9972 réponses à ce sujet

[chkchkchk]

GoblinSapper wrote...

chkchkchk wrote...

Sinnick03 wrote...

Reptilian Rob wrote...

izmirtheastarach wrote...

That quote from Patrick has been established as fake, according the Chris. He said he physically went and asked Patrick about it.

Yeah, it was confirmed as a hyper troll.

Impressive trollmanship.  How was it confirmed?

Impressive trollmanship indeed!  Whoever it was had been at it before Mass Effect 3 rolled out, by the looks of the responses on Penny Arcade.  (Or the account got hacked.)  But even if true, Bioware/EA certainly wouldn't fire him.  Think of the backlash then!  "BIOWARE FIRES LONG-TIME WRITER FOR REVEALING THAT THE ENDING WAS PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE TWO DUDES LOCKED THEMSELVES IN A ROOM AND IGNORED THE REST OF THEIR TEAM"

Can you imagine?  That basically throws the whole "artistic integrity" thing out the window, doesn't it?  So I don't think we've got to worry about anyone getting fired.

It doesn't matter if it's fake or real, though.  What matters is the potential that Bioware people are sympathetic to our concerns, and will thus advocate for us.  That's my point.  There's a good chance Bioware's creative teams are having some crazy debates right now.  Remember, the "artist" in this case is not a single author, but a whole team.  That's why it's good to remain civil.  We don't want to alienate people who want the same thing as us.

What? Of COURSE it matters if it's fake, because if it's fake, there is no Bioware Creative team member thats sympathetic to us.

Yeah, I take your point, but I think if we consider the SIZE of the creative team... there's got to be people who aren't happy with the ending as it stands.  I'm sure most of the writers would have done certain scenes differently if they had their way.  What our "movement" does is give an opportunity.  Until this "movement" started, any writer disgruntled by the ending was probably prepared to just deal with it forever.  But now...

[unclee]

Folks, let's remember to be civil and respectful to everyone here. We don't want to name call or talk disrespectful to anyone cause everyone is awesome!

[HALO_Project]

Darkeus wrote...


I hate to say that Mr. Priestly claiming that it is not real is not really a credible source  He is an employee of EA/Bioware and in that capacity, he is quite biased.  

So until it is confirmed by someone else, like a mod on the PA forums, then I will take what Mr. Priestly says with a grain of salt. 

Mr. Priestly also said that the multiplayer would not be required to achieve the optimal ending, that single-player alone could accomplish this and that isn't exactly true either, now is it? Of course there isn't really an "optimal ending" so I guess he dodged around that one and I firmly believe the man says what they pay him to. It is his job to rally us, he is the Community Coordinator.  I don't begrudge him that, I just take everything he says with a heap of salt. I have ever since the hype surrounding Dragon Age 2.

Holding out Hope and Holding The Line

[wheelierdan]

my reaction was holy crap this is the best game ever, except.. wait. what about the... and theres.... wait why is that person alive? Wait why did joker leave?!
*reloads save*
the rest is history
everyone seems to have that same,that was awesome! wait, was it awesome?" reaction

[izmirtheastarach]

HALO_Project wrote...

Mr. Priestly also said that the multiplayer would not be required to achieve the optimal ending, that single-player alone could accomplish this and that isn't exactly true either, now is it? Of course there isn't really an "optimal ending" so I guess he dodged around that one and I firmly believe the man says what they pay him to. It is his job to rally us, he is the Community Coordinator.  I don't begrudge him that, I just take everything he says with a heap of salt. I have ever since the hype surrounding Dragon Age 2.

Holding out Hope and Holding The Line

To be fair, he is sometimes wrong. But usually that's because the information he was given was wrong. Not because he intended to mislead anyone.

[spacefiddle]

HALO_Project wrote...

Darkeus wrote...


I hate to say that Mr. Priestly claiming that it is not real is not really a credible source  He is an employee of EA/Bioware and in that capacity, he is quite biased.  

