285 réponses à ce sujet

[Genera1Nemesis]

Norrax wrote...

every one can argue till they are blue in the face, but it comes down to this, the majority of people (including myself) hated last 5-10 mins, when magic and plot holes suddenly got thrown in to the mix and every choice we made in the last 2 games got thrown out the window. every one who's in favor of the endings OK you like them, just stop posting threads just to be controversial like all hipster douches, and stop citing artist creativity as a reason it just winds true fans up! were all recovering from the ending induced post traumatic stress. so just don't add insult to injury!

Nothing of what I've said was ever meant to be insulting;  or controversial; so if people take it that way I apologize. But to say that we shouldn't be able to share our opinions in an open forum broderlines on fascism.

[Norrax]

Genera1Nemesis wrote...


Nothing of what I've said was ever meant to be insulting;  or controversial; so if people take it that way I apologize. But to say that we shouldn't be able to share our opinions in an open forum broderlines on fascism.

ok fair point, though in my world right now a little fascism to get the ending i feel the game disearved is needed! 

[saracen16]

Alamar2078 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

Also, the article keeps confusing promises for marketing ploys DISGUISED as promises, which is CLEARLY what BioWare did. They have ever right to do so in this free market economy, and fulfilling consumer wishes defeats the purpose of artistic expression.

Here is the crux of the problem that you have laid out.  If a company engages in false advertising then that is actually a CRIMINAL offense.  I do not necessarily claim that BW did this with malice in their hearts but they set an unreasonable set of expectationts that they had no intention of matching.

These promises were not created out of a vacuum. The consumers made demands in the form of feedback, and BioWare as a company had to placate them. It doesn't matter what a developer says before a game. It doesn't matter what they advertise. We are hyped up about these so-called "promises" but in the end we feel let down because we raised the bar too high for them. We shouldn't expect anything out of it, instead taking the experience as it comes without waiting for something to happen.

As a company that produces a product they have a moral obligation to live up to their promises and/or the expectationts they deliberately set.   "Artisitc vision" will not excuse unethical behavior.

Even then, I personally do not believe that BioWare did not fulfill any promises. We have seen the conclusion to Shepard's story. It was the ENTIRE game. They did NOT mention that the end was solely in the last 15 minutes. They even said that the ending was not traditional. They said it after and BEFORE release.

So, no, I don't believe that they are lying.

Note:  I am willing to assume that BW did not do any of this with malice.  I do believe they did set unmatched expectations / promises therefore [given that consumers are not generally allowed to return games] I believe they have a moral responsibility to meet the expectations they have laid out for their product.

And they did. You just don't believe that they did. Even if they didn't, I don't think it's a big issue as to whether they lie or not, because it's their artistic production, they're working on it day and night to improve it as they see fit (as it should be because they, not you, own the rights to the game), and they're the ones who are trying to balance consumer demands. It's clear that they want to do that while maintaining it as their own work, and honestly, that's as much consumer input as any game or book gets. Books are written to be enjoyed, not sterilized by fanfiction. Same goes for games because I do NOT want someone else's endings or story SHOVED down my throat. I buy the game because I want BIOWARE'S story, not yours or any other self-entitled fan.

[Asnine112]

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

Asnine112 wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

Uezurii wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

The entire game was the end of the story, not just the last 5 minutes.

Changing where the ending starts does not change the fact that the last 20 minutes or so of the game were poorly executed.

20 minutes? I'm assuming you're talking about when you meet Catalyst? That was only like 5 minutes of dialogue, and then a 3 minute cutscene. And that still doens't mean that Mass Effect 3 as a WHOLE was not the end of the story. Throughout the game we were given resolution to every MAJOR and MINOR conflict that arose for out character since ME1.  Just because you didn't like the Catalyst part or the three last choices in the end does not mean that your choices NEVER counted.

How many choices were you given at the end (last five minutes) of Mass Effect 2?

Funny you mention this.

You know what the difference is?

The choice was framed within the context of what had happened earlier in the game. I'm pretty sure that if the 2 choices that came after the suicide run in ME2 were completely disassociated with the rest of the game people would've raged at ME2 as well.

