649 réponses à ce sujet

[Cody211282]

How can you clarify this many plot holes?

[Sc2mashimaro]

DarkSpiral wrote...

Alamar2078 wrote...

HenchxNarf wrote...

I'm glad they're sticking to their guns and not changing anything. They don't need to, it's their story, not the fans'.

IMHO it stopped being fully their story to tell any way they wanted as soon as they started making statements about how the endings would work out & such.  When BW started that they lost the moral high ground to handle the game any way they saw fit.

It isn't a moral issue, Almar.  They REALLY DO OWN the IP.  The only reason the Reatke movement had any headway at all is because Bioware 's...erm...public identity, I suppose...is based on the fact they respond and listen to fan feedback in the creation of their future wroks.  They want to maintain that image, so we have Bioware responding to us (Retake ME3) in a manner other than "Sorry you didn't like the ending, but it is what it is."

And since I know peopel will say this: No, they aren't saying the above.  If they were, the tweet and Ray's blog post would have never happened.

You are absolutely right. The term you are looking for, though, is either "brand" or "value". Part of their brand is listening and responding to customer feedback which is an extension of their stated value of "believing in a collaborative process with fans". Most companies would not allow so many indecorous voices on their public forums, but Bioware wants to hear what we have to say. Those who complain and trash the company: you're on the company's forum and they are LETTING you do that. Wonder if it ever occured to you...

[Kushan101]

They had better not of meant how that came across. I really am not impressed by this.

[Neophoenix 78]

The issue most people had was the fact that promises implied and directly made were not upheld in the last 10 minutes of the ending of a trilogy. That is the issue at hand for a lot of people. If that issue is not the issue that is fixed then Bioware never really did listen to the complaints people had about their product.

Look at two different companies that were in similar situations. Fallout 3 expanded on their ending. It made the company stronger for it. It showed they were wiling to work with their fan base. The fan base is the reason why these games are made.

Now we have Too Human. Promises were made about 4 player co-op. If you look at the co op section the coding tells you this is likely what they were going for. In a 2 player co-op game why would the option to have private slots be 0 or 1. Shouldn't it be yes or no. 0 or 1 implies there might be a 3 or 4. If you look at how the area is divided in the sections where Gamertag names go there is enough room for 4 distinct boxes of equal size. Only the space of boxes 1 and 2 are filled. Their defense was it was done on purpose. The ending was horrible. They said it was done on purpose. They used the "You do not get it" defense. How did that work out for Denis Dyack? Maybe people putting pressure on a company that made promises it did not honor is helping the company in the long run. People are upset because they care. If they didn't they would just throw it to the side as useless junk. Next to Too Human.

As for the ending. Happy or not there should be unique endings. We have 1 ending with 3 slight outcome variations with different variables in them. Those are not unique. Saying 3 burgers are unique because one has no seeds on the bun, one has poppy seeds, and the other has sesame seeds it not correct. They are variants not unique. You M-8 Avenger with stability and a sight is just a variant of my version of a M-8 with extended barrel and increased clip count. But they are too fundamentally similar to be called unique. But if you think about all those choices. Wrex/Wreav. Geth/Quarian ME2 companions, ME1 Outcomes and decisions. Too many possibilities to make a CG ending that fits to what the player has picked. That means more expensive scenes and more time on the ending.

As for not being happy if it is sad. That is not me. I want something to make sense. If it has to be sad I want to see how it is sad. I want to see Wrex and Grunt fighting the Reaper infantry. I want to see them getting circled and surrounded. I want to see them back to back. They then look over their shoulders and at each other. Snarl and go berserk. I want to see the camera pan out to see that they are in the middle of thousands of Reaper Infantry. I want to see Tali defending herself. Garrus sees this and rushes over. At the last moment a Brute grabs him and snaps him in two. You see his body fall. Tali screams and loses it. During the course of the fight a husk breaks her mask. You see her face and the hatred in her eyes. She is about to get obliterated but Primes jump in to help her. Ultimately they get destroyed but Tali makes it to the body of Garrus and they die in the same area. If you are going to kill off characters please do it in a manner befitting heroes. Mordin.. Legion.. Kaiden... Thane... Their deaths had meaning. It was sad but it added to the story. Their deaths did not detract from the story. Instead we get a variation of Deus Ex ending. I mean the game too as well as the idea of Deus Ex Machina. But you could at least see that in the title of that game.. Oh is that Mass Effect really means. Does it describe what is happening now? The Mass Effect of promises broken?

