96 réponses à ce sujet

[Super.Sid]

Some more truth for this

Tweet tweet

Mike Laidlaw ‏ @Mike_Laidlaw

Reply
Retweet
Favorite
· Open

TL;DR2 - We'll be -very- actively looking for feedback on the next DA title, and will be showing the game more than before as it develops.
Retweeted by Michael Gamble

niels bekkers[/b]
‏
@nielsbekkers88
Open
[/list]@Mike_Laidlaw I might be intrested if you give me "black-on-white" writing with signatures that you wont pull a "Mass Effect 3" ending



Mike Laidlaw[/b]
‏@Mike_Laidlaw
Close
[/list]@nielsbekkers88 We're certainly looking closely at the feedback from both ME and DA. Not quite ink on paper, but close, I hope.

Hide conversation

9:10 PM - 19 Mar 12
via web
· Details
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
[/list]Jake Peattie[/b]
‏
@JakePT
Open
[/list]Mike_Laidlaw From the outside it looks like BioWare isn't being given the time it needs to make BioWare games.



Mike Laidlaw[/b]
‏@Mike_Laidlaw
Close
[/list]@JakePT Totally understandable concern. I can't go into details, but this one's actually about ensuring we're better than good.

Hide conversation

11:55 PM - 19 Mar 12
via Tweetbot for iOS
· Details
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
[/list]

[Alithinos]

Why all this speculation ?
It is clearly stated that there WAS another ending,one that was written with Drew Karpyshyn where the game would end after a boss fight with the Illusive Man in his base,and that Mac Walters decided to change it because it was "too gamey" so he re-wrote it and added everything after the Illusive Man's base,and that the game was delayed because of this.

[Rockpopple]

Speculating as to why endings were speculative makes me speculate a spatula to the brain.

[Super.Sid]

The truth is already out in Final Hours so there is no speculation. You are making no sense at all.Are you some PR guy trying to flame-bait

Modifié par Super.Sid, 19 mars 2012 - 07:12 .

[Getorex]

darkshadow136 wrote...

I'm not sure on the rushing thing, considering for me at least the rest of the game seemed pretty solid and polished, they ending just seemed like it was written by a different team altogether and a bad story writing team.

I really don't see the logic in why they wrote the ending they did, but I haven't seen the logic in much Bioware has done in the last few years.

I think things are fairly simple.  A LOT of good people who worked ME1 bailed out afterwards when EA came along to swallow the soul of Bioware.  More people remaining from ME1 bailed during or after ME2 (it shows).  Finally, with ME3 there were just the dregs.  The people who care about paychecks and little else.  The people who didn't have the original vision and inspiration.  Also, I think (and this is clear) that Bioware developers succumbed to group think.  They got into a self-referential, uncritical self-congratulatory spiral and things went from there. 

We see the result in the last 10 dying minutes of the entire Mass Effect franchise (the ending of ME3).

[Getorex]

Rockpopple wrote...

Speculating as to why endings were speculative makes me speculate a spatula to the brain.

Perhaps you should speculate a speculum.

[Tirigon]

Super.Sid wrote...

The truth is already out in Final Hours so there is no speculation. You are making no sense at all.Are you some PR guy trying to flame-bait

The title actually stated that it was certain. Evil Chris Priestly changed it because apparently the title was misleading:

Chris Priestly wrote...

 Changed the title as it was misleading.

[terralax]

This all reminds me of I game I liked while play until it fell apart: KOTOR 2. I never thought that that debacle could be topped... The ending to ME3 is the ending to some other game, and really is not related to anything that went before in series or, worse still, ME3. I hated DE:HR's ending.

[kidbd15]

Leaked script shouldn't have changed ending... people's own fault for looking at spoilers

[terralax]

Leaked script had the same endings but with less detail.

[Agent_Dark_]

Rafe34 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

BioWare made better games before they were with EA.

And so did every company that has ever been with EA.

That would be interesting.

To go to all companies that EA took over and see if a single one of them actually put out better games after they were taken over.

1) DICE.

Yes, Battlefield 1942 was an excellent game.  But Battlefield 2 was truly excellent.  Since then, notable games have been Bad Company 1 and 2, Mirror's Edge and Battlefield 3 as well as a couple of impressive game engines with Frostbite 1 and Frostbite 2.

2) Maxis.

There were pretty much a one hit wonder with SimCity until EA aquired them in 1997.  Now they develop the best selling computer games of all time - The Sims Franchise.

[Kanner]

There was an EA investor call that I listened to where the CEO talked about focusing more closely on fewer franchises and reducing development times to get games from the various franchises released more often (ideally a new title or expansion every year).

The ME3 team had less than two years to get ME3 done, for simultaneous release across three platforms.

While this doesn't in any way explain or excuse the inanity of the actual ME3 ending, it's certainly a big *hint* that the people in charge are less than fully clued up about the game development processes - in particular being concerned with hitting release timetables at the expense of maintaining quality is just a deathmark in the entertainment industry.

