807 réponses à ce sujet

[Keladis]

Phategod1 wrote...

 1st let me say that this following statement is for older individuals with common sense and the ability to form coherent sentences. Your the ones I am disappointed in, not the 16 year old children who should not even be playing the M rated ME1 from several years ago. What you dont understand is, if Bioware and Casey Hudson have agreed to actually change the ending based on the arguaments, then what has been achieved is the fans have comepletely invalidated Casey Hudson's artistic vision, and video games artistic value as a whole. 

What this means is video games are not art, have no artistic value and are just a product. Movies, books, and other form set to entertain can be claimed as art as such we all can base an opinion on it, but when you demand the artist change it, most times they'll laugh in your face and tell you to sod off because its there art they made it and its your choice to enjoy it or not or buy it or not. When the finished product is comprimised for the sake of the vocal majority of the customers then the product is not an artistic vision but just a product. 

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes. Sure, you made decisions that affected your Shepard but those are decions that were given to you by Casey and the writers, every single piece of fiction has plotholes thats a fact of life. For those who don't like the ending, you have a right to your opinion but when you demand a change, you have over stepped your bounds as a fan and a consumer, and you may singlehandedly destroyed modern story telling in games. 

Thanks for any one who took the time to read all this and Apoligize for length and any spelling or grammatical errors I missed.

Here is something to think about

Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://venturebeat.c...fans-interview/
“Fans want to make sure that they see things resolved, they want to get

some closure, a great ending. I think they’re going to get that.”
“Mass Effect 3 is all about answering all the biggest questions in the

lore, learning about the mysteries and the Protheans and the Reapers,

being able to decide for yourself how all of these things come to an

end.”
Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”

Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with

the fans. We use a lot of feedback.”
Now if he feels the fans are co-creators of mass effect then the art which is mass effect is are art too... and if we think its bad and want to make changes then we have the right to let them know and get the changes we are asking for.

[Merwanor]

Keladis wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

 1st let me say that this following statement is for older individuals with common sense and the ability to form coherent sentences. Your the ones I am disappointed in, not the 16 year old children who should not even be playing the M rated ME1 from several years ago. What you dont understand is, if Bioware and Casey Hudson have agreed to actually change the ending based on the arguaments, then what has been achieved is the fans have comepletely invalidated Casey Hudson's artistic vision, and video games artistic value as a whole. 

What this means is video games are not art, have no artistic value and are just a product. Movies, books, and other form set to entertain can be claimed as art as such we all can base an opinion on it, but when you demand the artist change it, most times they'll laugh in your face and tell you to sod off because its there art they made it and its your choice to enjoy it or not or buy it or not. When the finished product is comprimised for the sake of the vocal majority of the customers then the product is not an artistic vision but just a product. 

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes. Sure, you made decisions that affected your Shepard but those are decions that were given to you by Casey and the writers, every single piece of fiction has plotholes thats a fact of life. For those who don't like the ending, you have a right to your opinion but when you demand a change, you have over stepped your bounds as a fan and a consumer, and you may singlehandedly destroyed modern story telling in games. 

Thanks for any one who took the time to read all this and Apoligize for length and any spelling or grammatical errors I missed.

Here is something to think about

Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://venturebeat.c...fans-interview/
“Fans want to make sure that they see things resolved, they want to get

some closure, a great ending. I think they’re going to get that.”
“Mass Effect 3 is all about answering all the biggest questions in the

lore, learning about the mysteries and the Protheans and the Reapers,

being able to decide for yourself how all of these things come to an

end.”
Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”

Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with

the fans. We use a lot of feedback.”
Now if he feels the fans are co-creators of mass effect then the art which is mass effect is are art too... and if we think its bad and want to make changes then we have the right to let them know and get the changes we are asking for.

String agree = Keladis .getQuote();

Modifié par Merwanor, 22 mars 2012 - 11:51 .

[Illusory_Enemy]

To be honest, I've, as everyone have, the right to demand what I please. I do not have the right to receive it or see it done, most of the time, but that's another story.

