23455 réponses à ce sujet

[3DandBeyond]

I see ME games through some very basic, though different prisms. Within one, I see a romance set against some tragic circumstances that make the romance difficult at best. Since I chose Liara as the LI-I noticed that she often fights against thinking of herself and Shepard as a couple, until the end. Unfortunately, there are few romances from what I've seen that achieve the same level of complexity, though some are equally heartfelt-Garrus, Tali, Jack, Thane. But others that I think are just horrendous-Allers, Sam in the shower. I mean love stories. Others go for different things and that's ok.

With another prism, I see ME as a terrific space opera of epic proportions. It is limited due to the platforms and all, but it's still in there within these games. It's the ultimate battle between good guys and evil guys, in space.

And with yet another, I see it as a "buddy" picture or story. Garrus and Shepard on the road. Or Shepard and everyone on the road. It's like "the Hangover" in space.

And with yet another, I see a drama that deals with adult themes within a venue often seen as less than adult. It was a coming of age story for video gaming. It wasn't shooting a gun and blowing a guy's head off in order to get to a checkpoint, but it was about deciding if it was right to blow the guy's head off and then choosing if and what was the next appropriate action.

Within all of these things, it was also about the future, and not just the future within ME. It was about the future of gaming. No one else does or has done or seems willing to do what Bioware did with ME. And now, what pains me the most, is that Bioware doesn't seem willing to do what Bioware did with ME.

I don't just want the ending of ME(3) fixed. I want Bioware fixed. I want them to dance with the ones that brung them. We "brought" them here, by believing in what they did and buying what they made. We want very much to continue this "dance" with them. We want to remain fans and we want them to keep doing what they do best and not to become just another meaningless game dev. Please.

I want more romance, space, epic, drama, adultness within games. I want my Bioware back.

[Archonsg]

Guys, guys, peace.
You know I do not agree with what Thanatos usual stuff, but he is right this time.

The problem is, the Bioware we knew is dead and gone. Even at the wosrt of times, I am thinking the end of Baldur's Gate2 before Throne of Bhaal expansion and the end of Neverwinter Nights 1 before Hordes of Underdark, where we had similar "non-endings" that weren't as satisfactory, and the old Bioware forums were ablaze with postings much like now, with one notable exception, Bioware actively addressed our concerns, genuinely seemed to want to know what we wanted, and most importantly, did not come across as a PR stunt but truly wanted our input, and than acted on them. Thus with the complaints that our Bhaalspawn hero just ending up in the elven halls and the abrupt ending wasn't epic to match the Bhaalspawn saga, came arguably the best expansion ever made. Throne of Bhaal gave Baldur's Gate the ending it deserved and how it treated your companions' growth was amazing. Who could forget Viconia's changing alignment, all because you taught her the meaning of love?

And oh yes, you could become a god (well okies, demi-god) or not. Become a father/mother or not. Walked into the sunset with your loved one, or not. All depending on what choices you made with your companions along the path of godhood.

Then, we have today's Bioware.
Who has no shame in citing paid reviewers' score in defense of an ending their core fans are calling foul on.
No discussions, no interaction.
When pointed out that the characters we whom we played with for so long, and worse, the character whom we built over five years, tge character whom we have invested our persoba with woukd not, could not do the things they had Shepard do, they Bioware called upon "artistic integrity" to defend suicide, betrayal and removal of a being's right to genetic freedom.

In a PR stunt to quell certain groups of players, and to buy time, they have announced the ECDLC.

Let's be honest here, any moron could see this wasn't what was asked for, a blind elcor could see just "clarity" of a crappy ending isn't what was asked for.
So you have to ask yourself then, why?
Why release something that wasn't a fix for the problem?

Perhaps it wasn't cost effective to effect a fix.
Perhaps, they knew they fracked up but can't do anything about it because someone else is calling the shots.

Whatever the reason, EA/Bioware chose not to do the right thing by their customers and core fans, treating us no more then numbers on a balance sheet.

So, it is then best that we communicate via that balance sheet.
Money talks, so the saying goes.
My money will stay firmly in my wallet till Bioware gives me a really good reason to support their products.

