always rebel against the creators because you can establish peace with the geth and the quarians and if the created did exactly as the catalyst said then even the reapers would rebel against him and it has been proven wrong twice I and many fans could go on and on and on about the plotholes and how characters were drasticly broken to create a unrealistic ending that makes no sense

yes do a majority of us would like a happy ending or a shot at one damn right  or even how your choices and your battle decisions truely craft a own ending for each player or that how your performance is decides how things end that is ultimately the big issue here I'm going to make a giant assumption and say you only read a few posts or so before commenting

Modifié par LiarasShield, 16 avril 2012 - 04:25 .

[Hexley UK]

noivoieidoi wrote...

darkway1 wrote...
700 pages is not a waste........it's a clear message that Bioware/EA are doing/done wrong.

That depends on context. In this small world, would seem so. But seeing that the whole established and respectable mass media vastly ignores the complaints on 700 pages (thousands when adding other websites).... it's a clear message that most of the complainers are doing something terribly wrong. That leads back to the concept of waste.

Personally, I couldn't find, so far, any reason why the endings would be objectively awful. Everything has been dismissed already as wrong reasoning, unintentional blindness, bias when making the ending worse than the rest of the series etc. That leads to personal preferences and the largely agreed upon conclusion: a significant majority of the complainers just don't like an unhappy ending, or one where they have to do some thinking on their own. Not psychologically correct, but I might add here the lack of the riot police in a virtual world, unlike the football or hockey matches in real world

Orly?

You either haven't read 95% of whats posted here or your being obtuse on purpose i.e a Troll.

Think i'll go for the latter.

Modifié par Hexley UK, 16 avril 2012 - 04:31 .

[LiarasShield]

that and more to a point do you play games to fail or lose to be the biggest loser of all or do you play games so that you can win and feel like you won cause I'm gonna say alot of us play games to win not to feel like we lost at the end but I guess you play games just to fail or to die right ?

[Levi1988]

http://ea-spouse.liv...al.com/274.html

[Levi1988]

The ending had absolutely no relevance to the established storyline and characters that defined the Mass Effect series. As a writer, I understand that introducing new elements, giving no closure, and leaving massive plotholes, will kill any chance of allowing your creations to thrive. The only clear details I gleaned from these endings were that Bioware/EA rushed production to the point that the writers had absolutely no time to construct a definitive ending. So we got stuck with M&M explosions and a religious allegory so incomprehensibly vague that even after going over it a thousand times in my head I can't make sense of it. So, please do tell me what you thought was "good" about the ending, or are you just in denial like every other ignorant fool who has tried to debate me on this subject?

[LiarasShield]

and for those of you who played mass effect 2 didn't like how your own choices and wether you prepared or not decided how well you did on the suicide mission that you can fail or succed depending on how ready your ship and your squad was if you did their loyalty missions well didn't you so why can you not understand why alot don't like the ending ....

[LiarasShield]

and for those of you who played mass effect 2 didn't like how your own choices and wether you prepared or not decided how well you did on the suicide mission that you can fail or succed depending on how ready your ship and your squad was if you did their loyalty missions well didn't you so why can you not understand why alot don't like the ending ....

[clarkusdarkus]

ironic its titled " yes we are listening" but yet how many posts in nearly 700 pages asked for what there giving us, added scenes to the same ending. clearly not listening.

[LiarasShield]

besides just the plotholes or the breaking of characters or how silly logic was proven wrong time and again it is just like some people choose to be flat out ignorant or defiant I mean if you love the ending that is fine but if you can't see all the errors that have been mentioned then their is something wrong with you

[Levi1988]

I understand now.
EA are Reapers.
Bioware has become the enslaved Protheans and are the Collectors.
Casey Hudson is the Illusive Man
And the fans are Shepard, doomed to have to accept their ultimate demise.

[3DandBeyond]

Again, as many of us point out and as I've said, games are intended to take you along for the ride and bring you home again. If they leave you somewhere far from home and you don't know where you are, they have not done their job.

No, everyone isn't expecting a singular happy ending. What many if not most of us want or are ok with, is several possibly sad endings that have meaning in the context of the universe that Bioware and we created with our choices as well as that one possible happy ending for our character.  We also want to have some say in what comes after that sad or happy ending-the same as we have had for the rest of the game.

For pete's sake, this is a game that allows you to not only create the face of your Shepard (notice how everyone takes possession of the character), but also allows for that character to have real desires, flaws, irritations, friends and motivational moments. Shepard may have freckles, Eva has a mole on her face. And I have yet to see one Shepard that looks like mine. You can even see cultural differences in the looks of other player's Shepards. No other game seems to have quite the personal character possession that this one has.

