1907 réponses à ce sujet

[Pygmali0n]

Artistic ending? What ME? Artistic? Yes, in that it was an exciting and very well made multiple choice story/game, but artistic as in Nouvelle Vague, as in installation in the Tate consisting of an empty room with a steaming pile of poo blocking the exit? No, never.

I can't decide if it was actually cost cutting or complete lack of judgement since DA:O was completed.

ME was always a crowd-pleasing blockbuster, a clever one, the pinnacle of one, and you'd set the stage for an amazing finale, only to blow it.

Expectations matter. Again and again you've played with expectations you've either never meant to deliver or pulled out of. This is why you get the opprobrium some don't think you deserve.

Apart from the ending so much more sounds wrong that it's easy to Hold The Line by avoiding ME3 altogether (even if it looks like good fun in places). Was burned by DA2, at least it warned me to wait and see about ME3. Thanks to the fans for honest reviews.

RIP BW, I hope all staff get highly paid jobs making Facebook games, but if you ever decide to go back to making good RPGs I'll come back with my tail between my legs.

[Getorex]

Pygmali0n wrote...

Artistic ending? What ME? Artistic? Yes, in that it was an exciting and very well made multiple choice story/game, but artistic as in Nouvelle Vague, as in installation in the Tate consisting of an empty room with a steaming pile of poo blocking the exit? No, never.

I can't decide if it was actually cost cutting or complete lack of judgement since DA:O was completed.

ME was always a crowd-pleasing blockbuster, a clever one, the pinnacle of one, and you'd set the stage for an amazing finale, only to blow it.

Expectations matter. Again and again you've played with expectations you've either never meant to deliver or pulled out of. This is why you get the opprobrium some don't think you deserve.

Apart from the ending so much more sounds wrong that it's easy to Hold The Line by avoiding ME3 altogether (even if it looks like good fun in places). Was burned by DA2, at least it warned me to wait and see about ME3. Thanks to the fans for honest reviews.

RIP BW, I hope all staff get highly paid jobs making Facebook games, but if you ever decide to go back to making good RPGs I'll come back with my tail between my legs.

After the incredibly good ME1 I always had this question at the back of my mind if they would be able to meet or exceed it.  It is a TOUGH act to follow, story-wise.  Good pacing, clever story, cool backstory, great villians and smooth reveal.  Perfection. 

Alas, it was such a tough act to follow that they haven't actually been able to match it.  It kinda makes me wonder too, with the end of ME3 with the Reapers defeated (and their purpose so ridiculously silly rather than "beyond your ability to understand" as Sovereign says in ME1), I cannot see upon what basis you can build any new Mass Effect universe content (beyond DLC for the current game).  When you (so easily) defeat THE biggest villian EVAH! any other antagonist will be pathetic and weak in comparison.  It would be the height of folly to go with an even BIGGER villian (a Reaper of the Reapers!).  All possible future bad guys are going to suffer in comparison to the size and scope of the Reapers as built up since ME1.  

As far as RPGs go this is possibly the end of the line for me.  Virtually ALL other RPGs I see are swords and sorcery stuff.  All the same.  That's what they were before Mass Effect and that is most of what is out there post Mass Effect.  Ugh.

Except Deus Ex.  When/if Bioware or other company produces new and GOOD NON-sword and sorcery RPG games, I'll play.  

Modifié par Getorex, 23 mars 2012 - 01:34 .

[Getorex]

ioannisdenton wrote...

So the internet wins over the developer about the game.
Τhe internet community ,which is full of contradictions, full of trends, full of memes like "arrow to the knee", the "chuck norris-jokes" generation, wins over a developer (and a DAMN good one) about it's spiritual child.
this is so wrong.
YES videogames are ART nowadays, this is like demanding a different ending for a movie, harass the director about the ending.
I do not want to be a part of this at all.

Demanding a different endng for a movie is ROUTINE.  Ever hear of "test audiences"?  They are used ROUTINELY to gauge viewer reaction to a movie and are used ROUTINELY to CHANGE the ending when the test audiences don't like it.  

Welcome to the REAL world.

