612 réponses à ce sujet

[Myrmedus]

Wow. Some of these quotes (working through them) are absolutely amazing because they're not even "discrepancies" like has been mentioned prior: they are outright 100% head-on "black & white" contradictions to the actual content we received.

It's astounding! Literally, I am honestly lost for words right now.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 22 mars 2012 - 11:29 .

[rvgifford]

Johnnycide wrote...

A pity, the last one got closed, you made very good points. The only reason I preordered my Mass Effect 3 instead of just waiting to purchase it was because I was incentivized by those promises.

This. It's the reason I have preordered every Bioware game. Right now it's why I won't in the future. I do hope the devs realize we aren't trying to be entitled, whiny brats, but rather that we have valid issues that shake our very trust in Bioware as a company.

[Rulycar]

whydoyouwanttoknow wrote...

The law on false advertising in Australia says that it's false advertising if it makes claims that are untrue, or something like that. I imagine it's the same most places.

Are interviews advertising?
For that matter ...
... Is false advertising subject to criminal or civil code?

[firebreather19]

Couple of interesting notes to expand on:

I had only commented based on the few quotes I previously read in other threads, but after reading the full list I do think they might have said things that had the ability to be inferred one way, and they obviously might not have gone super out of their way to fix that, but any claim of false advertisement you bring against those quotes can be addressed. Whether the A, B, C choices really being A1, A2, A3, A4, B1, B2, etc. etc.

Rachni, for example...they can be that howevermanypoints separating you from that military strength you need to be on the giving end of a beating and not the receiving.

That's not even factoring in how useless of an arguement that is. I'm not in the least trying to be antagonistic...I just honestly don't think anyone bought Mass Effect 3 because they heard Rachni would be in it and that was the selling point. Cool, yes, but if I'm that obsessed with lore I'm going to be more interested in other concepts.

[McScroggz24]

That's why the unmitigated FTC complaint will go absolutely nowhere and instead has garnered the "entitled" fans even more flack.

[spacefiddle]

firebreather19 wrote...
It does hurt your own credibility though by painting you as using these claims of false advertisement to further your own desire for new endings. You just happened to like ME2's ending, that's the difference. 

Weird homicidal analogies aside, the outside of the box says Five Chocolate Candies.  Inside the box, we have Three Lime Gumdrops. 

I don't know if you're trolling or just honestly confused, but there are two debates here: one is the relative merits and strengths of Three Lime Gumdrops.  That's covered in other threads.  This debate here is whether or not the people who printed the labels on the box should be accountable for saying Five Chocolate Candies, when they knew darn well they were wrapping up Three Lime Gumdrops.

That's all.

[Myrmedus]

Casey Hudson (Director)
http://gamescatalyst...active-stories/

“The whole idea of Mass Effect3 is resolving all of the biggest questions, about the Protheons and the Reapers, and being in the driver's seat to end the galaxy and all of these big plot lines, to decide what civilizations are going to live or die: All of these things are answered in Mass Effect 3.”

Well, at least he got that bit right. With the 20 or so supernovae sundering the entire galaxy as the Relays explode we certainly were in the driver's seat to end the galaxy!

[KingKhan03]

firebreather19 wrote...

Couple of interesting notes to expand on:

I had only commented based on the few quotes I previously read in other threads, but after reading the full list I do think they might have said things that had the ability to be inferred one way, and they obviously might not have gone super out of their way to fix that, but any claim of false advertisement you bring against those quotes can be addressed. Whether the A, B, C choices really being A1, A2, A3, A4, B1, B2, etc. etc.

Rachni, for example...they can be that howevermanypoints separating you from that military strength you need to be on the giving end of a beating and not the receiving.

That's not even factoring in how useless of an arguement that is. I'm not in the least trying to be antagonistic...I just honestly don't think anyone bought Mass Effect 3 because they heard Rachni would be in it and that was the selling point. Cool, yes, but if I'm that obsessed with lore I'm going to be more interested in other concepts.

But the concept was all questions would be answered and the fans wont be left with more questions then answers.

Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.360magazi...ferent-endings/

“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? But I can’t say any
more than that…”

[whydoyouwanttoknow]

Rulycar wrote...

whydoyouwanttoknow wrote...

The law on false advertising in Australia says that it's false advertising if it makes claims that are untrue, or something like that. I imagine it's the same most places.

Are interviews advertising?
For that matter ...
... Is false advertising subject to criminal or civil code?

Let me ask you this.  Say you go down to your local....... let's say Ford dealership.  The salesperson tells you all these cool features that the car comes with.  You buy it.  You take it home.  It comes with none.  Is it too bad because it wasn't in a physical ad?  Or you hear him on the radio in an interview saying all the cool features that his car comes with.  Is that too bad?

Of course not. Everything they say about their product is advertising it.

[Thomas Abram]

Mesmurae wrote...

You know, it won't be long before this thread gets locked. Bioware has gone on a locking spree, closing down threads that point out their mistakes.

So... yeah.

You clearly read all of the posts in this thread including the second one informing people to keep on topic, civil and to further the thread so it doesn't get locked. Woops!

[firebreather19]

Myrmedus wrote...

Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://business.fina...-all-audiences/

“I’m always leery of saying there are 'optimal' endings, because I think one of the things we do try to do is make different endings that are optimal for different people”

That comment killed me the most, for in my opinion it was the most important thing to include in ME3 - and a mechanic that would've given BW breathing room to try a more 'artistic' ending as one of the options - and yet was completely and utterly absent, to my absolute shock.

I don't know about that, I think whatever folks picked on their first playthrough (which seemed, from a lot of talk, to be the initial "what I would do" run) determined what type of person they were...whether they would be willing to risk controlling the reapers, sacrificing the Geth and Edi to destroy them, or believe the uniting of every organic and synthetic life would be the better ending. It was really telling of each individual's personality. 

[Tommytsunami]

McScroggz24 wrote...

Tommytsunami wrote...

McScroggz24 wrote...

I understand people claiming false advertisement, but MY perspective is that FA is attributed to more literal claims. I.E. a store claiming they will match any other stores prices on like items only to say they can't lower their price to match a competitor. And even then there could always be some fine print. If anything Mass Effect 3 did a very poor job of delivering on some of it's problems.

Part of the reason I think it comes off as false advertising is they kept making claims about the ending, as can be seen from the segments in the OP, even after they some knew what the ending would be. Why hype the ending to be something that you know it wont be?

While very poorly done, I THINK what Casey Hudson might have seen in the endings is the speculation of your choices is quite different, although much of what they show you and what immediately happens is immensly similar. So, it's kinda a metaphilosophical extropolation that shows the varying ending/s which was promised pre-release. I hope I made sense there, haha.

That does make sense and had he not mentioned how they could (once again myself as well as other fans might have taken this as they "would") branch out vastly since there was no need to tie the ending back together for a continuation then what you said would hold. The problem is that the majority of fans took his statements as the endings would branch out more and that you would clearly see and impact of your choice in the ending. I know if you just do a ****** poor job (whether it is on purpose or just bad choices) then there is a difference in whether or not Earth stands, but fans were looking for something more substantial. Casey Hudson's promises from interviews implied that there would be more of a difference and there wasn't.

[sargon1986]

Message posted by mistake, please delete is possible. Also do not ban me. 

Modifié par sargon1986, 22 mars 2012 - 11:59 .

[DuneMuadDib]

Rulycar wrote...

whydoyouwanttoknow wrote...

The law on false advertising in Australia says that it's false advertising if it makes claims that are untrue, or something like that. I imagine it's the same most places.

Are interviews advertising?
For that matter ...
... Is false advertising subject to criminal or civil code?

If you're interviewed about the game then you're obviously talking about it, and I'd certainly think talking about your product it is advertising.  Whether what's said in an interview fits any legal definition for advertising that can be claimed as "false" I don't know.

[Aaleel]

Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)

http://www.360magazine.co.uk/interview/mass-effect-3-has-many-different-endings/

“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? But I can’t say any more than that…”

smdh, this is the one that always gets me. I think the worst thing about these quotes is that they show Bioware knew what a lot of people wanted and just didn't do it.