The moment you mass-sell "art" it becomes a "product" (this does not mean necessarily that it loses its "art" status) and as such becomes subject to the law of market, such laws grant the consumers with a set amount of "leverage power", not different from the one of a lobby.

You do no want "art" subject to the law of market? Do not sell it in a mass-consumerism way.

Modifié par Illusory_Enemy, 22 mars 2012 - 11:58 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Phategod1 wrote...

2. Artistic integrity  is everything when it comes story based games like this, and to validate the "games as art" arguament. Imagine a wrold where people would have said *SPOILER* "Oh Wanderer turning into a baby at the end of Shaow of the Colossus is complete BS, change it" then we get a world were every ending has to be a  happy-pink-easily-explained-bunnies ending and games developed by corporate yes men who work for Fox studios. 

Two huge problems with this argument.

1) Bioware lost all claims to "artistic integrity" when they decided to release day 1 dlc and have a post credits message advertising their own dlc. At that point, you're more concerned with selling a product than you are crafting art.

2) Collective action. Notice that there have never been large scale complaints with Shadow of the Colossus. Do you know why? Because most do not hate the ending, or at least not enough to petition to change it. If you want to change something, you need numbers and resources in order to do it. The only precedent this will set is empowering the consumer to call developers out on their mistakes. Bioware doesn't have to change anything. But they decided to remind us about all this wonderful dlc they're coming out with, so we gave them straight forward terms: fix your mistakes, or no more money. They face the "reality" that every arist faces: integrity or financial success. You are in no position to tell them which to pick.

[Phategod1]

nevar00 wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes.

 I PAID for the game,

Stop right there, did you get A GAME? Did that game work? Then Bioware/EA has done there job. Its your God given right to express your satisfaction or dissatisfaction with that product. If your offer constructive critisism on how you felt anbout the ending and wish to no longer support EA or Bioware that also is your prerogative. Its the demand of change to finished product I take exception to. 

As for all the citings of precedence of authors chaging or retconning there works, I'd love to see and example outside ot Comic books that see different writers on almost a monthly basis that has taken place in the past 50 years, and As I said before Fall out 3 changed the ending for the sake of playing DLC after the game had been completed and in all likelihood had been planned before the small public outcry. 

[stysiaq]

1. Lifecycle of the modern video game is different from a lifecycle of the movie/book (there are no DLCs for movies)
2. Altering art happens

[Phategod1]

Keladis wrote...

Here is something to think about

Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://venturebeat.c...fans-interview/
“Fans want to make sure that they see things resolved, they want to get

some closure, a great ending. I think they’re going to get that.”
“Mass Effect 3 is all about answering all the biggest questions in the

lore, learning about the mysteries and the Protheans and the Reapers,

being able to decide for yourself how all of these things come to an

end.”
Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”

Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with

the fans. We use a lot of feedback.”
Now if he feels the fans are co-creators of mass effect then the art which is mass effect is are art too... and if we think its bad and want to make changes then we have the right to let them know and get the changes we are asking for.

Did Casey not use fan feedback to improve the RPG elements of the game? Clearly Casey's opinion of "A great ending" is different then everyone elses that does not make his opinion or choices wrong, they make him his. 

[saracen16]

Phategod1 wrote...

 1st let me say that this following statement is for older individuals with common sense and the ability to form coherent sentences. Your the ones I am disappointed in, not the 16 year old children who should not even be playing the M rated ME1 from several years ago. What you dont understand is, if Bioware and Casey Hudson have agreed to actually change the ending based on the arguaments, then what has been achieved is the fans have comepletely invalidated Casey Hudson's artistic vision, and video games artistic value as a whole. 

What this means is video games are not art, have no artistic value and are just a product. Movies, books, and other form set to entertain can be claimed as art as such we all can base an opinion on it, but when you demand the artist change it, most times they'll laugh in your face and tell you to sod off because its there art they made it and its your choice to enjoy it or not or buy it or not. When the finished product is comprimised for the sake of the vocal majority of the customers then the product is not an artistic vision but just a product. 

