276 réponses à ce sujet

[Aligalipe]

Stanley Woo wrote...

It is a bit of a double standard, don't you think, to suggest, request, and demand change so the game fits what you want the game to be, and then turn around and make fun of or belittle those who disagree with you?

Play nice, please.

With all due respect sir,
we give logical reasons for our requests, we don't make fun of or belittle those who disagree with us, we counter their arguements with ours (respectfully), most of those who like the endings think it is indoctrination anyway. We belittle those who insults us and calls us haters with hive mind, without managing to counter our arguements. Personally I think those type of guys and
so-called reviewers are pathetic. If someone likes the endings but can't counter our arguements are fine. No- problem, they don't have to. But if they start to insult us, we have a right to defend ourselfves and we can get rightfully angry. It's true that there are those who insult others who simply like the endings and call them stupid, but they are minority and most of the rude ones are on the "we like the endings side". I wish everyone could argue without using insults, but it' s the way of life..

I hope you take the time to read my comment. Respectfully a fan.

[ZodiEmish]

I find the review not to be that bad. What does bug me is his blog about the ending. He compare us to a hive mind, and in a Passive aggressive way saying that were all demanding a new ending because it is an internet fad that is in trend right now.

Which to that I say.. You Sir don't understand us.

As for belittling. When I watched the review. I didn't see him in anyway attacking us. ( maybe I missed something or can't understand his art ) but after watching his blog about the endings I have to say I agree. He was aggressive against those who did not like the ending.

So I can't agree that it is belittling if your aggressive first. Simple as that.

That being said some people can be out right mean to those who like the ending, and that is not okay, but in this case there is no double standard. He took a swipe and they responded.

[Leonia]

The Angry One wrote...

Let's be clear here, anger at liking the endings is directed mainly at:

- People who claim the endings are too clever for us regular people to understand.
- People who say they liked the endings, therefore no new endings must be added.

The first type are outright insulting, the second type strike me as incredibly selfish.

And demanding the changing of the endings to a piece of fiction you did not actually write is NOT selfish?

[majormajormmajor]

The Angry One wrote...

Let's be clear here, anger at liking the endings is directed mainly at:

- People who claim the endings are too clever for us regular people to understand.
- People who say they liked the endings, therefore no new endings must be added.

The first type are outright insulting, the second type strike me as incredibly selfish.

Not to mention they've been relying on character assasination for want of any argument

Both on BSN and in the media

[The Angry One]

DemGeth wrote...

There is no away from black holes that the point of the IFF.  It was just a forced money shot that you have to shrug your shoulders at and move on.  

Hence, contrivance at worst. But no, the black holes were in the direction of the Collector Base, not away from it.
The Reaper IFF had little to do with the actual black holes, it was to do with the fact that without the IFF you would smash right into the debris already present.

But let's say it was a silly scene. If that was the sole problem with ME3's Normandy scene it would be okay, the major problem is it's completely out of character for Joker, and the aforemenetioned resurrections/teleportations.

[DemGeth]

The Angry One wrote...

Let's be clear here, anger at liking the endings is directed mainly at:

- People who claim the endings are too clever for us regular people to understand.
- People who say they liked the endings, therefore no new endings must be added.

The first type are outright insulting, the second type strike me as incredibly selfish.

If your happy with the ending than dev time/money going into something you aren't interested in isn't selfish.  

Just as someone not interested in multiplayer has a right to be tiffed if they release dlc map/skins instead of new missions/content.

[The Angry One]

leonia42 wrote...

And demanding the changing of the endings to a piece of fiction you did not actually write is NOT selfish?

This is a videogame. Shepard is as much our character as theirs.

Moreover, we were promised we would affect the ending.
Many of us, myself included, preordered the game based on this promise.

[sircaren]

leonia42 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Let's be clear here, anger at liking the endings is directed mainly at:

- People who claim the endings are too clever for us regular people to understand.
- People who say they liked the endings, therefore no new endings must be added.

The first type are outright insulting, the second type strike me as incredibly selfish.

And demanding the changing of the endings to a piece of fiction you did not actually write is NOT selfish?

Video games are an interactive excersise between developer and player.  Not a book.  It's an entirely new entertainment medium, and old thought processes need to adapt.

Or at least I hope they do.

[mokponobi]

leonia42 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Let's be clear here, anger at liking the endings is directed mainly at:

- People who claim the endings are too clever for us regular people to understand.
- People who say they liked the endings, therefore no new endings must be added.

The first type are outright insulting, the second type strike me as incredibly selfish.

And demanding the changing of the endings to a piece of fiction you did not actually write is NOT selfish?