I do not get how people say they are willing to pay $$$ for DLC to fix this issue. They made the promises. They broke the promises. Why should I have to pay to fix their glaring mistakes? It would be similar to looking for a taxi. He says hey bud you trying to get from Point A to Point B. Yes but I would like to get there my way I respond. Yes sure get in. The ride costs $60. We have a deal. When the ride stops I get out and notice this is not where it was stated I would be. The taxi driver then says to wait a couple hours and he will be back to pick me up and take me to where he promised me to go. But that will cost me another $10 to get there. No that is unacceptable you can drive me to where we agreed upon. If you do not I demand a refund. I bet everyone that says "Sit down, shut up, and stop rocking the boat" would just gladly pay the taxi driver the extra money and feel guilty for even questioning his methods. I mean he is the taxi driver you are not. Who are you to tell him how he should drive.

Modifié par Neophoenix 78, 23 mars 2012 - 11:19 .

[CronoDragoon]

HenchxNarf wrote...

You're kidding me right? Do you know how to make video games? No? Then how can you say it isn't difficult. It would take money and time.

They said they aren't changing the endings. Nor should they have to. They're sticking by their writers.

Taking money and time is one thing. You are saying there is no scenario where they can please the majority of upset fans, and that is silly. By not difficult I am saying the solution and the path to it are visible. If they announced it would take them months to make the new endings but they would be new and quality, people would be fine with that. No one is demanding new endings now, they are impatient at the lack of information regarding what is to be done.

They can stick by their writers AND appease the fans, which is what new endings do. Perhaps you thought I meant they need to take out the old ones? No, I want additional endings. Doing this allows Bioware to say they are standing by their original writers' vision while also listening to their fans.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 23 mars 2012 - 11:18 .

[Goroxx]

Just to clarify, I don't think that I've ever really read that the company is hardline using for the "artistic integrity" excuse to not fix the ending...that push is coming from certain segments of the so-called professional gaming press and a few of the folks here on the forums. I just don't see it as a main theme in their communications.

That being said, I too am hoping that they drop Casper the Genocidal Space Ghost for something better. I hope they "clarify" his murderous insanity right out the door. Everything up until the the elevator ride (including the encounter with TIM and Anderson's death) was fantastic.

[cinderburster]

Abirn wrote...

That's what we wanted. It was never about getting a "happy" ending, its about getting an ending that isn't filled with plotholes and explains the whole catalyst/reaper thing in more detail.

That's certainly what I wanted.  If they can come up with a good explanation of the Star Child, I don't have a problem with it.

[The_Crazy_Hand]

 This is unacceptable, no bioware, just no.  You say you are listening, then you debunk the idea you are listening with crap like this.

[Icesong]

Sc2mashimaro wrote...

DarkSpiral wrote...

Alamar2078 wrote...

HenchxNarf wrote...

I'm glad they're sticking to their guns and not changing anything. They don't need to, it's their story, not the fans'.

IMHO it stopped being fully their story to tell any way they wanted as soon as they started making statements about how the endings would work out & such.  When BW started that they lost the moral high ground to handle the game any way they saw fit.

It isn't a moral issue, Almar.  They REALLY DO OWN the IP.  The only reason the Reatke movement had any headway at all is because Bioware 's...erm...public identity, I suppose...is based on the fact they respond and listen to fan feedback in the creation of their future wroks.  They want to maintain that image, so we have Bioware responding to us (Retake ME3) in a manner other than "Sorry you didn't like the ending, but it is what it is."

And since I know peopel will say this: No, they aren't saying the above.  If they were, the tweet and Ray's blog post would have never happened.

You are absolutely right. The term you are looking for, though, is either "brand" or "value". Part of their brand is listening and responding to customer feedback which is an extension of their stated value of "believing in a collaborative process with fans". Most companies would not allow so many indecorous voices on their public forums, but Bioware wants to hear what we have to say. Those who complain and trash the company: you're on the company's forum and they are LETTING you do that. Wonder if it ever occured to you...