[Myrmedus]

firebreather19 wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...

Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://business.fina...-all-audiences/

“I’m always leery of saying there are 'optimal' endings, because I think one of the things we do try to do is make different endings that are optimal for different people”

That comment killed me the most, for in my opinion it was the most important thing to include in ME3 - and a mechanic that would've given BW breathing room to try a more 'artistic' ending as one of the options - and yet was completely and utterly absent, to my absolute shock.

I don't know about that, I think whatever folks picked on their first playthrough (which seemed, from a lot of talk, to be the initial "what I would do" run) determined what type of person they were...whether they would be willing to risk controlling the reapers, sacrificing the Geth and Edi to destroy them, or believe the uniting of every organic and synthetic life would be the better ending. It was really telling of each individual's personality. 

That's like saying everyone's personality can be categorized into 3 boxes. Besides, I would argue (and obviously like many others) there wasn't a single 'optimal' ending for me, or anything close.

Besides, the outcome of those endings - the visual outcomes - are very much the same.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 22 mars 2012 - 11:38 .

[SharlenaSharlena]

joe1852 wrote...

i just call it peter molyneux syndrome

Ahhh so true, Fable 3 was such a major let down....

[firebreather19]

corpselover wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

corpselover wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

People, stop arguing with trolls. They will just drag you everywhere to get the thread closed. ME2 is off topic, discuss it in the ME2 forum. However I think the OP is pretty clear about the point of false advertising. I mean you can't even stretch it so the things can somehow be justified. However, I don't think they planned lying on us. They probably talked about a version of the game that didn't made it into the final product. However, and apology from Bioware would be in order. I mean, ffs, can they not once in a lifetime just say that some crap happened or whatever? It's not like people can't see it.

Not off topic, it's definitely important. If people were promised things in ME2 that weren't delivered, then why didn't this happen then as well? It means it has nothing at all to do with false advertising, but the claim of false advertising is used for wanting more endings. Like I said, this has been going on for decades and I can find twenty things in every one of your homes (probably) that promise(d) to do something that it didn't. Why ME3, why Bioware, why now? Definitely not off topic. 

Again, poor behavior by one group does not justify poor behavior by another.

The fact that 'others do it too' doesn't change the situation. Will you legalize murder because some people get away with it? The OP claims that they lied and obviously these statements from Bioware don't hold water in ME3. It's false advertisement, period. If you want to criticise ME2 for that and file a complaint then do it. But don't come here telling us that we can't hold Bioware by their word just because they are notorious liars.

It does hurt your own credibility though by painting you as using these claims of false advertisement to further your own desire for new endings. You just happened to like ME2's ending, that's the difference. 

It's not the same as "legalizing" murder, but is it hypocritical for people to get uberupset over a man's murder when hundreds if not thousands of individuals are murdered everyday and no one says anything? 

Murder is a bad analogy. Under no condition would it be condoned. A better analogy is having a guy come up and sucker punch you. You would have the right to be upset, because it is wrong. The fact that someone else got sucker punched and was okay with it would not justify it.

Says the guy named Corpselover.

Kidding



Still not the same. Like I said, I could probably go and find 20 products you've used or have that promise things they're not delivering. That means you just got sucker punched twenty times throughout the past couple years, but what...this one time you're going to get mad about it? That's my point. 

[jerrinehart]

McScroggz24 wrote...

BTW, I just looked at all my Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, and Neverwinter Nights games and just sighed...oh the good ol' days.

Ahhh the days before EA, DLC, and this crap. /sigh.

[Spectre Chris]

Great, great thread, OP. Perfect collection of quotes. I hope we can get the message across the Bioware that these promises are really the reason for our frustration.

[Reptilian Rob]

Thomas Abram wrote...

Mesmurae wrote...

You know, it won't be long before this thread gets locked. Bioware has gone on a locking spree, closing down threads that point out their mistakes.

So... yeah.

You clearly read all of the posts in this thread including the second one informing people to keep on topic, civil and to further the thread so it doesn't get locked. Woops!