[OriginalTibs]

Had it been an artistic decision to end it like that I woud be compelled to agree, but I find it incongruous that it was an artistic choice. Instead it looks like an executive decision to truncate the game at the Indoctrination puzzle sequence because to finish the full game would have been too expensive and/or taken more time than Bioware had.

Once that decision was handed down all the artists could do is craft the best ending they could with what they had left to work with.

Looking at all the inconsistencies, plus the radical shift in philosophy (from hope to futility, from the promotion of life and liberty to a choice between suicide and genocide... the simplest explanation factoring the wonderful mastery in storytelling Bioware has otherwise amply demonstrated in the past, is that this ending was not an artistic choice, but instead a business decision.

[Violet]

I believe that message read something like "blar blar huff blar" *close hangs up phone*. People shouldn't speak unless they are willing to converse in two way dialogue. Otherwise it becomes invitation for more ire. It's like getting in the last word when really people won't be satisfied till they hear meaning. 

[Monomorfic]

Getorex wrote...


Demanding a different endng for a movie is ROUTINE.  Ever hear of "test audiences"?  They are used ROUTINELY to gauge viewer reaction to a movie and are used ROUTINELY to CHANGE the ending when the test audiences don't like it.  

Welcome to the REAL world.

The fact that it's common in our times doesn't mean it's right. Also remember that not only critics liked those endings, but half of the players also liked them. At first i hated the fact that they destroyed the "magic" of this universe, but that's how legends are born, and Shepard became the biggest one ever.
CHANGEING ENDING IN A ALREADY PUBLISHED GAME WOULD BE A CIRME AGAINST HUMANITY.

What is missing in my opinion is some kind of prequel that --- introduce a syntetic race that poses a real threat to the galaxy's organic life, cause in this and even previous cycle there was none other than reapers, or show that the geth could be one (the geth as they ar now imo even if wanted coudn't win in an all out war against galaxy). 

[Pallando]

Changing an ending is not wrong... If they rushed things and did not end it as they wanted, they SHOULD correct that...
Seriously, where are the multiple endings depending on all past choices they told us they wanted gamers to experience... ?

Modifié par Pallando, 23 mars 2012 - 04:10 .

[Hermes74]

Hi,
First I would like to say that I am a ME fan, I know the story perfectly well, I've played ME2 several times (literaly), and I played ME3 4 times already. BUT, I'm also a ph.D. candidate in Films Studies, my thesis subject is about fan culture and reappropriation. I'm also a director and artist.
Now, here is my humble insight about this whole ending/controversy raging on the Web by passionate fans. I have to say that fan reactions is quit interesting from an academical fan studies perspective. When a work of fiction as Mass Effect becomes so engaging (moreover it is a shooter-RPG) fans tend to appropriate it as their own. A famous fan studies scholar, Henry Jenkins, calls it "participatory culture", as fans aren't passives, but active consumers and also producers of new contents surrounding their fetishized world (here ME - just surf the Net to see fanarts, fanvids, etc.). The all mecanic of ME being a videogame encourage that of course (our active participation with decision/making, morality level, etc). But, it looks like many fans doesn't seem to have achieve a satisfying level of gratification in the end of ME3, considering their intense engagement, and attachment, with the caracters for the past 5 years. Why? Let me remind you that millions of fans bought the game, most won't talk neither express their feelings through social network. They may be sad, melancolic, left with a sens of emptiness or highly pleased with endings left, I hope voluntarily, with plotholes that will be filled in time by future and major DLC. It is not clear however, for the fans out there who may be easily paranoiac and skeptical towards corporation, what is your intention, continue the story with Shepard with DLC and complete the cycle, because you don't intend to make a ME4 with Shepard? So technically we don't know if it is the actual majority of the ME fan gamers who aren't satisfy, because they think (the fans who passionnatly and quickly express themselves through social network) they know the story more than the writers (the same here can be applied to Star Wars fans and other big franchises). What is sure is that many gamers don't feel the replay value knowing how it ends, and not-knowing more about what happens with their favorite caracters. They can't reappropriate their intense feeling in replaying the game because they don't like the emptiness in the end. It's like making Star Wars with the end of 2001... I really liked it, I gotta say you had balls to do that! And ME will be remember in the history of videogames for that... But the fans... They need to understand, it would be reassuring for them to know that the galaxy wasn't destroy with the explosion of the Mass Relays... I have my own explanation for everything, but most of the fan seems to make the following equation : in Arrival, destroying a Mass Relay destroy the system where it is, ergo, if every mass relay is destroyed all the systems are... A banana is yellow, your face is yellow, ergo your face is a banana... I think it is not that simple.
I'll stop here,because I don't even know if the right person at Bioware will read my post. But if you want to know more about my research, here is a link to download a paper I gave in 2009 at Salzbourg.
http://www.google.co...XqSvvvp_hg17N1w