[streamlock]

Well, yeah it was rushed. If you read up on some of that app that goes over some of the final days of the ME3 dev, even creatively wise-yes it was.

But, it was super crunch time. This is the part where everyone and everything is rushed, and everyone is rushing. Because they were kinda playing it as it goes, and the ending was one of the last things to get done, it got rushed.

I call it the Obsidian complex. They have a hard time closing the deal because, well they do the ending last. Out of time, out of money. (well, not out of money in Bioware's case) To avoid that dev's really need to have a set game plan on how the story/game will unfold and the ending should be one of the 1st things to get worked on.

To schedule the work on the finale', the finale of the damn trilogy at that, during the worst part of the crunch cycle is insane if you ask me. Bad management and planning. Bioware should know better.

[gabe2gg]

And people thought I was lying with EA's plan for a yearly Dragon Age with MP.

[terralax]

There is a lot to be said for not creating your game in chronological order. As someone who writes professionally for a living, I find it much more useful to create the start and ending first before moving on to the main body thus both can be easily tweaked as the main body is put together. The thing is that BW is usually very good at this, just look at the endings for DA or some of their earlier games.

[Ieldra]

ringdrossel wrote...
out of curiosity - was the leaked ending better then the released one?

Yes. The mass relays were only destroyed in the Destroy ending and the description of the Synthesis was more vague, but much less retarded.

[RockSW]

you know i have a feeling bioware will make it right. i look forward to all the ****s out there from gaming sites who **** on us trying to backpedal.

Modifié par RockSW, 20 mars 2012 - 07:05 .

[Han Shot First]

Metalrocks wrote...

leaked ending or not, they shoulnd have changed it. not every single one checked out the leaks. i dint.

I agree.

If true, what was the purpose of changing the ending? To give a new ending to people who actively sought out spoilers in the first place? Because the only way the ending got spoiled, was if you actually tried to find content relating to the leaked script.

[PiEman]

coles4971 wrote...

Well they rushed out the ending because some idiots leaked the story before release.

No way can Bioware take all the blame for this.

No, but they can sure as hell take the blame for handing it as poorly as they did.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

When we finally get the ending, everything else is just going to be cherries. Bioware's said we're getting a full year of DLC for this game, with the multiplayer and the fact that they arent making 4 at the same time as DLC, it means more time for content, hopefully we get a TON of extra content for this game that makes it just an amazing product all around when all is said and done.

[Malchat]

There is plenty of circumstantial evidence that the production team had to cut corners to meet release and there is no denying it impacted the execution of the endgame.

Choices, consequences and cinematics that seemed logical, even obvious, to include just aren't there.

People who play through the game casually (and the way this game was positioned, it drew in a lot of casual players) might not notice the seams. We know from ME2 statistics that most players just go through it once and many never finish at all.

I also suspect a lot of professional reviewers just barreled through it (understandable, given the time between their review copy arriving and the release), so didn't really stop to analyze the ending. On top of that, game endings are universally dire, so maybe they feel that Bioware did just enough to exceed expectations and add a little depth to the game.

But to the hardcore fans, those who have been playing for many years, the missed opportunities and inconsistencies in the endgame are not just jarring, they are aggravating.

It's important to keep emphasizing the rushed and half-hearted nature of the endgame, because it counters many of the arguments that people use to criticize 'Retake Mass Effect'.

The heart of the debate not really Bioware's artistic vision clashing with fan expectations; this is a red herring and one that, understandably, has a lot of pundits, game developers and players come down on the side of Bioware.

It's really about Bioware fostering a culture where corporate demands compromised the delivery of an endgame with a coherent narrative, dramatic closure and respect for player agency.

The endgame was always going to be a compromise; many of us just weren't prepared for the extent of the compromise... and are calling Bioware out on it.

If you add your voice to the debate, please remember the red herring I mentioned above: the people debating you have very valid concerns about artistic integrity and setting a bad precedent. Their arguments are not wrong and deserve a civil and reasoned response. But that shouldn't distract you from the key points:

• Mass Effect was supposed to have an ending worthy of the trilogy
  
  
• Corporate pressure meant Bioware couldn't deliver on this.
  
  
• Fan pressure may give them the room and resources they need.
  
  
• We're doing this for the artists as much as for ourselves.

Hold the line.

Modifié par Malchat, 20 mars 2012 - 08:46 .

[Uneazy]

EA's **** regime Motto: Recreate games for the casual gamer that's willing to spend money for content, instead of earning it by being good at the game. Make game autopilot itself, so that casual customer feels stimulation while pressing only 1 button. Make good preorder incentives so that casual gamer pre-orders and feels special with his 5 minute thrown together in-game clothing. Make ads that make the game look amazing, but feature absolutely no real gameplay. And last but not least, place the blame on the developers under our control, even though we made them finish the game in half the time it should've taken.

TL;DR

http://gifsoup.com/i...?id=3530924&t=o GIFSoup