Um...those companies who shut down dialogue would have their brands hurt. If there were more profit in it doing that, that's what BioWare would do too. So no, I don't feel especially grateful to the corporation that's doing what's in its best interest to do.

[sydranark]

clarifying the ending is not changing the ending. and unless they specify "changing the ending" i'm not going to spend a penny on the DLC.

[Zalajinn]

Worst part of the message was i think "That's all". It kinda means we cannot expect anything big....and that's what we would need.

[frylock23]

*sigh* Another day and I see BioWare just continues to dig their little hole deeper ...

If they're not careful, they'll find hell down there. Of course, by then they'll also realize that not many people are spending any more money on them anymore.

They really need to realize that with the endings as they stand, there just isn't much reason for anyone to be enthused about ME at all, past, present, future because they destroyed the universe everyone loved.

Sure I could play in a past ME, but if they go too far back, there are no humans because we're too primitive to go out into the galaxy. I'm not really interested in playing in an MMO set during the Prothean cycle for example. A.) I know that ends badly and B.) I know that there's no hope for the future either. Sure, they could do a First Contact war game, but A.) any characters from that are likely still alive to witness THE END of ME3 and B.) Why bother? The universe you're fighting in is going to come to a bad end anyhow? And, they can go way into the future to do something set about 50,000 years after this cycle, but A.) how do we know Shep won and the Reapers don't come back? B.) if the do, how do we know BioWare won't just pull the rug out from under us again? C.) Even without the first two, anything they create will perforce be drastically different than anything ME was prior to this game and it won't really be ME ... So, why bother?

I mean, they really just shot themselves in the foot.

As for DLC, yeah, I can buy more stuff to prolong the inevitable endings, but again, why? I already feel like I spent $80 to be massively disappointed and upset. Why would I want to spend more money on the massive, steaming pile of poo they've already delivered me? No matter how fun the gameplay is, if the game itself leads to an ultimately unsatisfying conclusion, I lose interest, so there's just no point. This was ME2's problem and the reason I never bought Kasumi.

This thing with the ending being final and well final is also why I never bought any DA2 DLC, too. I just never was interested in prolonging my Hawkes. They were done. If they had done ME3 correctly, I'd be feeling about it the same way I did for DA:O - Wanting to play again to explore another ending possibility and waiting eagerly for DLCs like Warden's Keep to add to my game to make it longer before the end. And quite happy with each ending I play to because I feel like each of my Shepards gets an ending that delivers a final but appropriate end to her story whether she lives or dies, saves the galaxy or not, salvages relationse between various factions, saves the synthetic races, even retires happily to a quite and little-known world with her LI to live as a quiet recluse for the rest of their natural lives ... or some combinations of all of those.

But no, I get herded into a killing chute and slaughtered by BioWare's so-called artistic whim.

[LdyBelial]

HenchxNarf wrote...

FemmeShep wrote...


True. But that poster's logic is also shaky. "Nothing will ever make them happy". I disagree, there is certainly a way to make fans happy. 

So here, let me re-word it.

There is a majority of the movement that will not be happy no matter what BioWare chooses to do (which in this case is not to change the endings, just clarif) and I have seen, in this thread alone, that no matter what BioWare gives them, they won't be happy with what they're given. They want more, or something that isn't even on the table as an option.

No one is going to bully me into accepting "clarification" of that terrible, nonsensical ending.  I want new endings <-- notice the plural there – unlike the ending we have been currently served.  And I want them based on my choices made throughout the game.  Just like BioWare gave us in ME1 and 2.  That is why I pre-purchased ME3 after all.  It was supposed to be the end of the trilogy.  As it stands right now?

ME3 could have been called (and in my opinion should have been) Mass Effect: War Zone.  And ANYONE could have been the star it didn't have to be Shepard.  It could have been Commander Smith for all that artistic ending gave us.