I don't like being stranded by this game. I want it to bring me home. There's no question what makes blockbuster movies blockbusters. Some of that understanding hopefully will be realized here.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 16 avril 2012 - 05:06 .

[LiarasShield]

like what mr b tongue has said once again it is not the quality of the arguement that gets taken into consideration only the prestiege of the person who makes it

Modifié par LiarasShield, 16 avril 2012 - 05:13 .

[Archonsg]

Hoodoo Guru wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

Think you are kinder then most. Me, I just wonder if they are so enamored by the Hollywood "sacrifice the hero" coupled with multiple explosions that they just don't stop to think what each choice really means, what the state of the galaxy is and even if taken at face value, that ending was inconsistent within itself. 

First of all I can't stand over the top action movies where nothing fits within the realm of physical reality and ability, like any of the "Mission Impossible" movies. 

Secondly, "Hollwood "Sacrifice the Hero," what?  The hero almost never gets sacrificed.  And yes thought was given to each choice, and the state of things after the choice.  Relays destroyed along with Reapers and synthetics, and every action has a reaction and a consequence, no ifs or buts about it.   Travel through the "stars may not be possible at that moment but pockets of life survived throughout the systems.  I was hoping for that great epic battle where the "good guys" are victorious as well, but I also accepted the ending for what it was, shocking and different from what everybody built up in their heads.  Yes sacrificing EDI and other synthetics sucked, but I have never heard of a perfect solution, where everybody wins, even in a truce concessions have to be made.

As far as Shepard controlling the reapers, I interpreted it as him taking the place of the catalyst as a cognizant energy enforcing will over the reapers, maybe I am wrong, I could be, I'm not always perfect, rarely actually.

Allow me to correct that statement about Hollywood endings. You are right, what I was thinking and what I typed into my phone didn’t quite gel.
What I should have said was fusion Hollywood-isque ending filled with gratuitous amount of explosions, a chase of some sort with even more explosions and “Art house” anti-victory, hero dies at the end or pyric victory outcome that Bioware seems hell bent on defending.
Also if you read the rest of that post you would also realise that my contention with the current ending is that one of logical choices and yes, contol of the path we players get to make in choosing which path, which ending branch we get to experience.
 
Wasn't that the whole big advertising campaign lauched by EA on Mass Effect 3 was all about, just how much our choices would change our endings drastically? 

As for you take on the "Control" ending. That is your interpretation, and you have every right to believe in it.
But because it is another contradictory logic paradox, in itself, I had to stop a few minutes after hearing it the first time to think what the AI said to me.
That I will die. 
That I will loose everything that I am.

My Interpretation of "loosing everything that I am" means that Shepard is no longer Shepard. He or she will no longer have the ideals, the personality, even motivations that make Shepard, Shepard. Thus, if I am no longer the person I am, and if my "id" (if you will) is what is left to control the reapers, why would I care if the reapers kill organics or stop killing them for that matter, since that "id" is no longer Shepard in essense but a "blank program".

Also you die. But why? If all you need is my thought patterns, wouldn't a mind scan produce the same effect? Why must Shepard die to facilitate this "control" option. It isn't clear and to be honest, its a faux choice given to you the player so that you'll be forced to sacrifice your character.

Now if they had made Shepard plug himself into a machine and become a "living" processing unit (think of the Overlord DLC) that would at least make a little more sense but still, that choice would stink.

[CorpralKarl]

I greatly disliked the final scene as having the Stargazer in the future on the planet Joker landed on. It made the thing seem real distant from what had happened on Earth.

What happened to Earth? Are people reduced to cave men since the Mass Effect technology is gone? Is that far away planet completely reduced to inbred people, or were there other people on it already? Did Joker bang my Love interest?
None of these are answered with just a Stargazer and a child.

[The Protheans]

Its not a wasted effort.
Its clear sign and message to Bioware that a lot of people are unhappy.
Whether they respond in this thread isn't important but as long as they get the message from it all is good IMO.

[Archonsg]

jeweledleah wrote...

P.S.  I understand exactly why bioware made the scenes the way they did.  and it was nothing particularely artistic or deep.  it was all about "the rule of cool"  all 3 of the scenes, the cutscenes, the whole deal.  it was all about Michael Bay style visuals.  except transformers sequels suck.  but who cares - the explosions looks spectacular, amirite?

Precisely.
Forget lore, forget advising about options, hell forget that your fans are the best gauge on just how good or bad your product is and not "professional reviewers who are afraid of loosing advertising revenue, forget Brand Intergrity. 
Just go with lots of gratuitous explosions, throw in a chase scene with the a shockwave and the Normandy, throw in a teaser that Shepard might be alive, and no one would notice just how big a pile of crap the ending really is, right?