And funnily enough, this Saracen personality , as always, continues to ignore the more well presented arguments against the ending. Master baiter if I ever saw one.

ME3 story is about stopping Reapers.

ME3 ending saw the Reapers stopped. Did I miss something?

But did you?

2/3 endings you can't be sure that you've actually stopped the Reapers.

You don't see people ****ing about the lack of choices in, say, ME1 or 2 (in fact, pretty sure ME1 didn't have any ending choices per se explicitly relevant to the overall arching plot). Why? Because, once again, the choices (or what happened) made sense, and didn't suddenly appear out of nowhere. ME3 ending sequence (yes, I understand that there is a view that the entire game is the "ending") is a classic example of a Gainax ending.

As for you Saracen, you've changed your position. Your previous topic was "Oh the endings are great because I can make my own ending (imagine what happened afterwards), BW IS BRILLIANT" to this article that you've copy and pasted. I addressed your OP in the other thread, and, since I'm going to be adopting your style of argument, this is my response to this thread:
"I already refuted all the points presented in the article in some other post in some thread. Clearly you don't know how to read. <Insert some random rambling about how someone didn't read the OP and should step off their soapbox>"

edit: Also, the article isn't wrong per se. Yes, it is BW's story, and yes, throughout all of it we were only choosing the choices that they gave us. BUT, just as they can choose to do what they will with the story, WE as a consumer can choose to not pay for DLC or whatever else because we're not satisfied.

Modifié par Asnine112, 16 mars 2012 - 01:01 .

[Juggernaut241]

The ending had me a bit confused. There is so much that happened that could be interpreted in numerous ways. I dont know if this was Bioware's intent, but just from the ending there are a wide array of possibilities that could lead to future games. And I wouldnt count Shepard out yet. At least I dont want to. (ha or maybe Im in denial.) He came back from death in ME2, so why not!

From a practical view, it would be kind of careless of bioware to kill off shepard, especially with where the level of popularity is. I sincerely hope they continue with Shepard. Maybe work out a way to rebuild the relays, or how all those galaxy's species migrate back to their homeworlds.But I will admit, the ending had me feeling kinda sick. Lets just hope Bioware listens and does something about it.

Modifié par Juggernaut241, 16 mars 2012 - 01:02 .

[Genera1Nemesis]

Norrax wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...


Nothing of what I've said was ever meant to be insulting;  or controversial; so if people take it that way I apologize. But to say that we shouldn't be able to share our opinions in an open forum broderlines on fascism.

ok fair point, though in my world right now a little fascism to get the ending i feel the game disearved is needed! 

lol, I agree; and I never said I liked every aspect of the ending either; in fact, quite the contrary. I just agree that if this is the ending that the artist intended or was happy with then they shouldn't feel they have to change it based on popular opinion. This is why Hollywood movies have become so stagnant recently; they write the scripts based on the consensus of what fans expect; not what the screenwriter wanted.

[Asnine112]

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

Norrax wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...


Nothing of what I've said was ever meant to be insulting;  or controversial; so if people take it that way I apologize. But to say that we shouldn't be able to share our opinions in an open forum broderlines on fascism.

ok fair point, though in my world right now a little fascism to get the ending i feel the game disearved is needed! 

lol, I agree; and I never said I liked every aspect of the ending either; in fact, quite the contrary. I just agree that if this is the ending that the artist intended or was happy with then they shouldn't feel they have to change it based on popular opinion. This is why Hollywood movies have become so stagnant recently; they write the scripts based on the consensus of what fans expect; not what the screenwriter wanted.

No...they write what they think people want to see, which is why you get movies with crap plots but millions spent on special effects.

[Nu-Nu]

saracen16 wrote...


 I'm just saying that you have no right to force BioWare to CHANGE the ending

Forcing and wanting a change is two different things, why do people not understand this? Forcing is going to Bioware headquarters and putting a gun to their head until they change it. Wanting it change is doing a peaceful petition to show unhappiness at the ending.

There is a difference between want and force.

Modifié par Nu-Nu, 16 mars 2012 - 01:18 .

[ticklefist]

How did this happen. How did it become ok for "artists" to answer to share holders but not fans?