Sure, you want to sling how we fans cannot be satisfied because it what?  Defends your point of view?  Well... to me it is just bullying tactics.  You can keep it to yourself.  I don't come here and attack you for how you feel!  No.  Instead I think it is AWESOME that you liked the ending you got.  I really, really, really wish I could like it too!  BUT I CAN'T!  My Shepard wouldn't have done any of the three options.  That's the way I see it.  You don't have to like me, you don't have agree with me.  But the rules of the site expect you to behave respectfully.  And bullying those of us who didn't like that ending? Trying to make us feel badly for how we feel about that shoddy, misplaced ending?  You are nothing more than a bully.  Feel free to state how you feel, but don't attack us that feel otherwise. 

Gosh... they close threads where folks are getting paranoid but they allow other posters to perpetuate this?!  Wow... Mind blowing.

[iiTzCyAniiDe]

I wonder how this will play out.

[RiouHotaru]

It's funny how people think that the endings can't be clarified. They explained quite a few of the plot-holes from ME2 in ME3 quite handily.

I'm pretty sure they can easily explain the Catalyst and it's logic.

[garf]

Doesn't matter anymore to me. I've spent the money I would have saved for bioware over the course of this year elsewhere.

[Lankist]

RiouHotaru wrote...

It's funny how people think that the endings can't be clarified. They explained quite a few of the plot-holes from ME2 in ME3 quite handily.

I'm pretty sure they can easily explain the Catalyst and it's logic.

And no amount of clarification will change the fact that they are all functionally identical, that they completely disregard your prior decisions in defiance of the marketing promises (and the reason most of us bought the game, frankly), and they are simply poorly constructed and poorly conceived.

You can hold a magnifying glass to garbage all you want. It doesn't change what it is. After a certain point, having more detail about this crap is either going to make even less sense or disregard player input even further.

Modifié par Lankist, 23 mars 2012 - 11:29 .

[The Smitchens]

HenchxNarf wrote...

The Smitchens wrote...


Time and money are debatable as concerns.  It's presumable they'll be selling this as DLC so they'll fix the price to make up the difference and gain profit.  All due respects you didn't actually give him a chance to answer whether or not he had an understanding of what goes into the developing of a video game.

And while they didn't say they were changing the endings they didn't say they weren't.  We're left with a bit much ambiguity to say one way or another right now.  If anything, since we're only over two weeks into the release of ME3 it's probable that they don't have a specific plan on how they're going to approach things.  Or if they do have a plan then any number of things could change along the way.  Development processes aren't straight lines.

This says they're not changing the endings.

Well then I stand corrected in that regard.  Though I wonder what that guy will be saying after he does finally beat it.

[krayt298]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

I'm not sure how to feel about this.

This.

I'm really confused about how this will work. Still the mechanics of the ending will remain bad (decisions do not matter). <_<

Modifié par krayt298, 23 mars 2012 - 11:30 .

[Alamar2078]

DarkSpiral wrote...

Alamar2078 wrote...
IMHO it stopped being fully their story to tell any way they wanted as soon as they started making statements about how the endings would work out & such.  When BW started that they lost the moral high ground to handle the game any way they saw fit.

It isn't a moral issue, Almar.  They REALLY DO OWN the IP.  The only reason the Reatke movement had any headway at all is because Bioware 's...erm...public identity, I suppose...is based on the fact they respond and listen to fan feedback in the creation of their future wroks.  They want to maintain that image, so we have Bioware responding to us (Retake ME3) in a manner other than "Sorry you didn't like the ending, but it is what it is."

And since I know peopel will say this: No, they aren't saying the above.  If they were, the tweet and Ray's blog post would have never happened.

@DarkSpiral:  I have a general question to ask you.  Let me set up a scenario please:

Lets say you have a Company and they release a Product.  The Company makes specific promises about how the Product will perform.   Do you believe the Company has a moral obligation to make sure their Product conforms to their statements about the Product even if it limits what they can do with the Product???

Honestly I believe the answer is YES.  If a Company starts making statements about a Product then they are morally obligated to follow through on their statements.  If you believe the answer is NO ... a Company can make statements about a product and then not deliver and that's morally OK then we have no common frame to discuss the issue further and we will have to hope that we agree to disagree and be as civil as we can.

IMHO the only thing to debate is whether BW did or did not live up to their statements.