No one is demanding a change, only additional endings and/or fixing what doesn't make sense about the current ones...I could do a list but there are plenty out there already.

[Lightice_av]

Not to mention they've been relying on character assasination for want of any argument

Both on BSN and in the media

Exactly what is this supposed to mean? I've presented numerous arguments for why the ending is, while not entirely without problems, thematically and stylistically appropriate for the series, and expressed an opinion that the Indoctrination cop-out is the worst decision that Bioware could make at this point.

[The Angry One]

DemGeth wrote...
If your happy with the ending than dev time/money going into something you aren't interested in isn't selfish.  

Just as someone not interested in multiplayer has a right to be tiffed if they release dlc map/skins instead of new missions/content.

If you don't even have the empathy to notice how this ending is a stab in the kidneys to many of us then I disagree.
You have your ending, let us have ours.

[Jagri]

The Angry One wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

And demanding the changing of the endings to a piece of fiction you did not actually write is NOT selfish?

This is a videogame. Shepard is as much our character as theirs.

Moreover, we were promised we would affect the ending.
Many of us, myself included, preordered the game based on this promise.

I would have to agree it isn't selfish to expect something promised and was paid for based on it.

[Kloborgg711]

leonia42 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Let's be clear here, anger at liking the endings is directed mainly at:

- People who claim the endings are too clever for us regular people to understand.
- People who say they liked the endings, therefore no new endings must be added.

The first type are outright insulting, the second type strike me as incredibly selfish.

And demanding the changing of the endings to a piece of fiction you did not actually write is NOT selfish?

No, requesting the product I was advertised and expected to get is not selfish, it's my responsibility as a consumer.

[Leonia]

But I'm selfish for liking the ending as is.

How do I defend against that.

[Troubleshooter11]

Lugaidster wrote...


I actually believe that destroying the relays was ok though. Why fight for the chance to shape your future if you're going to depend on other's (reaper) technology.

Depending on the technology of others is not a bad thing. You could say the Roman Empire was one of the biggest positive influences in our history when it comes to math, art, philosophy, law, order, science and technology.

And the Romans were brilliant 'scavengers' of good ideas and technology, hell even the famous iconic "roman sword", is called Gladius Hispania. A sword originally used by iberians in spain! The romans just took a good idea or existing technology and build it into their society.

You might think that disposing of the relays might 'free' people from the influence of the Reapers and develop along their own paths, but with mass effect technology already in existence and use, they would just have to 'reinvent the wheel' so to speak. Might aswell just keep using the relays and keep the galactic civilization that has been in place rather than throwing it all out the window and causing massive chaos, misery and strife.

Just my opinion of course, no need to go spreading it around as Joker would say.

[Zoso Delta]

Stanley Woo wrote...

It is a bit of a double standard, don't you think, to suggest, request, and demand change so the game fits what you want the game to be, and then turn around and make fun of or belittle those who disagree with you?

Play nice, please.

We just want the ending to make sense not happy/artsy whatever adjective. Most people would have tolerated the ending if it at least seemed like there was some effort in to making things make sense and a 2 minute epilogue. But the writers just had to go all 2001 phaux artsy on us in the end for no good reason. 

But this guy's opinion is null for all the reasons posted. Someone can try as hard as they want to convince me that Kesha is better than Chopin but they're still wrong. 

[mokponobi]

leonia42 wrote...

But I'm selfish for liking the ending as is.

How do I defend against that.

You don't need to, you just need to play the game and enjoy the end.

[DemGeth]

The Angry One wrote...

DemGeth wrote...
If your happy with the ending than dev time/money going into something you aren't interested in isn't selfish.  

Just as someone not interested in multiplayer has a right to be tiffed if they release dlc map/skins instead of new missions/content.

If you don't even have the empathy to notice how this ending is a stab in the kidneys to many of us then I disagree.
You have your ending, let us have ours.

I don't mind if they do ending dlc I just wouldn't pay for it.  

I was speaking in generalties; just like I don't mind them working on multiplayer dlc.  

I mean I have he gamer tag glitch, I can't even get to the start screen.  To me you're all selfish 

Modifié par DemGeth, 19 mars 2012 - 05:01 .

[UltraBulldozer]

Why are you guys bringing attention to him then? Just stop feeding the troll, he wants those views and those responses. All this does is hurt the cause because it gets people to think we will jump on the chance to make other people accept our view on the ending.

[Edje Edgar]

Stanley Woo wrote...

It is a bit of a double standard, don't you think, to suggest, request, and demand change so the game fits what you want the game to be, and then turn around and make fun of or belittle those who disagree with you?

