197 réponses à ce sujet

[Abirn]

I take issue with his number 3 response. The entire industry is controlled by advertising from big name publishers and pressure from them. He knows it, we know it, and everybody knows it. There is no shortage of evidence available out there to back that up either.

[The Razman]

Abirn wrote...

I take issue with his number 3 response. The entire industry is controlled by advertising from big name publishers and pressure from them. He knows it, we know it, and everybody knows it. There is no shortage of evidence available out there to back that up either.

He works in the industry, therefore he personally is a corrupt scumbag who's being paid off?

You don't see how he might find that offensive?

[SpideyKnight]

This is another example of the less you know, the more you just ignore the stuff that doesn't make sense, the better the ending is for you. But enjoyment of an ending shouldn't be predicated on ignorance and self delusion.

[InvincibleHero]

piemanz wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

The Razman wrote...

And incidentally ... I agree with him when it comes to "I don't really know about the Normandy. Does it really matter? I was too busy enjoying the game to care."

Also BW can explain what happened without altering the game. If they did that closed all plot holes by having Mac say this is why they did this and it makes sense in the context of their universe would that satisfy the new ending people?

Apparently not.

So its not on the table even though they claim to want such closure?

[Abirn]

The Razman wrote...

Abirn wrote...

I take issue with his number 3 response. The entire industry is controlled by advertising from big name publishers and pressure from them. He knows it, we know it, and everybody knows it. There is no shortage of evidence available out there to back that up either.

He works in the industry, therefore he personally is a corrupt scumbag who's being paid off?

You don't see how he might find that offensive?

I never said paid off.  Succumbing to pressure is another form of corruption which is much more common in the gaming industry for "journalists"  Look at the guy who got fired for giving a big budget game a bad review.  Then there is Duke Nukem Forever, remember that twitter incident.  There is plenty of corruption to go around, and it doesn't always involve direct payments.

[The Razman]

SpideyKnight wrote...

This is another example of the less you know, the more you just ignore the stuff that doesn't make sense, the better the ending is for you. But enjoyment of an ending shouldn't be predicated on ignorance and self delusion.

Or it's another example of how the more disappointed you were with a sad, bleak ending, the more you try to scapegoat plotholes which in a different situation wouldn't bother people so much that they "ruin" the ending for them. But enjoyment of an ending shouldn't be predicated on whether the emotions you feel are happy or sad.

Works both ways, that logic.

[The Razman]

Abirn wrote...

The Razman wrote...

Abirn wrote...

I take issue with his number 3 response. The entire industry is controlled by advertising from big name publishers and pressure from them. He knows it, we know it, and everybody knows it. There is no shortage of evidence available out there to back that up either.

He works in the industry, therefore he personally is a corrupt scumbag who's being paid off?

You don't see how he might find that offensive?

I never said paid off.  Succumbing to pressure is another form of corruption which is much more common in the gaming industry for "journalists"  Look at the guy who got fired for giving a big budget game a bad review.  Then there is Duke Nukem Forever, remember that twitter incident.  There is plenty of corruption to go around, and it doesn't always involve direct payments.

Good. You're still assuming that anything that was said was the result of "corruption". And I somehow doubt you were saying the same when the same exact publication (RPS) was posting an article last week which slammed the endings.

Point is ... the guy is right. Slurring his reputation just because he has an opinion different to you is disgraceful. And you should be ashamed for doing so.

[kbct]

The Razman wrote...

He works in the industry, therefore he personally is a corrupt scumbag who's being paid off?

You don't see how he might find that offensive?

Something strange is going on when there are so many perfect professional reviews. I think BioWare touted there were over 70 perfect reviews. There is huge disparity between user reviews and professional reviews. Something doesn't smell right.

Modifié par kbct, 20 mars 2012 - 02:55 .

[Parrk]

It must be stated that John Walker is stating a counter argument, and that another side of the issue has also been posted to the site. In the interest of full disclosure, it was not in support of the Take Back players views either, but it did serve to illustrate that he is not the singular voice of RPS.

I read RPS a couple times a week and find that I often disagree with him, but I respect him as legitimate

[The Razman]

kbct wrote...

The Razman wrote...

He works in the industry, therefore he personally is a corrupt scumbag who's being paid off?

You don't see how he might find that offensive?

Something strange is going on when there are so many perfect professional reviews. I think BioWare touted there were over 70 perfect reviews. There is huge disparity between user reviews and professional reviews. Something doesn't smell right.