So until it is confirmed by someone else, like a mod on the PA forums, then I will take what Mr. Priestly says with a grain of salt. 

Mr. Priestly also said that the multiplayer would not be required to achieve the optimal ending, that single-player alone could accomplish this and that isn't exactly true either, now is it?

Thaaaaat's kind of a good point, right there.
I liked the MP, but I remember the whole "MP optional" thing being emphasized - as a selling point - and being confused when I couldn't find how to work it in the game.  Oh, it doesn't exist.  Hmmm.

The breaking point will be when BW stops going "my artistic integrity is wounded," and starts realizing, "oh.  We have customers who didn't get what we told them they'd get.  Of course they're upset."

[chkchkchk]

HALO_Project wrote...

Mr. Priestly also said that the multiplayer would not be required to achieve the optimal ending, that single-player alone could accomplish this and that isn't exactly true either, now is it? 

In all fairness, I believe you only need 4000/5000+ EMS to get the "optimal" ending.  If you have galactic readiness (from multiplayer) then you can get away with a lower EMS.

[Sinnick03]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

HALO_Project wrote...

Mr. Priestly also said that the multiplayer would not be required to achieve the optimal ending, that single-player alone could accomplish this and that isn't exactly true either, now is it? Of course there isn't really an "optimal ending" so I guess he dodged around that one and I firmly believe the man says what they pay him to. It is his job to rally us, he is the Community Coordinator.  I don't begrudge him that, I just take everything he says with a heap of salt. I have ever since the hype surrounding Dragon Age 2.

Holding out Hope and Holding The Line

To be fair, he is sometimes wrong. But usually that's because the information he was given was wrong. Not because he intended to mislead anyone.

That is kind of hard to be sure of, isn't it?

[Carnage752]

@spacefiddle Loose statements like the on all PR's make can be danced sround and are technically not lying. However, if a definitive statement was made then found out to be lies, then the backlash would be large and completely legit. So if they made a definite statement over something like that, you can be assured it's legit. It's heavy risk, and the priiiizzzee isn't worth it.

[Darkeus]

HALO_Project wrote...

Darkeus wrote...


I hate to say that Mr. Priestly claiming that it is not real is not really a credible source  He is an employee of EA/Bioware and in that capacity, he is quite biased.  

So until it is confirmed by someone else, like a mod on the PA forums, then I will take what Mr. Priestly says with a grain of salt. 

Mr. Priestly also said that the multiplayer would not be required to achieve the optimal ending, that single-player alone could accomplish this and that isn't exactly true either, now is it? Of course there isn't really an "optimal ending" so I guess he dodged around that one and I firmly believe the man says what they pay him to. It is his job to rally us, he is the Community Coordinator.  I don't begrudge him that, I just take everything he says with a heap of salt. I have ever since the hype surrounding Dragon Age 2.

Holding out Hope and Holding The Line

Yep, I remember that too.  I was one of those he told that....

[wheelierdan]

as far as who to believe within the company. honestly i believe them all. Even when they say it was the best ending ever. Why? because enough fans agree, so they aren't pulling it out of their butts. Thebe agreed to work on some undefined content, i believe that too. I don't think theyve said anything untrue.

The man i really want to hear from is casey hudson though, as far as i recall he made all those pre release quotes that we all know. Those things i take issue with.

but as far of the rest im not gonig to say, "he said hes making dlc!!" unless they use that term.

[Siegdrifa]

Near 6 am, time to sleep a few hours ...

Before i go here is a joke when i had my first day in highschool near 15 years ago, on my desk was written (from another studen) :
"in this place, i held the line against sleep..... but i failed", i understood few days later what he meant.

And for those who missed it :
http://kotaku.com/58...ng-for-the-fans
Kotaku backing better ending for ME3 and why it would be a good idea for us (player) as for them (Bioware), enjoy !
See you later.

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 22 mars 2012 - 04:58 .

[izmirtheastarach]

Sinnick03 wrote...

izmirtheastarach wrote...