[LiarasShield]

Archonsg wrote...

Guys, guys, peace.
You know I do not agree with what Thanatos usual stuff, but he is right this time.

The problem is, the Bioware we knew is dead and gone. Even at the wosrt of times, I am thinking the end of Baldur's Gate2 before Throne of Bhaal expansion and the end of Neverwinter Nights 1 before Hordes of Underdark, where we had similar "non-endings" that weren't as satisfactory, and the old Bioware forums were ablaze with postings much like now, with one notable exception, Bioware actively addressed our concerns, genuinely seemed to want to know what we wanted, and most importantly, did not come across as a PR stunt but truly wanted our input, and than acted on them. Thus with the complaints that our Bhaalspawn hero just ending up in the elven halls and the abrupt ending wasn't epic to match the Bhaalspawn saga, came arguably the best expansion ever made. Throne of Bhaal gave Baldur's Gate the ending it deserved and how it treated your companions' growth was amazing. Who could forget Viconia's changing alignment, all because you taught her the meaning of love?

And oh yes, you could become a god (well okies, demi-god) or not. Become a father/mother or not. Walked into the sunset with your loved one, or not. All depending on what choices you made with your companions along the path of godhood.

Then, we have today's Bioware.
Who has no shame in citing paid reviewers' score in defense of an ending their core fans are calling foul on.
No discussions, no interaction.
When pointed out that the characters we whom we played with for so long, and worse, the character whom we built over five years, tge character whom we have invested our persoba with woukd not, could not do the things they had Shepard do, they Bioware called upon "artistic integrity" to defend suicide, betrayal and removal of a being's right to genetic freedom.

In a PR stunt to quell certain groups of players, and to buy time, they have announced the ECDLC.

Let's be honest here, any moron could see this wasn't what was asked for, a blind elcor could see just "clarity" of a crappy ending isn't what was asked for.
So you have to ask yourself then, why?
Why release something that wasn't a fix for the problem?

Perhaps it wasn't cost effective to effect a fix.
Perhaps, they knew they fracked up but can't do anything about it because someone else is calling the shots.

Whatever the reason, EA/Bioware chose not to do the right thing by their customers and core fans, treating us no more then numbers on a balance sheet.

So, it is then best that we communicate via that balance sheet.
Money talks, so the saying goes.
My money will stay firmly in my wallet till Bioware gives me a really good reason to support their products.

More power to you arch ^^

[tschamp]

Modifié par tschamp, 15 juin 2012 - 01:50 .

[Archonsg]

@liarasshield Don't get me wrong, I would rather go back to the "shut up and take my money!!! " Bioware fan. It is the reason why I am still here posting.





Ps: posting from phone so, please forgive the odd mistakes. Proof reading is practically impossible. ;-)

Modifié par Archonsg, 15 juin 2012 - 01:54 .

[BlueStorm83]

LiarasShield wrote...

Definitly love bethesda they definitly do try to go out of their way to please fans from the fallout ending to releasing patches to help fix lag issues on the ps3 and bethesda does really care or at least I feel that they do ^^

Even if they don't CARE about the fans, they realize that the fans pay their salaries, so it's in their best interest to make them happy.

[BlueStorm83]

--- I agree. BioWare isn't making RPGs anymore. They started out as RPGs, they dabbled in Action RPGs, then they changed to Action games with RPG elements. Mass Effect 2 was almost just an Action Game, but I forgave because it was set in a universe I loved and there was still a good amount of story to it. Mass Effect 3's GAMEPLAY was a step back in the right direction, it's NARRATIVE was a step back in the right direction, even its action-inventory system felt like a good melding of RPG standards with Action Game Gameplay (and honestly, it makes more sense than Shepard carrying 5,000 guns with him from everything he killed.) But then they made the ending as variable as the ending of Gears of War 3, where you can pick between the Muscle Refrigerator killing Badguys, the Muscle Refrigerator killing Badguys, or the Muscle Refrigerator killing Badguys. And then they did pull the silent treatment on me. ME. Not us. No offense to everyone else, you're all great, yes even MSandT and Thanatos. But I'm me, and me is best. So how dare they do this to me!?