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes. Sure, you made decisions that affected your Shepard but those are decions that were given to you by Casey and the writers, every single piece of fiction has plotholes thats a fact of life. For those who don't like the ending, you have a right to your opinion but when you demand a change, you have over stepped your bounds as a fan and a consumer, and you may singlehandedly destroyed modern story telling in games. 

Thanks for any one who took the time to read all this and Apoligize for length and any spelling or grammatical errors I missed.

Well said. Art is not subject to the democratic process, but rather to the desires of an individual as it is an expression of himself or herself in the public sphere. I like the fact that BioWare tried something new and individual for a change, as opposed to produce another factory-driven product. They got their point across and they did it admirably. If they succumb to pressure to change their own work, then they would be dragged down by the same consumerist forces that seek to make life and all we know it nothing but a soulless existence.

[DESTRAUDO]

Aweus wrote...

DESTRAUDO wrote...

Not because i say so, because the game and the ones before it very intentionally forced those situations with non optimal outcomes and no one has complained about any of the others. The entire concept of the ME3 is sacrifice. The game is loaded with sacrifice, and has multiple choke points where sacrifice is all but guaranteed, in some places guaranteed.  If you added in options throughout the game for happy happy the entire theme of the game goes zoom out the window. The dream sequences where you are haunted by comments from those that sacrificed themselves. Zoom gone. The emotional impact of defeating kai lang, zoom gone. Absolute freedom for optimal choices will never be given because it would crush the narrative on which the game is hung. 

Then how would you explain that me and multiple other people (just look around) are CRUSHED with the current narrative? If the narrative is so perfect, why are people angry/sad over it? Is it becouse we are idiots and idiots dont understand true valors? Even more so, idiots do not deserve anything becouse they are not worthy by definition? I am sorry, but the only explanation of your argument is that you are regarding me and my kin as mentally handicapped individuals. Good riddance. And if not, I still dont understand why you are against changes that will CHANGE NOTHING for your Mass Effect experience and make low intelligence life-forms like me happy? What you are basically saying is like: "I like oranges best, apples should never be present in our kitchen becouse then it would be possible to not eat oranges which would crush the wonderful taste of oranges. People who likes apples are irrelevant, make them eat oranges or let them die from starvation."

I love that since i have been polite throughout this that you felt it necessary to create a mini fictional narrative in which i repeatedly insult you.  It is not so much that you built a strawman argument, rathar you imported one from another country. Shameful. I never said the narrative was perfect and i never said you were an idiot for not liking it. I said that having optimal choices would crush the narrative of the story. You could not counter that so you went on a wild, arm swinging emotional tirade and an analogy which can not in any way be made to fit the situation.

You want a mass effect were there is an option to avoid all the hard choices. Where there are optimal choices. But having an optimal choice to a choose what to lose question defeats the purpose of the question. Defeats the emotions those questions raise. If you do not have to choose between ashley and kaiden then it robs you of the emotional experience of having to choose. It defeats the purpose of that choice in the game. It is the same with losing mordin to cure the genophage and losing legion to end the geth war. The game places you in these points where you have to choose for a reason. It does so to generate an emotional experience. The fact that the ending crushed you is good. Losing mordin crushed me. Losing legion crushed me. Making the decision to sacrifice myself, and in so doing sacrificing my characters future with liara crushed me, but i still did it.

If i wanted the future with liara more than i wanted the galaxy to be free of war between organics and synthetics i would have chosen destroy. In destroy, so long as you did not mess up the whole game , you live. Your future with your LI exists as a possibility. If they clarify and expand the ending i hope that those who chose destroy get to meet them again. However i do not wish them to create an optimal ending in which my characters choice to sacrifice themselves meant nothing, where all life organic and synthetic can be saved without self sacrifice, because it makes how i faced that choice, and chose sacrifice less meaningful, borderline pointless.

Why in a re edit of the game would i choose synthesis or control if there was an option where one gains all the benifits of those endings without the sacrifices. Where one is given an optimal ending, choosing between suboptimal endings becomes illogical. 