To be fair, he is sometimes wrong. But usually that's because the information he was given was wrong. Not because he intended to mislead anyone.

That is kind of hard to be sure of, isn't it?

Is it? That infor about multiplayer came from Jarret Lee originally, and Bioware is still maintaining it is true. And I've seen Chris publicly acknowledge having given out incorrect info in the past. Anyways, this is a silly point to contend. If the writer in question really did make that post, it would be foolish of him to admit it now, so who really know nothing.

Modifié par izmirtheastarach, 22 mars 2012 - 04:58 .

[-PG-Skyre]

Ok guys, I generally don't like people throwing polls around and getting people to vote, but I'll be "that guy" this time.
The FAQ website, which is rather well known (and is the reason I'm doing this), is putting up their own poll on changing the ending. Currently, the 3 choices for change are winning, but only slightly.

If you find a poll about the change, vote on it. Doesnt matter if its on a dead end website that no one uses, as Bioware will find any polls that work in favor of keeping the ending (and will use said polls as a reason to leave things as is).

Anyways, here is the FAQ site-
http://www.gamefaqs.com/

Hold the line guys *salutes*

[durasteel]

unclee wrote...

I can't recall a single instance in the past where Priestly has straight up lied to the fans here. ...

He continued to insist that Mass Effect was an Xbox eclusive, and that there were no plans to release the game for Windows, until a few days before the Windows version was announced, complete with screenshots of the new inventory interfece and hacking mini-game.

It is possible, of course, that he wasn't prevaricating, and that no one in the company told him that the PC version was well underway, but he also did exactly the same thing with Jade Empire.

Make of that what you will.

[SkaldFish]

spacefiddle wrote...

Carnage752 wrote...

wheelierdan wrote...

im not disagreeing im just saying its a funny situation, this topic has nothing to do with gameplay so technically speaking it shouldn't be in the forum. yet in talking of gameplay one becomes off topic of the thread.

im glad its here obviously im just saying, see the humor in it.

Then perhaps you should take a moment to thank Bioware for not only tolerating 3 threads that are off-topic, but are directly opposed to their interests on their own private forums.

You know how you can thank them? BEING CIVIL!

^
There is enlightened self-interest at work here.  They've left threads up about getting refunds, fer cryin' out loud.  Note it is both "enlightened" AND "self-interest."  Heavy-handed censorship would backfire anyway.

I'd really love to get some kind of view or insight into what really happened here, internally at Bioware, over the last few months that produced this result.  Not holding my breath, though.  What I AM holding the line for now, is for BW to get over the shock and stop seeing this as a "problem brought on by rabid fans," which is our fault, and more as "problem brought on by misrepresented product angering customers," which they take ownership of.

And at the end of the day, the Doc's letter of this morning looks like a good, if VERY cautious and tentative, step in that direction.  Rome wasn't rewritten in a day.

Somebody rewrote Rome?!?! OMG - why was I not informed???

[DuneMuadDib]

chkchkchk wrote...

HALO_Project wrote...

Mr. Priestly also said that the multiplayer would not be required to achieve the optimal ending, that single-player alone could accomplish this and that isn't exactly true either, now is it? 

In all fairness, I believe you only need 4000/5000+ EMS to get the "optimal" ending.  If you have galactic readiness (from multiplayer) then you can get away with a lower EMS.

EMS is the total assets multipled by the readiness.  Numerous calculations have been done to show it to be "problematic" to achieve 4000 EMS without playing multiplayer as 8000 TMS is impossible at present (moreso with bugged quests).

I could be mistaken, but I'm given to understand you can't have Shepard live if you don't play at least SOME MP.

[cyrrant]

Carnage752 wrote...

@spacefiddle Loose statements like the on all PR's make can be danced sround and are technically not lying. However, if a definitive statement was made then found out to be lies, then the backlash would be large and completely legit. So if they made a definite statement over something like that, you can be assured it's legit. It's heavy risk, and the priiiizzzee isn't worth it.