When the Extended Cut comes out, I'll re-beat the game and make one LAST post. That post will either be "I'll give them another shot," or "It's been fun, but apparently it's over."

[Chesus]

They have one chance, and one chance only. If the EC delivers (I'm almost convinced it will not if the "clarity and closure" comments are true) then I will continue purchasing DLC and future games. If not, I'm done and they'll never get another dollar from me. No DA3, no Star Wars, nothing. Not even another Mass Effect game. And I don't think they realize that there are a LOT of people just like me who won't be buying their products. This is what happens when you alienate what had previously been a fiercely loyal fanbase.

[BearlyHere]

Me too. And we're not a minority, Thanatos, As has been pointed out, even on the pro-ending threads, most of the posts are more like "it didn't totally suck" or "if would have been cooler if, but yeah, it did kind of suck."

I've been playing Bioware games since Baldur's Gate, and have considered them my # 1 game source. But if all we get is some extra dialog explaining how artistic the ending really is, that's it. My money can be spent elsewhere on games from companies that treat me like a valued customer, not a mark to roll in the alley.

[sonicchaos]

Please, just let that indoctrination theory be true. I don't care about hundreds of different endings myself, I just want to see Harbinger dead, but not like in a general maner. I want it to suffer by my hands. What was the point of Shepard breathing in the end if I can't get him out of that rubble? Hell, I'll go after Harbinger in a Kodiak. News like "No further expanded ending" is making fans feel pain in their harts. I, for one, don't want that ending changed, but what was the point if everything was a metaphoricc dream of Shep's struggle to fight against Reaper indoctrination? We get it, if we chose the most painfull option, Shepard will (or might) live). I find it to be the most incredibly well written story ever, and more if it goes the I think of it (obviously, aren't we all a bit subjective and selfish!? no? just me?). I, as one of Bioware's greatest fans, just ask that this should not be the way Shepard goes out.

P.S.: And God may help you, Bioware, if you'll ditch Mark Meer as UbiSoft did with Michael Ironside!

Modifié par sonicchaos, 15 juin 2012 - 05:03 .

[3DandBeyond]

Chesus wrote...

They have one chance, and one chance only. If the EC delivers (I'm almost convinced it will not if the "clarity and closure" comments are true) then I will continue purchasing DLC and future games. If not, I'm done and they'll never get another dollar from me. No DA3, no Star Wars, nothing. Not even another Mass Effect game. And I don't think they realize that there are a LOT of people just like me who won't be buying their products. This is what happens when you alienate what had previously been a fiercely loyal fanbase.

This is it exactly, but it goes further for me-EA games.  My nephew wants a bunch of us family members to get the 2013 hockey so we can play together.  Won't do it if this is not fixed.  Bioware and EA.  We have other options to play together.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 15 juin 2012 - 05:12 .

[Archonsg]

@sonicchaos
You do realize that IT as is envisioned by most pro-it fans is flawed because they are all ignoring that it requires Shepard to accept an indoctrination choice and then use willful denial on the player's part to "save" Shepard.

Indoctrination is a binary solution set. You either are, or are not indoctrinated.
Once you fall into the trap, you are gone.
There is no "but Shepard sub consciousness was able to fight it."
No.

However Shepard would have had a chance if he knows he is being indoctrinated or an attempt to indoctrinate him was in progress and fights the attempt.
That was the missing fourth choice.
The choice denied to us.

I am posting from the phone so I won't go into detail as I did on some other thread the on in and outs of the IT flaws, but believe me, had the current idea of IT maded true sense and not open even more plot holes I would have accepted it.

No.

IT in itself isn't the solution, an attempt at IT and the fourth choice, DENY THE EFFING STARBRAT, was. Bioware just didn't give it to us.

Modifié par Archonsg, 15 juin 2012 - 05:42 .

[sonicchaos]

Archonsg wrote...

@sonicchaos
You do realize that IT as is envisioned by most pro-it fans is flawed because they are all ignoring that it requires Shepard to accept an indoctrination choice and then use willful denial on the player's part to "save" Shepard.