Modifié par DESTRAUDO, 22 mars 2012 - 12:03 .

[Baronesa]

Phategod1 wrote...

nevar00 wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes.

 I PAID for the game,

Stop right there, did you get A GAME? Did that game work? Then Bioware/EA has done there job. Its your God given right to express your satisfaction or dissatisfaction with that product. If your offer constructive critisism on how you felt anbout the ending and wish to no longer support EA or Bioware that also is your prerogative. Its the demand of change to finished product I take exception to. 

As for all the citings of precedence of authors chaging or retconning there works, I'd love to see and example outside ot Comic books that see different writers on almost a monthly basis that has taken place in the past 50 years, and As I said before Fall out 3 changed the ending for the sake of playing DLC after the game had been completed and in all likelihood had been planned before the small public outcry. 

Why dont you read what the producers of Fallout 3 said about that? They said "we screwed it!" You can rationalize the Broken Steel DLC however you like, but when you have the guys behind Fallout 3 saying that htye made a mistake, then your speculation simply fails, because it does not conform with reality

What is the comment about comic books?? Wait... have you read about the examples cited here? Did I missed the time where Dickens and Conan Doyle made comic books?? what???

[Phategod1]

Baronesa wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

nevar00 wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes.

 I PAID for the game,

Stop right there, did you get A GAME? Did that game work? Then Bioware/EA has done there job. Its your God given right to express your satisfaction or dissatisfaction with that product. If your offer constructive critisism on how you felt anbout the ending and wish to no longer support EA or Bioware that also is your prerogative. Its the demand of change to finished product I take exception to. 

As for all the citings of precedence of authors chaging or retconning there works, I'd love to see and example outside ot Comic books that see different writers on almost a monthly basis that has taken place in the past 50 years, and As I said before Fall out 3 changed the ending for the sake of playing DLC after the game had been completed and in all likelihood had been planned before the small public outcry. 

Why dont you read what the producers of Fallout 3 said about that? They said "we screwed it!" You can rationalize the Broken Steel DLC however you like, but when you have the guys behind Fallout 3 saying that htye made a mistake, then your speculation simply fails, because it does not conform with reality

What is the comment about comic books?? Wait... have you read about the examples cited here? Did I missed the time where Dickens and Conan Doyle made comic books?? what???

Someone did reference Comic books as often retconned art. I have Read nearly every post in this thread. 

[BaladasDemnevanni]

saracen16 wrote...

Well said. Art is not subject to the democratic process, but rather to the desires of an individual as it is an expression of himself or herself in the public sphere. I like the fact that BioWare tried something new and individual for a change, as opposed to produce another factory-driven product. They got their point across and they did it admirably. If they succumb to pressure to change their own work, then they would be dragged down by the same consumerist forces that seek to make life and all we know it nothing but a soulless existence.

A shame then, since they already admitted to having "taken fan feedback" into account when producing this terrible excuse of an ending. It's pretty far from their vision.

[PrussianBlue]

Why not change something if it becomes better in the process? Of course, there is the possibility to make things worse (George Lucas) but I think in this case you should say gtfo to this art thing because the endings as they are right now make now sense and aren´t art at all.

[smooshmonster]

I disagree with you OP. I'm a pen-and-paper gamer and I am a Games Master for several different games. If I ever railroaded my players into an ending where all their actions didn't matter throughout the game, where nothing they did had any effect on the ending, and where story inconsistencies sprang up, they would not only never play my games again, they'd call me out on it and demand I reran the ending. I could claim artistic licence all I want, in the end there are 5 angry players who have invested time and emotion into the game I'm running.

This is an RPG. It's not an action game, it's not an adventure game. Your choices are supposed to matter. Otherwise, you shouldn't market it as an RPG and promise that they will.

Modifié par smooshmonster, 22 mars 2012 - 12:08 .

[Kushan101]

As well as the whole "art can be changed" and the multiple arguments about writers changing their "art" to suit the people they are writing for, I would also say that something can stop becoming "art" when it is a mass produced digital program that was made, and sold, with the sole purpose of making money.