And if you want to know more about my insight, you can contact me directly
marc.joly@umontreal.ca  or  hermes@videotron.qc.ca

Thank you for reading me.
Regards

Marc Joly-Corcoran, director
Ph.D candidate in Film Studies

[Canxorna Ri]

It feels like the story tellers wrote themselves into a corner and the ending was their copt out... I feel cheated....

[Canxorna Ri]

Monomorfic wrote...
The fact that it's common in our times doesn't mean it's right. Also remember that not only critics liked those endings, but half of the players also liked them. At first i hated the fact that they destroyed the "magic" of this universe, but that's how legends are born, and Shepard became the biggest one ever.
CHANGEING ENDING IN A ALREADY PUBLISHED GAME WOULD BE A CIRME AGAINST HUMANITY.

By removing the naration and some scenes from Blade Runner, the director effectively 'changed' the ending, making the director's cut different from the theater release.

It is more common than you think.

[ile_1979]

Hermes74 wrote...

......

Marc Joly-Corcoran, director
Ph.D candidate in Film Studies

By the gods (reapers) man! Mass Effect is not a movie, or a book, or a radio drama! It's a game. And supposedly a role playing game. If it ain't then we have a different problem all together.....

[Hermes74]

ile_1979 wrote...

Hermes74 wrote...

......

Marc Joly-Corcoran, director
Ph.D candidate in Film Studies

By the gods (reapers) man! Mass Effect is not a movie, or a book, or a radio drama! It's a game. And supposedly a role playing game. If it ain't then we have a different problem all together.....

Thanks. I didn't know it was a game (...)  I just spent the last 100hrs without knowing that... gosh...
My point is : narratively speaking it makes no difference the kind of media the story uses. Idem for the reaction of movie fans, television show fans or a cinematic storydriven and caracter focus videogame fans. That is why I talked about the "participatory" concept from Jenkins.  And also, film studies and videogames studies are more and more blended together. At the University of Montreal, a new graduate program Videogame Studies just opened (not videogame design, but videogame studies - interested in how cinema and videogame are more and more interlaced).
The new target audience/gamers for those companies like Bioware will be people seeking narrative involvement in videogames (I hated Rage, FEAR, and all those shooting only experience, that's ok, others like it, but I prefered videogames like Heavy Rain, Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, Enslaved...).

Marc

[ChuckieJ]

I find it strange that this part of the forums is spoiler restricted and yet a reasoned response to Casey Hudson would inevitably involve spoilers.

That said for a few days I was upset until I found "The ____ Theory" and now I am happy and waiting to see what comes next. If the Theory is correct, I do believe there should have been a couple less subtle hints thrown into the game. As someone who tried to finish the game as best I could playing 2-4 hrs a night (usually tired) there was no way I would have picked up on the clues that were there. I merely found them oddities if I noticed them at all.

[Basher of Glory]

Monomorfic wrote...


What is missing in my opinion is some kind of prequel that --- introduce a syntetic race that poses a real threat to the galaxy's organic life, cause in this and even previous cycle there was none other than reapers, or show that the geth could be one (the geth as they ar now imo even if wanted coudn't win in an all out war against galaxy). 

I bet we will see something like this in a not so far future...

[SerBlackheart]

Modifié par SerBlackheart, 23 mars 2012 - 07:29 .

[LordDeimos4]

Well this sucks. I haven't played ME3 yet since i migrated from Xbox360 to PC for ME3, i have to replay the first two games. I have to say i do not like what i'm hearing about ME3. It looks like i'll just end up pissed off and angry like everyone else. Bioware promised:

Casey Hudson - ".......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. The endings have a lot more sophistication and variety in them.