Play nice, please.

So, if you were at the baker and you'd ask the baker if he could make that specific kind of bread he used to make. Just because you love it so.

And some random customer next to you steps forward and says, "no don't do that I like all the bread you have just fine."

Even though making that bread you like won't change anything to the bakers current selection anyway and nobody and nothing forces the other guy to buy the kind of bread you like. You wouldn't kindly ask him to go away?

[Skeejee]

I'm sorry, but Woo IS right. Just because I personally feel there's more to the ending that we've seen and will be pretty disappointed if that's it, doesn't give me a right to shout down and decry anyone who *did* enjoy the ending.

Some people will find it's a satisfying ending. Let them

[Lugaidster]

Troubleshooter11 wrote...

Lugaidster wrote...


I actually believe that destroying the relays was ok though. Why fight for the chance to shape your future if you're going to depend on other's (reaper) technology.

Depending on the technology of others is not a bad thing. You could say the Roman Empire was one of the biggest positive influences in our history when it comes to math, art, philosophy, law, order, science and technology.

And the Romans were brilliant 'scavengers' of good ideas and technology, hell even the famous iconic "roman sword", is called Gladius Hispania. A sword originally used by iberians in spain! The romans just took a good idea or existing technology and build it into their society.

You might think that disposing of the relays might 'free' people from the influence of the Reapers and develop along their own paths, but with mass effect technology already in existence and use, they would just have to 'reinvent the wheel' so to speak. Might aswell just keep using the relays and keep the galactic civilization that has been in place rather than throwing it all out the window and causing massive chaos, misery and strife.

Just my opinion of course, no need to go spreading it around as Joker would say.

I'm trying to follow the narrative of the story here. I you're going to destroy the reapers, I think it's not a bad narrative decision to destroy everything constructed by them, IE citadel and relays.

[Troubleshooter11]

leonia42 wrote...

But I'm selfish for liking the ending as is.

How do I defend against that.

You are not selfish or dumb or simple or whatever for liking the ending as it is. And you have no, or should not have any need to 'defend yourself'. Your opinion is your opinion and more power to you if you found the ME3 ending satisfying and worth the money.

Some people like Harry Potter, some people hate it
Some people like Lord of the Rings, some people hate it
Some people like Star Wars, some people hate it
Some people like Twilig....nvm, everyone hates that piece of junk...

Anyhow, most of the people playing Mass Effect 3 dislike the ending and feel they walk away unsatisfied. As a business, should Bioware shrug and continue counting our money? Or should they atleast scratch their heads and learn from it, knowing the customers will remember and not spend their money as eagerly.

[The Angry One]

leonia42 wrote...

But I'm selfish for liking the ending as is.

How do I defend against that.

Stop misinterpreting us. We have not said that.

[Kyrick]

leonia42 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Let's be clear here, anger at liking the endings is directed mainly at:

- People who claim the endings are too clever for us regular people to understand.
- People who say they liked the endings, therefore no new endings must be added.

The first type are outright insulting, the second type strike me as incredibly selfish.

And demanding the changing of the endings to a piece of fiction you did not actually write is NOT selfish?

Not when the piece of fiction is directly stated to be a collaborative effort between the fans and developers.  They've stated countless times how the fans and players are in partnership with the developers as to how the story played out.

Furthermore, when you claim things as the developers have (like no 'a,b,c endings') and then renege on that, despite continuing to say it despite knowing while giving the interview that such is clearly not the case, then that is outright deception.

If Mass Effect 3 was a piece of written fiction that was simply put out for people to read, they could do what they want with it.  But it clearly isn't and has been admitted as such by the very developers we're demanding a new ending from.

If somebody turns in an incomplete product after claiming that the product is, in fact, complete, then consumers of that product have EVERY right, both morally and legally, to demand that they get their money's worth.

The claim that the ending satisfied the statements that they've made is so patently false that a five year old could see the disconnect, hence the massive and widespread outrage that people are voicing.  They are not being 'selfish', they are being simple consumers of a product; they were promised one thing and something different was delivered.  They wish to have what they were promised.

While nobody ever directly stated that the ending would be a work of classical relevance, people did come to expect an ending worthy of the name, not hastily thrown together rubbish as was given.  Especially jarring is the fact that, for the past two games (and much of the third), the story is well written.  It is emotionally satisfying, full of choices as they claimed, and morally relevant.  The game was, up until the end, a magnificent piece of gaming.  There are quibbles, but nothing game-breaking.  But the ending directly invalidates the stuff that came before it.