This.

Everyone stay civil and respectful, keep this thread on the rails. 

[papapwnzone]

Not much to add right now, but I'd just like to say that your post is very well written OP, gj. If everyone can maintain that level of civility maybe we'll get the changes so many of us would like after all.

[Myrmedus]

corpselover wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

corpselover wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

People, stop arguing with trolls. They will just drag you everywhere to get the thread closed. ME2 is off topic, discuss it in the ME2 forum. However I think the OP is pretty clear about the point of false advertising. I mean you can't even stretch it so the things can somehow be justified. However, I don't think they planned lying on us. They probably talked about a version of the game that didn't made it into the final product. However, and apology from Bioware would be in order. I mean, ffs, can they not once in a lifetime just say that some crap happened or whatever? It's not like people can't see it.

Not off topic, it's definitely important. If people were promised things in ME2 that weren't delivered, then why didn't this happen then as well? It means it has nothing at all to do with false advertising, but the claim of false advertising is used for wanting more endings. Like I said, this has been going on for decades and I can find twenty things in every one of your homes (probably) that promise(d) to do something that it didn't. Why ME3, why Bioware, why now? Definitely not off topic. 

Again, poor behavior by one group does not justify poor behavior by another.

The fact that 'others do it too' doesn't change the situation. Will you legalize murder because some people get away with it? The OP claims that they lied and obviously these statements from Bioware don't hold water in ME3. It's false advertisement, period. If you want to criticise ME2 for that and file a complaint then do it. But don't come here telling us that we can't hold Bioware by their word just because they are notorious liars.

It does hurt your own credibility though by painting you as using these claims of false advertisement to further your own desire for new endings. You just happened to like ME2's ending, that's the difference. 

It's not the same as "legalizing" murder, but is it hypocritical for people to get uberupset over a man's murder when hundreds if not thousands of individuals are murdered everyday and no one says anything? 

Murder is a bad analogy. Under no condition would it be condoned. A better analogy is having a guy come up and sucker punch you. You would have the right to be upset, because it is wrong. The fact that someone else got sucker punched and was okay with it would not justify it.

There is also a key difference between ME2 and ME3: any ending to ME2 was a stop-gap conclusion since it was only the 2nd in the series. Therefore, there was far less significance, less onus and thus less backlash if it didn't quite meet expectations, since it had ME3 to succeed it in terms of providing conclusion.

ME3 has no such safety net: its conclusion had to tick all the boxes because there is no subsequent instalment to save it.

[firebreather19]

Myrmedus wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...

Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://business.fina...-all-audiences/

“I’m always leery of saying there are 'optimal' endings, because I think one of the things we do try to do is make different endings that are optimal for different people”

That comment killed me the most, for in my opinion it was the most important thing to include in ME3 - and a mechanic that would've given BW breathing room to try a more 'artistic' ending as one of the options - and yet was completely and utterly absent, to my absolute shock.

I don't know about that, I think whatever folks picked on their first playthrough (which seemed, from a lot of talk, to be the initial "what I would do" run) determined what type of person they were...whether they would be willing to risk controlling the reapers, sacrificing the Geth and Edi to destroy them, or believe the uniting of every organic and synthetic life would be the better ending. It was really telling of each individual's personality. 

That's like saying everyone's personality can be categorized into 3 boxes. Besides, I would argue (and obviously like many others) there wasn't a single 'optimal' ending for me, or anything close.

Besides, the outcome of those endings - the visual outcomes - are very much the same.

True, but that's a different conversation, more about Shepard and the Reapers and whether that situation could've ever actually been more than it was. Some argued why not just stick with conventional warfare. Sure, you could, but you also just witnessed it taking multiple fleet's firepower just to take down one Reaper. And not even decimated...barely destroyed. Just enough that it couldn't function, but still enough that it could give Shepard a figurative dying cackle. And you expect them to take on an army of those beings? Nothing aside from a miracle was going to save the galaxy from the Reapers. Or maybe if you got Chris Redfield to punch each Reaper in the face. That guy punches boulders like a pro, I think he might be able to handle it.