[Kushan101]

smooshmonster wrote...

I disagree with you OP. I'm a pen-and-paper gamer and I am a Games Master for several different games. If I ever railroaded my players into an ending where all their actions didn't matter throughout the game, where nothing they did had any effect on the ending, and where story inconsistencies sprang up, they would not only never play my games again, they'd call me out on it and demand I reran the ending. I could claim artistic licence all I want, in the end there are 5 angry players who have invested time and emotion into the game I'm running.

This is an RPG. It's not an action game, it's not an adventure game. Your choices are supposed to matter. Otherwise, you shouldn't market it as an RPG and promise that they will.

Sorry for double post, but I LIKE this. Very good example.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

PrussianBlue wrote...

Why not change something if it becomes better in the process? Of course, there is the possibility to make things worse (George Lucas) but I think in this case you should say gtfo to this art thing because the endings as they are right now make now sense and aren´t art at all.

True, but change always has the potential to be worse, but that has (rarely) stopped game developers from trying. We always make change with the hope that it will be better than its predecessor.

[Vhalkyrie]

My mistake in this scenario was pre-ordering. From now on, I'll wait for the metacritic/Amazon user reviews before I make a purchase. That way I can decide whether the "art" is something I want to spend $60 on.

[IsleySilverlord]

saracen16 wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

 1st let me say that this following statement is for older individuals with common sense and the ability to form coherent sentences. Your the ones I am disappointed in, not the 16 year old children who should not even be playing the M rated ME1 from several years ago. What you dont understand is, if Bioware and Casey Hudson have agreed to actually change the ending based on the arguaments, then what has been achieved is the fans have comepletely invalidated Casey Hudson's artistic vision, and video games artistic value as a whole. 

What this means is video games are not art, have no artistic value and are just a product. Movies, books, and other form set to entertain can be claimed as art as such we all can base an opinion on it, but when you demand the artist change it, most times they'll laugh in your face and tell you to sod off because its there art they made it and its your choice to enjoy it or not or buy it or not. When the finished product is comprimised for the sake of the vocal majority of the customers then the product is not an artistic vision but just a product. 

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes. Sure, you made decisions that affected your Shepard but those are decions that were given to you by Casey and the writers, every single piece of fiction has plotholes thats a fact of life. For those who don't like the ending, you have a right to your opinion but when you demand a change, you have over stepped your bounds as a fan and a consumer, and you may singlehandedly destroyed modern story telling in games. 

Thanks for any one who took the time to read all this and Apoligize for length and any spelling or grammatical errors I missed.

Well said. Art is not subject to the democratic process, but rather to the desires of an individual as it is an expression of himself or herself in the public sphere. I like the fact that BioWare tried something new and individual for a change, as opposed to produce another factory-driven product. They got their point across and they did it admirably. If they succumb to pressure to change their own work, then they would be dragged down by the same consumerist forces that seek to make life and all we know it nothing but a soulless existence.

Oh God, this is **Human Stupidity** at the highest. People here trying to give the endings art or intelligence, ignoring plotholes and incoherence. Bringing on "the forces that make life life nothing but a soulless existence" What. The. ****. That's so dumb, and excuse me sir, that I just can't even keep typing about how overreacted and senseless it is.

[Illusory_Enemy]

saracen16 wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

 1st let me say that this following statement is for older individuals with common sense and the ability to form coherent sentences. Your the ones I am disappointed in, not the 16 year old children who should not even be playing the M rated ME1 from several years ago. What you dont understand is, if Bioware and Casey Hudson have agreed to actually change the ending based on the arguaments, then what has been achieved is the fans have comepletely invalidated Casey Hudson's artistic vision, and video games artistic value as a whole. 

What this means is video games are not art, have no artistic value and are just a product. Movies, books, and other form set to entertain can be claimed as art as such we all can base an opinion on it, but when you demand the artist change it, most times they'll laugh in your face and tell you to sod off because its there art they made it and its your choice to enjoy it or not or buy it or not. When the finished product is comprimised for the sake of the vocal majority of the customers then the product is not an artistic vision but just a product. 