Indoctrination is a binary solution set. You either are, or are not indoctrinated.
Once you fall into the trap, you are gone.
There is no "but Shepard sub consciousness was able to fight it."
No.

However Shepard would have had a chance if he knows he is being indoctrinated or an attempt to indoctrinate him was in progress and fights the attempt.
That was the missing fourth choice.
The choice denied to us.

I am posting from the phone so I won't go into detail as I did on some other thread the on in and outs of the IT flaws, but believe me, had the current idea of IT maded true sense and not open even more plot holes I would have accepted it.

No.

IT in itself isn't the solution, an attempt at IT and the fourth choice, DENY THE EFFING STARBRAT, was. Bioware just didn't give it to us.

I don't think you know what the indoctrination theory actually refers to. This isn't some bull crap government conspiracy teory, it's an analysis based on the artistic writing of a story, of course it's flawed. the only ones holding the truth are the writers of the story. It's like assuming Jon is the son of Ned Stark's sister, and not a bastard, but that thing is only known by George R.R. Martin. You see where I'm getting?
And let me just say that the biggest plot hole of all is Shepard's breathing in the rubble after the citadel blows up. And that happens only if you choose wisely (unlike your choise probably) just like in ME2, where you had to choose very specificaly so the mission concludes in total success. Just take a look at what fans have to say about their artistic vision of the end and then we'll talk.

In fact, better analyzing your post, I don't think you know what indoctrination is at all, not to mention Reaper indoctrination (defined in the game's codex, look it up). It's not that binary at all. It clearly states there are at least three known forms of Reaper indoctrination in the ME universe.

Modifié par sonicchaos, 15 juin 2012 - 08:05 .

[Archonsg]

sonicchaos wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

@sonicchaos
You do realize that IT as is envisioned by most pro-it fans is flawed because they are all ignoring that it requires Shepard to accept an indoctrination choice and then use willful denial on the player's part to "save" Shepard.

Indoctrination is a binary solution set. You either are, or are not indoctrinated.
Once you fall into the trap, you are gone.
There is no "but Shepard sub consciousness was able to fight it."
No.

However Shepard would have had a chance if he knows he is being indoctrinated or an attempt to indoctrinate him was in progress and fights the attempt.
That was the missing fourth choice.
The choice denied to us.

I am posting from the phone so I won't go into detail as I did on some other thread the on in and outs of the IT flaws, but believe me, had the current idea of IT maded true sense and not open even more plot holes I would have accepted it.

No.

IT in itself isn't the solution, an attempt at IT and the fourth choice, DENY THE EFFING STARBRAT, was. Bioware just didn't give it to us.

I don't think you know what the indoctrination theory actually refers to. This isn't some bull crap government conspiracy teory, it's an analysis based on the artistic writing of a story, of course it's flawed. the only ones holding the truth are the writers of the story. It's like assuming Jon is the son of Ned Stark's sister, and not a bastard, but that thing is only known by George R.R. Martin. You see where I'm getting?
And let me just say that the biggest plot hole of all is Shepard's breathing in the rubble after the citadel blows up. And that happens only if you choose wisely (unlike your choise probably) just like in ME2, where you had to choose very specificaly so the mission concludes in total success. Just take a look at what fans have to say about their artistic vision of the end and then we'll talk.

In fact, better analyzing your post, I don't think you know what indoctrination is at all, not to mention Reaper indoctrination (defined in the game's codex, look it up). It's not that binary at all. It clearly states there are at least three known forms of Reaper indoctrination in the ME universe.

I think you misunderstood what I meant.

Binary solution set = you are indoctrinated / you are not.
Do you dispute this?

And yes I have read the codex.
Also I saw your comment on my old blog about it, note that it was refering to that particular youtube video. There were discussions and other theories since.

Bottom line is, if Shepard chooses to accept any of the three indoctrination choices, he is accepting reaper programming. 
Do we all aggree that all three choices originate from the reaper and thus all three are indoctrination choices if ANY ONE is. 

I am saying that IF Bioware had put in that 4th choice, all that happened right after the beam made sense. Because it was all an attempt to indoctrinate Shepard. He has to fight that attempt. Not accept it.
Do you see my point?