Imagine if at some point during this it turned out that that post was actually written by a disgruntled writer...hoo boy.

Our Choices Should Matter - Hold the Line

[spacefiddle]

Carnage752 wrote...

@spacefiddle Loose statements like the on all PR's make can be danced sround and are technically not lying. However, if a definitive statement was made then found out to be lies, then the backlash would be large and completely legit. So if they made a definite statement over something like that, you can be assured it's legit. It's heavy risk, and the priiiizzzee isn't worth it.

Above your post are several examples of what he said being completely untrue.  Note than instead of backlash, we have "well he must have been misinformed."

My point is a double-standard where trust without proof is extended to Chris, despite statements he's made in the past being proveably false, while at the same time people defend their right to jump all over Jessica as being "part of her job," with no similar trust being extended; with, in fact, people taking the position that it is right and correct to doubt everything she says.  Double standard.  More iking by the fact that she's here engaging, and Chris isn't.

IN fact, while she's devoted personal time to engaging us, Chris' last post was "Hey we're listening, really we are, now quick let's all list the things about ME3 that we really love! Tapdance shellgame deflect..."

I find Chris' role to be a lot more static and company-line.  Nothing against him, it's just his role.  But it's odd that their opposite actions get crossed results.  Why do you think that is?

[Sinnick03]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

Sinnick03 wrote...

izmirtheastarach wrote...

To be fair, he is sometimes wrong. But usually that's because the information he was given was wrong. Not because he intended to mislead anyone.

That is kind of hard to be sure of, isn't it?

Is it? That infor about multiplayer came from Jarret Lee originally, and Bioware is still maintaining it is true. And I've seen Chris publicly acknowledge having given out incorrect info in the past. Anyways, this is a silly point to contend. If the writer in question really did make that post, it would be foolish of him to admit it now, so who really know nothing.

True, I can't fathom him going, 'oh yeah, totally. I posted that? Why?' 

[izmirtheastarach]

durasteel wrote...

He continued to insist that Mass Effect was an Xbox eclusive, and that there were no plans to release the game for Windows, until a few days before the Windows version was announced, complete with screenshots of the new inventory interfece and hacking mini-game.

It is possible, of course, that he wasn't prevaricating, and that no one in the company told him that the PC version was well underway, but he also did exactly the same thing with Jade Empire.

Make of that what you will.

That's just doing what he's been told to do by his bosses. Again, he can only distribute the info he's been cleared to distribute. 

[Paparob]

I'll just be as polite as I can, people don't care about a professional review when its contrary to their own position. Most people who want to play Mass Effect 3 have beaten it already and have drawn their own conclusions. It seems like most people think the endings are really sub-par and telling them so and so from some magazine gave it a perfect score doesn't change that. The only people who will care are in the mainstream and they don't care enough to actually buy your games. In short throwing professional reviews around will only make an impression on the people who aren't actually your consumers.

Modifié par Paparob, 22 mars 2012 - 05:02 .

[Ahms]

unclee wrote...

Folks, let's remember to be civil and respectful to everyone here. We don't want to name call or talk disrespectful to anyone cause everyone is awesome!

Except for the folks behind the ending. Awesome they are not.

[cyrrant]

-PG-Skyre wrote...

Ok guys, I generally don't like people throwing polls around and getting people to vote, but I'll be "that guy" this time.
The FAQ website, which is rather well known (and is the reason I'm doing this), is putting up their own poll on changing the ending. Currently, the 3 choices for change are winning, but only slightly.

If you find a poll about the change, vote on it. Doesnt matter if its on a dead end website that no one uses, as Bioware will find any polls that work in favor of keeping the ending (and will use said polls as a reason to leave things as is).

Anyways, here is the FAQ site-
http://www.gamefaqs.com/

Hold the line guys *salutes*

Anyone available should probably head on over and vote on this poll.

[Razorsteel]

Pro reviews are "purchased" anyway. They would be fools to bite the hand that feeds them.