That's not an excuse. Rock Paper Shotgun is a reputable site. It's proven many times in the past that it's not subject to corruption. It's even posted articles about how bad the ending is in this past week. To attempt to tarnish one man's reputation for posting his opinion on how he liked the ending ... there's no excuse for that. None.

[kbct]

The Razman wrote...

Point is ... the guy is right.

It's his opinion. There is no right and wrong. He either liked it or he didn't.

If people listen to the professional reviews and not the user reviews or word of mouth, then Mass Effect will continue to do well. If not, it could end up following a sales curve similar to DA2.

[piemanz]

kbct wrote...

The Razman wrote...

He works in the industry, therefore he personally is a corrupt scumbag who's being paid off?

You don't see how he might find that offensive?

Something strange is going on when there are so many perfect professional reviews. I think BioWare touted there were over 70 perfect reviews. There is huge disparity between user reviews and professional reviews. Something doesn't smell right.

Probably has something to do with prefessional reviewers not scoring the game based on the last 10 minutes...

[TAPyratic]

He4vyMet4l wrote...

That is hardly the point.

The ME universe gets destroyed. It really doesn't matter what choices we made during the previous games, if no-one is left to enjoy them. The relays explode, and only a handful of individuals are left stranded on a planet.

That is how life after ME3 continued, A new beginning, with nothing to show for it. Everything we did was meaningless with the ending we got.

Let me put it this way: Lets say you are having a chess match with someone you don't know. You two are having a blast, with brilliant moves from both of you. Eventually you lose.

You may try again, saying to yourself that was fun and one hell of a match.

Would you try again if you knew that person was the best chess player in the world, and you have no way in heaven to win?

Edit:

I must say I believe mose of us loved everything prior to the end. I myself think ME3 is the best gaming experience I ever had (probably alot more than gaming alone). So that article is missing the point imo.

Without trying to give any spoilers away.  I like the idea of struggle presented to the survivors at the end of the game.  It feels like every choice you made as Shepard has created a Legacy for the subsequent Mass Effect games to come.  With all the variables at play, it has created a very interesting and promising starting point for a sequel to the Mass Effect series that won't have the same protagonist as the first three.  That seems like a hard thing to do, but with this type of ending, it feels now in the realm of possibility.  

While I can understand the need for immediate gratification for your choices, it falls under the same paradigm as the choice between $100 now, or $200 a year from now.  Most people would take the $100 now even though it would be more worth it to wait and get the $200 a year from now.  After ME1, EA had stated that Mass Effect would be a long running series.  With that in mind, I feel that closure on the results of your actions would be a much bigger reward as the starting point for ME4 than just a DLC for ME3.

[fwc577]

The Razman wrote...

And incidentally ... I agree with him when it comes to "I don't really know about the Normandy. Does it really matter? I was too busy enjoying the game to care."

Then thats fine, but don't come to a place where a lot of people disagree with you and try to shove  our vews into thier faces.

I just came across this post and it is one of the best things I've seen written regarding the ending.

http://social.biowar.../index/10022779

[kbct]

The Razman wrote...

kbct wrote...

Something strange is going on when there are so many perfect professional reviews. I think BioWare touted there were over 70 perfect reviews. There is huge disparity between user reviews and professional reviews. Something doesn't smell right.

That's not an excuse. Rock Paper Shotgun is a reputable site. It's proven many times in the past that it's not subject to corruption. It's even posted articles about how bad the ending is in this past week. To attempt to tarnish one man's reputation for posting his opinion on how he liked the ending ... there's no excuse for that. None.

Sure, you have to look at each case-by-case. I bought ME3 because I thought BioWare had a great track record so I can understand the same thing for a reviewer. However, when you look at ALL the professional reviews and ALL the user reviews, something is wrong.

The sales over the next month will show if people believe the professional reviews or the customer reviews.

[kbct]

piemanz wrote...

Probably has something to do with prefessional reviewers not scoring the game based on the last 10 minutes...

How would you rate ME3 if it made you NOT want to play ME1, ME2, or ME3 again?

[The Razman]

kbct wrote...

The Razman wrote...

kbct wrote...

Something strange is going on when there are so many perfect professional reviews. I think BioWare touted there were over 70 perfect reviews. There is huge disparity between user reviews and professional reviews. Something doesn't smell right.

That's not an excuse. Rock Paper Shotgun is a reputable site. It's proven many times in the past that it's not subject to corruption. It's even posted articles about how bad the ending is in this past week. To attempt to tarnish one man's reputation for posting his opinion on how he liked the ending ... there's no excuse for that. None.