"Mike Gamble - "There are many different endings. We wouldn't do it any other way. How could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets"

Bioware - "As Mass Effect 3 is the end of the planned trilogy, the developers are not constrained by the necessity of allowing the story to diverge, yet also continue into the next chapter. This will result in a story that diverges into wildly different conclusions based on the player's actions in the first two chapters."

And apparently this isn't what we get in ME3? Sad :/

[chammie]

I still believe that the ending was rushed to meet a release deadline. That's why its so disconcerting. Being someone who likes movies like Blade Runner, Galipolli, Das Boot I am certainly not put off by bittersweet endings or even depressing endings (when done well). This one just smacks of " Holy crap how are we going to wrap this up and release by end of Quarter 1" Honestly I am not sure what Bioware can do to change the ending or provide "Better closure". I guess they did give more than three endings technically. So we are left with these questions:

Will they provide a deeper epilogue ? Probably
Can the change the ending? I don't see how that's possible that would take months
Will they run with one of the other theories posted? I suppose that's possible since some could fit.
Based Rays response the no change option is off the table a this point.

I guess we will see...
.

[cwierzo]

Dear Mr. Casey Hudson

I dont know neither Mr. New York nor Ms. Penny and I dont care about their opinion.

I do know my borther, father, my wife and a bunch of my friends who has played Mass Effect since 2007 and all of them, including me, thinks that the ending is the most terrible thing that could have happened to this great trilogy.

[aries1001]

I have played The Witcher, the first game. While every line Geralt talked were written first, Geralt in that game spoke the first line, then the npc answered, then Geralt took over and carried on with the conversation himself, often for maybe a minute or two, but sometimes for as long as 2-3 or even 4 minutes, it seemed. Also, the combat in that game Witcher 1, were very action-oriented, it seems to be so, at least to me. And from what I've seen it is even more action-oriented in the second game? I'm not asking you for your opinjions in Witcher 1 or Witcher 2, but simply seek an answer to why is it OK that CD Project makes Geralt take away your choices in conversation while it not OK that Bioware does so. Bioware tells a story through the mechanichs, not the other way around, using the game mechanics to tell a story.

I know that some of you, a few or perhaps many, would like to see Bioware (still) use gaming mechanics to tell the story. But to me, Bioware's strength has always been their story telling, and the emotional impact they have created as well as the characters you've met from Jaheira and Khalid in BG1 to Youshimo in BG2 to Linu, Boddyknock and Tom in NWN, to Garrus, Wrex, Liara and all the other characters you meet in ME3. And who can forget Sten or Fenris in DA:O and DA2? The player can form a relationship with these characters through their player character; Bioware has devoted a lot of time and energy to evolve this aspect ofthe storytelling in their games. And to me, they have succeeded. They have even succeeded so well that people are in uproar over an ending to videogame, ME3, because they don't feel they have gotten the closure they needed, or because they really need to know what happened to their crew or for other and different reasons perhaps. This is what happens when you, as Bioware, tells a story through a game medium, through the game mechanics. If you do not make and ending (most) people are satisfied and fullfull their emotional needs, you have sort of done harm to yourself. (and the yourself here I'm talking about is of course - Bioware).

As for how this can be rectified or changed or altered, I don't know how. But I do know that it seems that Bioware chose to end the ME3 game the way that they did - deliberatey, it seems. Also, both Michael Gamble and Casey Hudson said in interviews before release that not everyone 'would be happy with the endings'. And this is certainly come true, it seems.

I don't know the reason behind why Bioware decided to end the game with a sort of ghost in the machine ending. The game ends (as I've seen it on youtube) storywise with the player/gamer not knowing what happens to the crew. In an analysis and interpretation of this say in a discussion about stories in games this would be called: the narrative structure ends openly e.g. players are left speculating as to what happens next. [On a similar, yet somewhat unrelated or related note, perhaps, the first Still Life (adventure) game also ended its narrative strcuture openly, leaving adventure gamers speculating a lot over the years....]