I do see why IT would be a game saver but you have to see that a tainted Shepard is no better than a Dead Shepard.

Modifié par Archonsg, 15 juin 2012 - 08:38 .

[sonicchaos]

Archonsg wrote...

sonicchaos wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

@sonicchaos
You do realize that IT as is envisioned by most pro-it fans is flawed because they are all ignoring that it requires Shepard to accept an indoctrination choice and then use willful denial on the player's part to "save" Shepard.

Indoctrination is a binary solution set. You either are, or are not indoctrinated.
Once you fall into the trap, you are gone.
There is no "but Shepard sub consciousness was able to fight it."
No.

However Shepard would have had a chance if he knows he is being indoctrinated or an attempt to indoctrinate him was in progress and fights the attempt.
That was the missing fourth choice.
The choice denied to us.

I am posting from the phone so I won't go into detail as I did on some other thread the on in and outs of the IT flaws, but believe me, had the current idea of IT maded true sense and not open even more plot holes I would have accepted it.

No.

IT in itself isn't the solution, an attempt at IT and the fourth choice, DENY THE EFFING STARBRAT, was. Bioware just didn't give it to us.

I don't think you know what the indoctrination theory actually refers to. This isn't some bull crap government conspiracy teory, it's an analysis based on the artistic writing of a story, of course it's flawed. the only ones holding the truth are the writers of the story. It's like assuming Jon is the son of Ned Stark's sister, and not a bastard, but that thing is only known by George R.R. Martin. You see where I'm getting?
And let me just say that the biggest plot hole of all is Shepard's breathing in the rubble after the citadel blows up. And that happens only if you choose wisely (unlike your choise probably) just like in ME2, where you had to choose very specificaly so the mission concludes in total success. Just take a look at what fans have to say about their artistic vision of the end and then we'll talk.

In fact, better analyzing your post, I don't think you know what indoctrination is at all, not to mention Reaper indoctrination (defined in the game's codex, look it up). It's not that binary at all. It clearly states there are at least three known forms of Reaper indoctrination in the ME universe.

I think you misunderstood what I meant.

Binary solution set = you are indoctrinated / you are not.
Do you dispute this?

And yes I have read the codex.
Also I saw your comment on my old blog about it, note that it was refering to that particular youtube video. There were discussions and other theories since.

Bottom line is, if Shepard chooses to accept any of the three indoctrination choices, he is accepting reaper programming. 
Do we all aggree that all three choices originate from the reaper and thus all three are indoctrination choices if ANY ONE is. 

I am saying that IF Bioware had put in that 4th choice, all that happened right after the beam made sense. Because it was all an attempt to indoctrinate Shepard. He has to fight that attempt. Not accept it.
Do you see my point?

I do see why IT would be a game saver but you have to see that a tainted Shepard is no better than a Dead Shepard.

But I do dispute it because you did got it wrong. The codex states that the indoctrination can be long term, even years, like in Illusive Mans' case. He tries to fight it, but he ultimately discovers he's in fact being indoctrinated. Like Shepard, so did Saren and Illusive Man both went through familiar choices similar to Shepards'. Only two out of three choices transforms Shepard into a husk. Pay atention. The third one doesn't. There is only that third choice, only that one, where shepard breathes at the end. Only one choice is the right choice. The other two lead to indoctrination. You are only angry because you still think all that really happened, and you deny everything that others might have to say against it. But if you'd see it in the indoctrination theory way, you'd agree with me.

I got one more explanation for you to leave that "binary solution set" aside, 'cause obviously I did not missunderstood your point. Indoctrination is a process, the end product is called a husk.

Modifié par sonicchaos, 15 juin 2012 - 11:59 .

[darkway1]

I got this feeling that the extended ending DLC is gonna open up a whole new can of worms,is IT real or not?did Shepard die or not?did the Normandy crash on some mission or was the scene purely artistic (adam/eve)??did the relay's explode??? etc........clarity will put an end to much speculation.......for better or worse.