[ticklefist]

That's getting sigged.

[Myrmedus]

Again, this is the terrible attitude that artists are above criticism from their viewers.

Criticism is an integral part of improvement and development, and no matter how good you are you're not immune to making mess ups. BW messed up, fixing it would be a good move, a process of learning; whether they do or not, I have no idea, but there you go.

I take issue with these kinds of arguments that are based upon self-righteous concepts: those who argue against changing the ending because they liked it at least have a good reason behind their arguments but simply saying it shouldn't be changed because of <insert moral rhetoric here> could keep going back and forth ad infinitum.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 16 mars 2012 - 01:17 .

[MizzNaaa]

saracen16 wrote...

MizzNaaa wrote...

See, my problem with ALL those articles that are against the ME3-retake thing is this:

They all keep saying something that is completely untrue, they all keep saying that we WANT to change the WHOLE ending.

We don't want to change anything. We want more.

Barring your generalizations, THAT's the problem: adding or subtracting to something IS changing it. You are forcing BioWare to abandon their independence and cease to be artists, instead become nothing but shills for a community that wants their own fan-fiction IMPOSED on the game.

That is simply not true. Imposing our 'fanfiction' means we're telling BioWare "Here, take what I wrote, put it in the game". We aren't, we're simply 'asking' them to give us more. As in, explain what they put in the ending. Fix the gaping plot holes, and let us know what happens. 

I repeat "Let us KNOW what happens" not..what we want to happen. We -again- just want closure and an explanation to all the things we don't quite understand.

I don't see anything imposing about that. Espeically that the product we were given was advertised to give us definite closure. (don't let me start about player choice)

 I realize however that I'm going to have to respectfully disagree to your opinion and leave it at that since we both won't come to terms with eachother's opinions.

[MizzNaaa]

Nu-Nu wrote...

saracen16 wrote...


 I'm just saying that you have no right to force BioWare to CHANGE the ending

Forcing and wanting a change is two different things, why do people not understand this? Forcing is going to Bioware headquarters and putting a gun to their head until they change it. Wanting it change is doing a peaceful petition to show unhapiness at the ending.

There is a difference between want and force.

Thank you! Thank you! 

And thank you!

This, so much.

[Deventh]

Why does this thread have 5 stars? Actually why does it even exist?

Edit: Whoooops~ 4 stars 

Modifié par Deventh, 16 mars 2012 - 01:23 .

[Alamar2078]

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

But Bioware would win this legally if that's the basis of the argument. The can go through every momnet in the game and show how your choices were reflected throughout; so in general the game was not falsely advertised. It did what they said it would do; they just didn't do it all in one fell swoop at the end of the game itself.

This isn't about winning.  It's about right vs. wrong and expecting a company to live up to the statements that they make about a product.

Most of their comments I am referring to refer to the "ending" of the game so a "jury of my peers" would almost certainly rule in my favor anyway.  I don't think most reasonable people would subscribe to the "entire" game being the ending of the game.

YMMV.

[Alamar2078]

BTW people please keep this civil. If we antagonize someone with an opposite opinion that's one more person that is likely to lobby HARD against our position. In addition it's the "right" thing to do which IMHO is more important anyway than "winning".

[Alamar2078]

saracen16 wrote...

These promises were not created out of a vacuum. The consumers made demands in the form of feedback, and BioWare as a company had to placate them. It doesn't matter what a developer says before a game.

If I interpret this properly you indicate that it doesn't matter if a producer of a product LIES about the product.  [No I'm not saying BW lied I'm responding to the above].   If so I don't see how we could ever have a discussion because our frames of reference are polar opposites.

So "Fraud" would be OK???

saracen16 wrote...
Even then, I personally do not believe that BioWare did not fulfill any promises. We have seen the conclusion to Shepard's story. It was the ENTIRE game. They did NOT mention that the end was solely in the last 15 minutes. They even said that the ending was not traditional. They said it after and BEFORE release.

I see you quote a pre-release article.  Yes BW says the endings won't be traditional.  BW goes on to point out that:

"This story arc is coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot more different. At this point we're taking into account so many decisions that you've made as a player and reflecting a lot of that stuff. It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C."