[silver6kraid]

sefudargo wrote...

what gets me is that Bioware has stated before that they listen to their fans. and there is proof of that. after mass effect fans wanted to have a relationship with Garrus and tali. Mass effect 2 we have Garrus and tali as possible Love Intrest. we wanted a return to a more RPG style. Mass effect 3 we have more power evolutions and weapon customization and armor stat customization. but when fans cry at the ending. Nope, Artistic Integrity

Try and put yourself in their shoes. If you wrote a story you were proud of and suddenly everybody is telling you to change the ending, wouldn't you feel a bit protective of what you'd created? I mean, at the end of the day this is still their story. As an artist I often grow protective of my work and try not to compromise when it comes to things other people want. That said, if it's a good idea that I like, sure I'll add it in, but to change something that's already finished? Yeah, I might have an issue with that. See, that's the problem, nobody is even trying to see this from their point of view. Was the enidng bad? Yes, but that doesn't mean that the fanbase has the right to demand they change thier work because they weren't satisfied. Or at least I'm sure that's how they feel. 

[Archonsg]

CorpralKarl wrote...

I greatly disliked the final scene as having the Stargazer in the future on the planet Joker landed on. It made the thing seem real distant from what had happened on Earth.

What happened to Earth? Are people reduced to cave men since the Mass Effect technology is gone? Is that far away planet completely reduced to inbred people, or were there other people on it already? Did Joker bang my Love interest?
None of these are answered with just a Stargazer and a child.

Earth is FRIED.
(edit : somehow linking to Bioware's own blog page doesn't seem to work now so, here's the wall of text)

On Exploding Relays
Okies guys, people keep going "this is Not Arrival... it wasn't hit by an asteroid, it got hit by a signal beam, so its explosion is not the same! That it’s a "controlled explosion.”

I agree that this is not an "Arrival scenario since in Arrival you destroyed a Relay by ramming what is essentially a small planetoid into a Relay (Mass + Velocity + momentum vs Stationary object), so please bear with me and read why physics actually puts this scenario where when a relay explodes, on its own might be a lot more powerful than the one in Arrival.

Let’s first all just agree that we ALL do see the Relays explode.
Let’s Watch the video again:
youtu.be/liQV1N7jXis

Citadel fires signal, signal hits relay, relays charges to critical, sends signal along then BLOWS up. Note that Relays are superstructures that can withstand a Super Nova without taking any damage at all.

Refer to your Codex; Secondary : Ilos : Mu Relay

All a Super Nova did to it while vaporising the system it was in and creating the nebulae that hides the Mu Relay was to push the Relay out of position while not doing a single dent to it. (You guys USED it for crying out loud)

So to recap, the Relays in ME3 was NOT hit by a big planetoid (this makes it easier to destroy a Relay presumably since now we have a huge butt load of mass and momentum of said mass added into the equation ...

But we are talking about ME3, which means the RELAYS exploded from kinetic / momentum force or energy ALONE. Which means that force had to had more velocity and momentum to damage a structure then if it was mass AND velocity.

If you want to do the math, here's a link:
]www.stardestroyer.net/Resources/Science/Explosives.html

In short and in lay man's terms, a Relay can take an energy shockwave hit of Super Nova scale and not be structurally damaged.
Relays are tough SOBs.

A structural explosion happens when enough kinetic / momentum force is applied to compromise said structure. Whether its a Big or Small "Kabooom", "kaboom" must be powerful enough to rip things to shreds.

Example, a soda can, will explode if you apply xxx amount of pressure. Does not matter if you want a big or small explosion, but you need a minimal amount of pressure, to make a soda can explode.
Thus an EXPLODING relay you saw = ONE BIG ASS KABOOM!

Logic would dictate that if structure is not damaged by Super Nova Scale energy, energy needed to not just bend but blow apart said structure = force of many orders of magnitude.
REALLY, REALLY big AND powerful KABOOM!

Now to understand just how powerful a Super Nova is
www.nagt.org/files/nagt/jge/abstracts/Dutch_v53n1.pdf

I find this portion interesting:
"Also, the supernova Sun would blast off a significant fraction of its mass at relativistic velocities. When it reaches Earth, it would be pretty effective at helping to strip off mass. The Earth wouldn't vanish instantly in a supernova explosion, but its survival time would be measured in days at best. If the Sun blasts away half of its mass, or 1030 kg, the earth would intercept 4.5 x 10-10 of the ejected mass, or 4.5 x 1020kg. This amounts to 1/13,000 the mass of the earth, but it would be moving at high speed. If it were moving at 10 per cent of the speed of light, its total kinetic energy would be 4 x 1035 joules, or about 75 times the orbital kinetic energy of the earth and 4500 times the energy required to vaporize the earth. Its momentum would be about 3/4 the orbital momentum of the earth.
As the comic strip character Dogbert put it in a different context, it would be "like sandblasting a soup ******."