[darkway1]

 For those interested in Biowares TOR.

http://www.gamestm.c...-lead-designer/

[Archonsg]

sonicchaos wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

sonicchaos wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

@sonicchaos
You do realize that IT as is envisioned by most pro-it fans is flawed because they are all ignoring that it requires Shepard to accept an indoctrination choice and then use willful denial on the player's part to "save" Shepard.

Indoctrination is a binary solution set. You either are, or are not indoctrinated.
Once you fall into the trap, you are gone.
There is no "but Shepard sub consciousness was able to fight it."
No.

However Shepard would have had a chance if he knows he is being indoctrinated or an attempt to indoctrinate him was in progress and fights the attempt.
That was the missing fourth choice.
The choice denied to us.

I am posting from the phone so I won't go into detail as I did on some other thread the on in and outs of the IT flaws, but believe me, had the current idea of IT maded true sense and not open even more plot holes I would have accepted it.

No.

IT in itself isn't the solution, an attempt at IT and the fourth choice, DENY THE EFFING STARBRAT, was. Bioware just didn't give it to us.

I don't think you know what the indoctrination theory actually refers to. This isn't some bull crap government conspiracy teory, it's an analysis based on the artistic writing of a story, of course it's flawed. the only ones holding the truth are the writers of the story. It's like assuming Jon is the son of Ned Stark's sister, and not a bastard, but that thing is only known by George R.R. Martin. You see where I'm getting?
And let me just say that the biggest plot hole of all is Shepard's breathing in the rubble after the citadel blows up. And that happens only if you choose wisely (unlike your choise probably) just like in ME2, where you had to choose very specificaly so the mission concludes in total success. Just take a look at what fans have to say about their artistic vision of the end and then we'll talk.

In fact, better analyzing your post, I don't think you know what indoctrination is at all, not to mention Reaper indoctrination (defined in the game's codex, look it up). It's not that binary at all. It clearly states there are at least three known forms of Reaper indoctrination in the ME universe.

I think you misunderstood what I meant.

Binary solution set = you are indoctrinated / you are not.
Do you dispute this?

And yes I have read the codex.
Also I saw your comment on my old blog about it, note that it was refering to that particular youtube video. There were discussions and other theories since.

Bottom line is, if Shepard chooses to accept any of the three indoctrination choices, he is accepting reaper programming. 
Do we all aggree that all three choices originate from the reaper and thus all three are indoctrination choices if ANY ONE is. 

I am saying that IF Bioware had put in that 4th choice, all that happened right after the beam made sense. Because it was all an attempt to indoctrinate Shepard. He has to fight that attempt. Not accept it.
Do you see my point?

I do see why IT would be a game saver but you have to see that a tainted Shepard is no better than a Dead Shepard.

but i do dispute it because you did got it wrong. The codex states that the indoctrination can be long term, even years, like in illusive man's case. Even he tries to fight it, but he ultimately discovers he really is indoctrinated. Like Shepard, also Saren and Illusive man both went through familiar choises such as Shepards. Only two out of three choices transforms Shepard into a husk. Pay atention. The third one doesn't. There is only that third choice, only that one, where shepard breathes at the end. Only one choice is the right choice. The other two lead to indoctrination. You are only angry, because you still think all that really happened, and you deny everything that others might have to say against it. But if you'd see it in the indoctrination theory way, you'd agree with me.

I got one more explanation for you to leave that "binary solution set" aside, caus obviously i did not missunderstood your point. Indoctrination is a process, the end product is called a husk.

You are contradicting yourself.
Its a process but it is indoctrination and the person during that process IS INDOCTRINATED. Or are you saying that both Saren and TIM aren't already indoctrinated even though they weren't husks. 
Mind you "husk like" and being an actual husk, is obvious.

And you still do not want to see it from my point of view.
That is your choice.
But please don't make assumptions as to what I feel or how I logically come to the conclusion why IT is wrong. 
You just want a way for IT to be right so badly that you not only insult, you ignore valid points of view when it is presented to you.

I'll leave it as you do not want to view options that are opposed to your opinion. 