BTW:  I do thank BW because this is their forum and they can boot anyone they feel like at pretty much any time [unless they state in writing that they wont do that].

[wikkedjester]

All I'm getting is, " SO yeah we has some content that was cut from the game that explained the ending." This is further inferred by the the Mass Effect Final hours, when they talk about gutting what was called the CAT missions, one of which we were given as DAY ONE DLC. . . . DEEP WANG!

[Sc2mashimaro]

Icesong wrote...

Sc2mashimaro wrote...

DarkSpiral wrote...

Alamar2078 wrote...

HenchxNarf wrote...

I'm glad they're sticking to their guns and not changing anything. They don't need to, it's their story, not the fans'.

IMHO it stopped being fully their story to tell any way they wanted as soon as they started making statements about how the endings would work out & such.  When BW started that they lost the moral high ground to handle the game any way they saw fit.

It isn't a moral issue, Almar.  They REALLY DO OWN the IP.  The only reason the Reatke movement had any headway at all is because Bioware 's...erm...public identity, I suppose...is based on the fact they respond and listen to fan feedback in the creation of their future wroks.  They want to maintain that image, so we have Bioware responding to us (Retake ME3) in a manner other than "Sorry you didn't like the ending, but it is what it is."

And since I know peopel will say this: No, they aren't saying the above.  If they were, the tweet and Ray's blog post would have never happened.

You are absolutely right. The term you are looking for, though, is either "brand" or "value". Part of their brand is listening and responding to customer feedback which is an extension of their stated value of "believing in a collaborative process with fans". Most companies would not allow so many indecorous voices on their public forums, but Bioware wants to hear what we have to say. Those who complain and trash the company: you're on the company's forum and they are LETTING you do that. Wonder if it ever occured to you...

Um...those companies who shut down dialogue would have their brands hurt. If there were more profit in it doing that, that's what BioWare would do too. So no, I don't feel especially grateful to the corporation that's doing what's in its best interest to do.

That depends a lot on their brand. Not every company is run with the same philosophy towards social media as Bioware. Manufactured consent is good enough for some companies and whether that hurts them or not strongly depends on the company and what else they bring to the table in the place of open dialogue with consumers.

[The Smitchens]

RiouHotaru wrote...

It's funny how people think that the endings can't be clarified. They explained quite a few of the plot-holes from ME2 in ME3 quite handily.

I'm pretty sure they can easily explain the Catalyst and it's logic.

Yeah, but ME2 wasn't the end of a trilogy.  Some plot holes were there by design and regardless they were just assumed to be filled in later.

I'm not going to speak on behalf of everyone for this, but for me it's just the worst time to introduce plot holes that need to be explained and the epitome of bad timing for such a dramatic cliff hanger.  It's not so much that I can't handle plot holes, but the sudden shock that so many of such magnitude would show up at that point.

But in defense of your statement, yes I do think they can tweak it in one way or another.  I don't think the only solution is new endings or bust, or it must be indoctrination theory, or whatever.  There are multiple paths to a satisfying conclusion.

[Sc2mashimaro]

krayt298 wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

I'm not sure how to feel about this.

This.

I'm really confused about how this will work. Still the mechanics of the ending will remain bad (decisions do not matter). <_<

That depends on how they execute this "clarification and closure" promise. Something people should probably wait until after they explain in detail to judge... but that never stopped the internet, I guess.

[Sc2mashimaro]

The Smitchens wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

It's funny how people think that the endings can't be clarified. They explained quite a few of the plot-holes from ME2 in ME3 quite handily.

I'm pretty sure they can easily explain the Catalyst and it's logic.

Yeah, but ME2 wasn't the end of a trilogy.  Some plot holes were there by design and regardless they were just assumed to be filled in later.

I'm not going to speak on behalf of everyone for this, but for me it's just the worst time to introduce plot holes that need to be explained and the epitome of bad timing for such a dramatic cliff hanger.  It's not so much that I can't handle plot holes, but the sudden shock that so many of such magnitude would show up at that point.

But in defense of your statement, yes I do think they can tweak it in one way or another.  I don't think the only solution is new endings or bust, or it must be indoctrination theory, or whatever.  There are multiple paths to a satisfying conclusion.

This.