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes. Sure, you made decisions that affected your Shepard but those are decions that were given to you by Casey and the writers, every single piece of fiction has plotholes thats a fact of life. For those who don't like the ending, you have a right to your opinion but when you demand a change, you have over stepped your bounds as a fan and a consumer, and you may singlehandedly destroyed modern story telling in games. 

Thanks for any one who took the time to read all this and Apoligize for length and any spelling or grammatical errors I missed.

Well said. Art is not subject to the democratic process, but rather to the desires of an individual as it is an expression of himself or herself in the public sphere. I like the fact that BioWare tried something new and individual for a change, as opposed to produce another factory-driven product. They got their point across and they did it admirably. If they succumb to pressure to change their own work, then they would be dragged down by the same consumerist forces that seek to make life and all we know it nothing but a soulless existence.

Way too easy, reap the benefits of mass-consumerism and globalization from your concrete bunker of artistic immunity, when you roll in the public arena be ready to fight for your ideas and acknowledge your mistakes. You can still leave when you please, or can't you?

[Phategod1]

PrussianBlue wrote...

Why not change something if it becomes better in the process? Of course, there is the possibility to make things worse (George Lucas) but I think in this case you should say gtfo to this art thing because the endings as they are right now make now sense and aren´t art at all.

Its not your judgement in its quality that makes it art, its the entire original vision the teams that created the ME universe. Who decided if its better, What Im saying is when someone makes you change what deem perfect or at least finished integrity is lossed. 

[CRISIS1717]

Just like Charles Dickens ruined literature when he changed the ending to Great Expectations lol.

Sorry OP but if there was artistic integrity in this industry then developers wouldn't pull the shenanigans they do like putting a walking IGN advert in their game.

However much you don't want it to be true and put your fingers in your ears going la la la la, games will always be a product first and art second.

[Raezaiel]

lol @ art cant be changed. please bring a new argument to the table, this is patently absurdly false.

Examples:
Star Wars...unfortunatly
Stranger in a Strange land
the hobbit
every directors cut ever
sherlock holmes
the witcher 2 enchanced edition (not out yet)
fallout 3 broken steel
Mass effect Deception

durr stop these posts please

[Zalajinn]

Soooo, here we go again...i will just add 2 counter-arguements:

1, Bioware stated several times, that the game is created TOGETHER with the fans. So we have every right to demand a change, if it did not live up to our expectations.

2, Read some of those topics what they promised us in past statements, and how they failed to deliver it....

Modifié par Zalajinn, 22 mars 2012 - 12:17 .

[Oryonn]

Phategod1 wrote...

 1st let me say that this following statement is for older individuals with common sense and the ability to form coherent sentences. Your the ones I am disappointed in, not the 16 year old children who should not even be playing the M rated ME1 from several years ago. What you dont understand is, if Bioware and Casey Hudson have agreed to actually change the ending based on the arguaments, then what has been achieved is the fans have comepletely invalidated Casey Hudson's artistic vision, and video games artistic value as a whole. 

What this means is video games are not art, have no artistic value and are just a product. Movies, books, and other form set to entertain can be claimed as art as such we all can base an opinion on it, but when you demand the artist change it, most times they'll laugh in your face and tell you to sod off because its there art they made it and its your choice to enjoy it or not or buy it or not. When the finished product is comprimised for the sake of the vocal majority of the customers then the product is not an artistic vision but just a product. 

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes. Sure, you made decisions that affected your Shepard but those are decions that were given to you by Casey and the writers, every single piece of fiction has plotholes thats a fact of life. For those who don't like the ending, you have a right to your opinion but when you demand a change, you have over stepped your bounds as a fan and a consumer, and you may singlehandedly destroyed modern story telling in games. 

Thanks for any one who took the time to read all this and Apoligize for length and any spelling or grammatical errors I missed.

Games are not an art, they are a product.