I'm fine with open endings in games, however even the endings have somehow to tie into the overall story arc in the game and make sense in the context of the game's inner workings. From what I've seen on youtube and heard and read on forum re: the endings to this, they really don't - make sense, I mean. Although they're beautifully crafted and well done, the endings doesn't seem to fit with the overall story arc for the game.

My biggest problem right now is the appereance of what I call a ghost in the machine that tells Shepards something about the Reapers. To me this ghost in the machine business introduces a religious overtone into the ME universe which really hasn't been there before - at all. It also seems contradictory to the lore in the game that ships would still fly in space wif certain parts that allowed this were destroyed and what about the fate of the Galaxy...

As for the whole art thing, yes we would defend Bioware when the government and certain tv-stations come knocking, and I, at least would defend Bioware's decisions to make the game they want to make and also the ending to the game, ME3, they want to make. However, I would also defend anyone's opinions on the endings as well as anyone's decisions not to buy the game, based in the info they now have. [I can only speak for myself, but when I finally got to play DA2 after months of harassing - yes - harassing posts etc. on this game, I've found that at least 80% of the claims against this game were hearsay, rumours and simpy not true...]

More generally, I think that most people are upset because they feel two things a) they didn't get the closure, the sense of fullfillment they wanted and they are confused and bewildered about the endings - since they seems to make no sense at all. As for the a) part in the above sentence, this is easily rectified; just add a boss fight. In an RPG players expect there to be a boss fight, so please give us one. Then, one of the endings could be the hero's tragic death, maybe even to save his crew. As for I really don't have a clue how this could be rectified or settled in a positive manner.

I know I've said this before, and now I'm going to say it again: Please Bioware think about your marketing strategies. Today I have again seen the big card board figure of Male Shepard at my local Blockbuster. It says Mass Effect 3 and above this it says: Take Earth Back and also in the bottom of this figure it says: Take Earth Back. Is it no wonder why people think that this game would be about taking earth back from the enemy approaching and hoping - sort of - that shepard would win - or at least die trying. I know marketing is supposed maybe not exactly tell the truth everytime, but this one really takes the cake - or to phrase it portalwise - the Cake is a Lie. You're smart, you can think for yourself as to what I'm trying to say here.

In short: Please tell the truth next time - or at least something that's close to the truth. Casey H. should have told people (via interviews etc) that the "endings might not be to everyone's liking as you have to make a tough choice at the end." And maybe this as well that "at the very end of the ME3, you'll have three tough choices. You must choose one." This way gamers would have been prepared for the three choices at the end. They might still have thought the ending made no sense at all - for various reasons - or disliked the open ending to the game - or disliked the ending for other reasons. But at least they would have known that they had to make a choice.

And come to think of it: maybe the consequnces of these choices aren't explained well enough in the game?

[Nordicus]

aries1001 wrote...

I'm not asking you for your opinjions in Witcher 1 or Witcher 2, but simply seek an answer to why is it OK that CD Project makes Geralt take away your choices in conversation while it not OK that Bioware does so. Bioware tells a story through the mechanichs, not the other way around, using the game mechanics to tell a story.

Easy:

Geralt is already an established character with his own character traits. In the game you're allowed to shift his priorities and political views a little, but it's still Geralt.

Wikipedia: "Geralt has been described as a character embodifying "the neo-liberal anti-politics" spirit of the Polish popular culture of the 1990s.[1]
He is a professional, carrying out his duties and unwilling to became
involved in the "petty quarrels" of the contemporary politics.[1]"

His first appearance was in The Last Wish, a book from 1993

Modifié par Nordicus, 24 mars 2012 - 12:32 .

[Akeashar]

Now that I've actually finished the game... I have no issues whatsoever with the ending I had. It fit perfectly with the feel and theme of the series. For me, it was a good ending, so... I 'm probably one of the few voices that is just completely happy with the ME3 story, and how it wraps up all the threads of the other two games of the series.

[Getorex]

Akeashar wrote...

Now that I've actually finished the game... I have no issues whatsoever with the ending I had. It fit perfectly with the feel and theme of the series. For me, it was a good ending, so... I 'm probably one of the few voices that is just completely happy with the ME3 story, and how it wraps up all the threads of the other two games of the series.

So who did you hate more, Garrus and Tali or the humans and Liara?  Which do you want dead on that planet they crashed on because one set or the other ARE dead.  