[TheLastThought]

Archonsg wrote...
Guys, guys, peace. You know I do not agree with what Thanatos usual stuff, but he is right this time. 
The problem is, the Bioware we knew is dead and gone. Even at the wosrt of times, I am thinking the end of Baldur's Gate2 before Throne of Bhaal expansion and the end of Neverwinter Nights 1 before Hordes of Underdark, where we had similar "non-endings" that weren't as satisfactory, and the old Bioware forums were ablaze with postings much like now, with one notable exception, Bioware actively addressed our concerns, genuinely seemed to want to know what we wanted, and most importantly, did not come across as a PR stunt but truly wanted our input, and than acted on them. Thus with the complaints that our Bhaalspawn hero just ending up in the elven halls and the abrupt ending wasn't epic to match the Bhaalspawn saga, came arguably the best expansion ever made. Throne of Bhaal gave Baldur's Gate the ending it deserved and how it treated your companions' growth was amazing. Who could forget Viconia's changing alignment, all because you taught her the meaning of love? 
And oh yes, you could become a god (well okies, demi-god) or not. Become a father/mother or not. Walked into the sunset with your loved one, or not. All depending on what choices you made with your companions along the path of godhood. 
Then, we have today's Bioware. Who has no shame in citing paid reviewers' score in defense of an ending their core fans are calling foul on. No discussions, no interaction. When pointed out that the characters we whom we played with for so long, and worse, the character whom we built over five years, tge character whom we have invested our persoba with woukd not, could not do the things they had Shepard do, they Bioware called upon "artistic integrity" to defend suicide, betrayal and removal of a being's right to genetic freedom. 
In a PR stunt to quell certain groups of players, and to buy time, they have announced the ECDLC. 
Let's be honest here, any moron could see this wasn't what was asked for, a blind elcor could see just "clarity" of a crappy ending isn't what was asked for. So you have to ask yourself then, why?Why release something that wasn't a fix for the problem? 
Perhaps it wasn't cost effective to effect a fix. Perhaps, they knew they fracked up but can't do anything about it because someone else is calling the shots. 
Whatever the reason, EA/Bioware chose not to do the right thing by their customers and core fans, treating us no more then numbers on a balance sheet. 
So, it is then best that we communicate via that balance sheet. Money talks, so the saying goes. My money will stay firmly in my wallet till Bioware gives me a really good reason to support their products. 

This...this is PERFECT! I could never find better words to write down how I feel. Thank you fo saying it so well, and in my dreams someone in Bioware will see these words and decide to do something, anything,  to make it better.
But reality is no dream, unfortunately.
So much sadness.

Modifié par TheLastThought, 15 juin 2012 - 12:12 .

[BlueStorm83]

sonicchaos wrote...

Please, just let that indoctrination theory be true. I don't care about hundreds of different endings myself, I just want to see Harbinger dead, but not like in a general maner. I want it to suffer by my hands. What was the point of Shepard breathing in the end if I can't get him out of that rubble? Hell, I'll go after Harbinger in a Kodiak. News like "No further expanded ending" is making fans feel pain in their harts. I, for one, don't want that ending changed, but what was the point if everything was a metaphoricc dream of Shep's struggle to fight against Reaper indoctrination? We get it, if we chose the most painfull option, Shepard will (or might) live). I find it to be the most incredibly well written story ever, and more if it goes the I think of it (obviously, aren't we all a bit subjective and selfish!? no? just me?). I, as one of Bioware's greatest fans, just ask that this should not be the way Shepard goes out.

P.S.: And God may help you, Bioware, if you'll ditch Mark Meer as UbiSoft did with Michael Ironside!

---  Problem with this is that then BioWare sold us 90% of a game, and the ending was something that had to be researched, picked apart, and then ultimately ASSUMED.

Based ENTIRELY on the actions of the game with no inference made by looking around, Indoctrination Theory is not real.

I wished it was at first, part of me wished they put it into the game, but if The Indoctrination Theory WAS part of the game, then, like Archon said, the only way out of it would be to 100% REJECT the Starboy, since he pretty much says, "Yeah, I AM the Reapers," and not agree to ANYTHING that he says.  Judging making any of the three choices by the endings after doing anything he says are invalid: you have to judge a situation on what happened before and what is happening during.  We don't have the benefit of Prescience.