Sure, you have to look at each case-by-case. I bought ME3 because I thought BioWare had a great track record so I can understand the same thing for a reviewer. However, when you look at ALL the professional reviews and ALL the user reviews, something is wrong.

The sales over the next month will show if people believe the professional reviews or the customer reviews.

Again, good for you. What you're saying is no argument relevent to this, though.

You do this thing where you say "I'm just going to leave this FACT here" ... ignoring that the fact you've left is completely irrelevent to what's being discussed. In this case, we're saying "John Walker isn't corrupt", and you're saying "it's a FACT there's a problem with most journalists. Obviously, work by a case by case basis, so not saying anything about Jonh Walker ... but if you look at the FACTS, everyone like John Walker is corrupt, and that's a FACT. Just sayin'."

Unless you have something to say about John Walker or Rock Paper Shotgun specifically ... your "just sayin'" statements are meaningless, and border on just plain slurs on his credibility.

[zambingo]

He4vyMet4l wrote...

The ME universe gets destroyed. It really doesn't matter what choices we made during the previous games, if no-one is left to enjoy them. The relays explode, and only a handful of individuals are left stranded on a planet.

That's one perception. It doesn't make it true.

Modifié par zambingo, 20 mars 2012 - 03:24 .

[kbct]

The Razman wrote...

You do this thing where you say "I'm just going to leave this FACT here" ... ignoring that the fact you've left is completely irrelevent to what's being discussed. In this case, we're saying "John Walker isn't corrupt", and you're saying "it's a FACT there's a problem with most journalists. Obviously, work by a case by case basis, so not saying anything about Jonh Walker ... but if you look at the FACTS, everyone like John Walker is corrupt, and that's a FACT. Just sayin'."

Unless you have something to say about John Walker or Rock Paper Shotgun specifically ... your "just sayin'" statements are meaningless, and border on just plain slurs on his credibility.

Gotta let others decide if it's relevant or not. I know you and other pro-ending guys here will never change your mind. I'm not even trying to do so.

There is good reason to view professional reviewers with skepticism.

Modifié par kbct, 20 mars 2012 - 03:27 .

[The Razman]

kbct wrote...

The Razman wrote...

You do this thing where you say "I'm just going to leave this FACT here" ... ignoring that the fact you've left is completely irrelevent to what's being discussed. In this case, we're saying "John Walker isn't corrupt", and you're saying "it's a FACT there's a problem with most journalists. Obviously, work by a case by case basis, so not saying anything about Jonh Walker ... but if you look at the FACTS, everyone like John Walker is corrupt, and that's a FACT. Just sayin'."

Unless you have something to say about John Walker or Rock Paper Shotgun specifically ... your "just sayin'" statements are meaningless, and border on just plain slurs on his credibility.

Gotta let others decide if it's relevant or not. I know you and other pro-ending guys here will never change your mind. I'm not even trying to do so.

There is good reason to view professional reviewers with skepticism.

That's not what you're doing. You're trying to slur by association. Posting biased things all the time and then saying "I'm just letting people decide, man!", and then making personal attacks when you get called out ... is not good. It's like the episode of South Park where Cartman is "just asking questions".

Anyway, moving on.

[kbct]

The Razman wrote...

That's not what you're doing. You're trying to slur by association. Posting biased things all the time and then saying "I'm just letting people decide, man!", and then making personal attacks when you get called out ... is not good. It's like the episode of South Park where Cartman is "just asking questions".

I present. Others decide. It's simple.

[He4vyMet4l]

zambingo wrote...

He4vyMet4l wrote...

The ME universe gets destroyed. It really doesn't matter what choices we made during the previous games, if no-one is left to enjoy them. The relays explode, and only a handful of individuals are left stranded on a planet.

That's one perception. It doesn't make it true.

Atleast it has some sort of basis behind it (such as arrival dlc - mass relays destroyed causing suprnovaesk explosions. Also the shockwave destroyed the Normandy, causing it to crash land).

Those in favor of the ending have only their own interpertations.

[Ieldra]

@all in this debate:
The problem is not in what the results of the mass relays' explosion are likely to be. It's what the imagery of the ending scenes suggests about the future. And that clearly suggests that intelligent organic life is done with a technological civilization for the foreseeable future. I find that not acceptable as an ending to an epic SF story. It is a luddite's dream.