Nice closure there.

Also...Shepard spends the entire series seeking to save galactic civilization from the Reapers only to do their dirty work for them NO MATTER WHAT.  No relays, no galactic civilization.  Well done.  Shepard's a fricking retard...no wait, that would be the "creators" of the ending at Bioware.

[Getorex]

LordDeimos4 wrote...

Well this sucks. I haven't played ME3 yet since i migrated from Xbox360 to PC for ME3, i have to replay the first two games. I have to say i do not like what i'm hearing about ME3. It looks like i'll just end up pissed off and angry like everyone else. Bioware promised:

Casey Hudson - ".......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. The endings have a lot more sophistication and variety in them.

"Mike Gamble - "There are many different endings. We wouldn't do it any other way. How could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets"

Bioware - "As Mass Effect 3 is the end of the planned trilogy, the developers are not constrained by the necessity of allowing the story to diverge, yet also continue into the next chapter. This will result in a story that diverges into wildly different conclusions based on the player's actions in the first two chapters."

And apparently this isn't what we get in ME3? Sad :/

If it isn't too late, do NO buy Mass Effect 3.  Worst game in Bioware history.  If you care about Shepard and the Mass Effect story at all from 1 and 2, do NOT play 3.  It assassinates the entire series.  

[Akeashar]

Getorex wrote...

Spoilerific

No ME3 spoilers allowed. Besides, the ending I got had nothing to suggest that anyone was dead, beside those that I saw eat a bullet.

The trilogy was always about trying to avert the cycle of extinction, I've got closure to that.

Maybe DLC, or another game or series will follow what happens afterwards, its left room for more stories easily. But thats completely different from no closure. All the loose plotlines were nice and neatly tied up.

[Lincoln MuaDib]

As far as the statement that keeps being made by Execs in BioWare about how "75 Game Sites gave us a Perfect!"

Sure, 99% of this game is just Liquid Awesome. But it means nothing when examining criticism of the ending.


Let's just examine this oddness.

1. Did all 75 sites complete the Game? Really? Did they ALL spend 30+ hours completing ME3, let alone spend 60+ hours playing ME1 and ME2?

Because if they didn't complete the ending, they can't comment on it.
Let me be clear, those 75 reviews can all speak with authority about
gameplay- but they can't all speak with authority about the ending.
A film critic that admitted they didn't stay for the end of a movie- hell, even a film critic that admits they never watched the first 2 films of a trilogy before reviewing the third- would NEVER have any credibilty in the Media.

We don't allow film critics to do this- why Game reviwers?

So, we take out the opinion of, let us say, 50 of those reviewers.

So now we have 25 Reviewers.

So are we now saying that the opinion of 25 reviewers is more important than the opinion of thousands of disgruntled ME3 players?

Because a Game Reviewer IS NOT A BETTER EXPERT ON GAMES THAN A PLAYER.

Their JOB is NOT to KNOW MORE about games than Gamers.

Their JOB is to know it FIRST, and give an OPINION as to whether they think the game is worth a purchase.

When we buy, on their recommendation, then get dissatisfied, WE have the right to have an opinion.

Normally, when, say, Film reviewers give a positive review on films that bomb, thety shrug and say, "Hey, just my opinion, you don't have to agree."

Yet certain sites *coughs* IGN *coughs*

Seem to think that it must be the unhappy ME3ers that are WRONG!


"Oh ho ho, no no! You are wrong, Plebeian!"




A FAR BETTER tack for the exceutives to take would have been to say,

"We understand that many many people have hated the ending. We recognise that. We also recognise that many many others love it. We seek to keep everyone happy."

After all, if we seek only to placate the majority and ignore the minority, we're kinda setting a dangeroud precedent.

"How many Quarians are there?"
"About 6 million, Shepard."
"And how many Geth?"
"About 60 million, Ma'am."
"Oh, so the Quarians are in the minority? **** 'em, then. Let 'em die."



I have no disrespect for those that love the endings. I wish you well.

For this reason, I do not want patches that changes the ending, such that the current ending no longer exists.

Let it be DLC.

Let there be CHOICE.

After all, isn't tha what Mass Effect is all about?