This part of the article seems to support my position because there are basically 3 endings with relatively minor tweaks.  There is not one single element of the endings that depend on any one or two specific decisions.  In addition the last paragraph lets you know about how characters ended, rise & fall of civilizations, etc.  I don't really get this from any of the "endings".

saracen16 wrote...
And they did. You just don't believe that they did. Even if they didn't, I don't think it's a big issue as to whether they lie or not, because it's their artistic production, they're working on it day and night to improve it as they see fit (as it should be because they, not you, own the rights to the game), and they're the ones who are trying to balance consumer demands.

I appreciate your position and the fact that you are defending it from what you perceive as an unfair attack.  But to me it's not OK for a company to lie, delierately mislead, or not deliver on expectations of a product that they themselves created.  To me "art" is not an excuse for unethical behavior / lies / misleading / etc.

We may just have to agree to disagree.   Cool???

[Favourite store on the CitadeI]

saracen16 wrote...

Favourite store on the CitadeI wrote...

Alot of people disagree

Your point?

Oh i do have a point. i just couldnt be bothered to explain them 

[Favourite store on the CitadeI]

I love how the OP always bashes people for their opinions. makes me howl

[t_i_e_]

Only a small percentage like the ending. Of that percent I wonder which percent of them are paid by EA.

[trembli0s]

daguest wrote...

Why BW should change the ending :

Saying you are an artist doesn't allow you to make bull**** everyone needs to like. And saying "you won't have A, B,C ending" suggest you won't have "Red Blue Green ending".

Also, the main difference between a book or movie is you can't change anything about it. The whole purpose of a RPG is to be able to change the story. But yet, it seems some people don't want us to do so.

Really, nothing else need be said.

[Genera1Nemesis]

Alamar2078 wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

But Bioware would win this legally if that's the basis of the argument. The can go through every momnet in the game and show how your choices were reflected throughout; so in general the game was not falsely advertised. It did what they said it would do; they just didn't do it all in one fell swoop at the end of the game itself.

This isn't about winning.  It's about right vs. wrong and expecting a company to live up to the statements that they make about a product.

Most of their comments I am referring to refer to the "ending" of the game so a "jury of my peers" would almost certainly rule in my favor anyway.  I don't think most reasonable people would subscribe to the "entire" game being the ending of the game.

YMMV.

I get that, I really do. But Bioware always referred to the entirety of ME3 being the 'end of Sheperds story" and the conclusion of every plot thread that came up since Mass Effect 1.

I get that the A, B, or C ending was not delivered in a way that felt meaningful to the rest of the narrative; in fact; that is one gripe I agree with. But to arbitrarily say that 'no choices mattered' wouldn't be doing justice to the other 99.99% of the game; in fact one could say that without all those choices mattering then you would never have gotten to the ending to begin with.

I look at ME2 as a prime example of this. The decision to either keep or destroy the collector base wasn't given to you as a choice until the very end of the game, and it in no way was tied to any of the choices made previous to it (aside from what party members are with you to express what their opinions were) Regardless of what you chose; you were given the exact same cutscene of Shep running back to Normandy and the ship fleeing as the base either blew up or lit up in blue fireworks. No matter what you chose, Shep always quits Cerberus, and always goes back to the alliance; just like in 3 where no matter what you chose the relays were destroyed and the reaper threat was gone.

Aspects of main plot had to stay static throughout; and since Bioware has never hidden the fact that they plan to continue the franchise in some way, all those choices could still be reflected as the series moves forward.

[saracen16]

Favourite store on the CitadeI wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

Favourite store on the CitadeI wrote...

Alot of people disagree

Your point?

Oh i do have a point. i just couldnt be bothered to explain them 

Yeah, I probably wouldn't understand it. Contribute or stop posting.

[saracen16]

Alamar2078 wrote...

BTW people please keep this civil. If we antagonize someone with an opposite opinion that's one more person that is likely to lobby HARD against our position. In addition it's the "right" thing to do which IMHO is more important anyway than "winning".

That's your opinion. If you pass it as fact, then there's no reason to debate.

[majinbuu1307]

Um. No. DLC extra endings or bust.