And just how large a Super Nova scale shockwave can get:
apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap030609.html

NGC 2736 (Pencil Nebula) is part of the Vela Super Nova
apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap960612.html

That happened roughly 11,000 years ago. Has a shell that is roughly 230 light years across and is still expanding at about 500,000 km/h. 11,000 years after initial event. (Time, dissipation, debris and space gas has slowed it down somewhat)

Now back to Mass Effect 3

Essentially a Super Nova as close to as 20-25 light years could take out half of Earth's ozone layer.

Closer than 10 light years a good portion of atmosphere should be blown away, earth's magnetic fields fracked up, climate goes to hell literally, most living things die.

Closer than 1 light years, vaporization is very likely. That or earth and everything in the path of the discharge become galactic kitty litter, pulverised into rock and dust.

The Charon Mass relay is JUST 4 light hours away.

Needless to say ANY system with an Exploding Mass Relay = Toast.
Any cluster with a Mass Relay = fracked up

Basically that ending we saw was producers who just wanted big fracking explosions.

Never mind the science behind it.
Ignoring their own "Issac Newton is the deadliest SOB in space" line (physics DO matter in Mass Effect), threw logic and common sense out the window just to have a "cool looking cut scene"

Lastly exploding relays even if we take the final cut scene at face value still has enough energy to rip apart vessels in space like it did the Normandy. Which is another "looks cool" but badly thought out "action first, logic and science behind construction of a ship (we can use current day Aerospace design rules as a guideline) gets thrown out the window.

Logic and the only conclusion that any shockwave that can flex and rip engines off lateral mounts = severe hull
integrity compromise = the fuselage should not, could not, stay in one piece. The Normandy should have been torn to Shreds not only from the shockwave but from re-entry into ANY planet with an atmosphere.

The same goes to ANY vessel around earth space. That means that whole armada that even if you want to ignore the Super Nova or greater scale energy discharge needed just to compromise a Relay and blow it up, still gets rip to shreds by the current ending's own shockwave.
I call BS on this.

You can't have the Relays or the Citadel explode, EVER.

If or anyone thinks exploding Mass Relays is "good" SCIENCE Fiction and yes, I understand it is fiction so, there is a good amount of leeway given to "space magic" such as oh, "Mass Effect fields" it still has to be explained and follow rules of physics, even made up ones.

Come up with a logical and physics based solution how one can essentially detonate a Relay and not have said energy transfer in the scale and magnitude of a Nova, and I'll accept it.


That was the original post I made some time ago back when all this was still "new" and fresh.

Someone brought up the "Armageddon" thing about a closed fist and explosion which in theory is sound, except that the Mass Relays are not an "enclose box" . It does have a containment field that serves as that box, but as a rule, explosive energy or rather kinetic/momentum energy seeks out the path of least resistance, which in this case would be containment failure and thus out into open space.

Hence the logic that the kinectic energy needed to still rip and tear a superstructre such as a Mass Relay needs to be at least as high as a super Nova, or more.

It doesn't make sense logically or as someone else mentioned, when you do the math, because you just caused a mass genocide even the Reapers could not in their dreams do.

Modifié par Archonsg, 16 avril 2012 - 06:32 .

[LiarasShield]

silver6kraid wrote...

sefudargo wrote...

what gets me is that Bioware has stated before that they listen to their fans. and there is proof of that. after mass effect fans wanted to have a relationship with Garrus and tali. Mass effect 2 we have Garrus and tali as possible Love Intrest. we wanted a return to a more RPG style. Mass effect 3 we have more power evolutions and weapon customization and armor stat customization. but when fans cry at the ending. Nope, Artistic Integrity

Try and put yourself in their shoes. If you wrote a story you were proud of and suddenly everybody is telling you to change the ending, wouldn't you feel a bit protective of what you'd created? I mean, at the end of the day this is still their story. As an artist I often grow protective of my work and try not to compromise when it comes to things other people want. That said, if it's a good idea that I like, sure I'll add it in, but to change something that's already finished? Yeah, I might have an issue with that. See, that's the problem, nobody is even trying to see this from their point of view. Was the enidng bad? Yes, but that doesn't mean that the fanbase has the right to demand they change thier work because they weren't satisfied. Or at least I'm sure that's how they feel. 

then obviously they shouldn't have done false advertizing  and making us think our decisions would still matter and effect the ending then let alone break characters from the way they have always acted like joker and crew being loyal and shepard not just giving up and submitting him or herself to this advanced ai or godchild then...

Modifié par LiarasShield, 16 avril 2012 - 05:56 .

[LiarasShield]

most of me3 99% percent of it was art but that last portion is not art when you add nonsense with more nonsense it does not equal art only more nonsense....