[darkway1]

No one is in dispute with Bioware's ability to produce quality games but the business mentality behind Bioware's games is some thing I no longer want to support,DA2 (unfinished/under developed environments),TOR (total lack of endgame content) and Mass3 (abandoned story/unfinished ending issues),to invest in DLC or maintain subscriptions simply encourages more of the same mentality that is destroying Bioware games/reputation.

Maybe the silence from Bioware has more to with knowing that the bolt-on ending was wrong and can't be justified in context of the quality of work previously produced.

[twinsfun]

update please we are waiting bioware

[3DandBeyond]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

sonicchaos wrote...

Please, just let that indoctrination theory be true. I don't care about hundreds of different endings myself, I just want to see Harbinger dead, but not like in a general maner. I want it to suffer by my hands. What was the point of Shepard breathing in the end if I can't get him out of that rubble? Hell, I'll go after Harbinger in a Kodiak. News like "No further expanded ending" is making fans feel pain in their harts. I, for one, don't want that ending changed, but what was the point if everything was a metaphoricc dream of Shep's struggle to fight against Reaper indoctrination? We get it, if we chose the most painfull option, Shepard will (or might) live). I find it to be the most incredibly well written story ever, and more if it goes the I think of it (obviously, aren't we all a bit subjective and selfish!? no? just me?). I, as one of Bioware's greatest fans, just ask that this should not be the way Shepard goes out.

P.S.: And God may help you, Bioware, if you'll ditch Mark Meer as UbiSoft did with Michael Ironside!

---  Problem with this is that then BioWare sold us 90% of a game, and the ending was something that had to be researched, picked apart, and then ultimately ASSUMED.

Based ENTIRELY on the actions of the game with no inference made by looking around, Indoctrination Theory is not real.

I wished it was at first, part of me wished they put it into the game, but if The Indoctrination Theory WAS part of the game, then, like Archon said, the only way out of it would be to 100% REJECT the Starboy, since he pretty much says, "Yeah, I AM the Reapers," and not agree to ANYTHING that he says.  Judging making any of the three choices by the endings after doing anything he says are invalid: you have to judge a situation on what happened before and what is happening during.  We don't have the benefit of Prescience.

This is it exactly.  If Shepard makes a choice, Shepard is indoctrinated.  There's no way back from that.  And Shepard's legacy and self are forever tainted.  What choice was ever freely made?  No one would be sure.  And the game incomplete as it is now, is even more intentionally obviously incomplete. 

The only redemption and salvation from indoctrination would have been that choice to reject.  It would be the "I know what you are trying to do and it won't work" moment where Shepard breaks free of the ATTEMPT and not some contrived moment where Shepard is the first to break out of indoctrination itself.  Indoctrination as shown with Saren/Sovereign is something that is, on or off as Archosg put it.  The only thing that changes over time is the amount of control asserted and the effect on the indoctrinated's brain.  They go from useful to useless.

[LiarasShield]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Definitly love bethesda they definitly do try to go out of their way to please fans from the fallout ending to releasing patches to help fix lag issues on the ps3 and bethesda does really care or at least I feel that they do ^^

Even if they don't CARE about the fans, they realize that the fans pay their salaries, so it's in their best interest to make them happy.

perhaps bioware is forgetting the fans and customers are the ones who buy their games and also not talking with fans at all or not discussing things at all doesn't really seem to be wise

[3DandBeyond]

darkway1 wrote...

No one is in dispute with Bioware's ability to produce quality games but the business mentality behind Bioware's games is some thing I no longer want to support,DA2 (unfinished/under developed environments),TOR (total lack of endgame content) and Mass3 (abandoned story/unfinished ending issues),to invest in DLC or maintain subscriptions simply encourages more of the same mentality that is destroying Bioware games/reputation.

Maybe the silence from Bioware has more to with knowing that the bolt-on ending was wrong and can't be justified in context of the quality of work previously produced.

I think there's a real fear of someone saying something and it not being 100% accurate or it not being enough or, as you point to, bearing out the accuracy of our conjecture.  That is, that on some level they know.