626 réponses à ce sujet

[spacefiddle]

Wait... am I to understand that, with at least a week to go before Bioware breaks its silence on what's really going on, we have an advert in here for a paid app?

Really?  Hey we're still not telling you anything, but if you forgot to go buy our documentary please do so, because customer dissatisfaction has caused us to sell less copies of it than we were hoping?

Really?

[sth128]

Naltair wrote...

Jaysh wrote...

Deventh wrote...

Is the indoctrination theory true?

this

I am pretty sure Geoff can't answer this, not sure why people think he can.

Oh, because Geoff is one of the few journalists with actual working knowledge of Bioware behind the scenes. And because we are desperate for any information regarding possible changes to the ending. Not to mention that Geoff went on Fox News to defend ME a few years back so many people might see him as a "man of the people" sort of figure.

Though (no offense to Geoff) I think he's probably just a casual fan of the series (after all he has to keep track of all the games across all consoles as a game journalist). He probably went on Fox because a) Fox asked for him and it's good PR for GT and himself.

In a sense, I think he's just another ploy used by Bioware to distract the gamers (or a ploy by EA to bring critics to their side). Bioware already got the "support" from IGN (Chobot for one, Moriarty another). By having Geoff on their side (with say, an exclusive behind-the-scenes look at Bioware), they gain the support of both GT and Spike TV.

Most critics already oppose the "take back" movement anyway. Critics don't have the same kind of vested interest as fans do.

To put into a Mass Effect analogy, fans are like Shepard. We CARE about what happens to the universe. We TRY to convince that there's a threat (ie. ending). Bioware is like the Consul, they have to worry about the economics, the politics, making the dead line. Sure, they know we are important, but that won't stop them from just brushing us off when we say "no everything is not alright". Last but not least, the critics are like Udina, not that they will betray us in the end (though some did apparently), but they are stuck in the middle. They can't take our side completely because their job depends on making good with the game companies (ie. consul), but they have to also voice concerns from time to time when Shepard complains.

So yeah... Geoff is Udina. Well maybe not Udina, maybe Anderson when he was ambassador.

[Naltair]

spacefiddle wrote...

Wait... am I to understand that, with at least a week to go before Bioware breaks its silence on what's really going on, we have an advert in here for a paid app?

Really?  Hey we're still not telling you anything, but if you forgot to go buy our documentary please do so, because customer dissatisfaction has caused us to sell less copies of it than we were hoping?

Really?

BioWare did not make the app, Geoff Keighley did, he does not work for BioWare and he has done a similar app for Portal 2, please check your conspiracy and rage at the door.

[Naltair]

sth128 wrote...

Oh, because Geoff is one of the few journalists with actual working knowledge of Bioware behind the scenes. And because we are desperate for any information regarding possible changes to the ending. Not to mention that Geoff went on Fox News to defend ME a few years back so many people might see him as a "man of the people" sort of figure.

Though (no offense to Geoff) I think he's probably just a casual fan of the series (after all he has to keep track of all the games across all consoles as a game journalist). He probably went on Fox because a) Fox asked for him and it's good PR for GT and himself.

In a sense, I think he's just another ploy used by Bioware to distract the gamers (or a ploy by EA to bring critics to their side). Bioware already got the "support" from IGN (Chobot for one, Moriarty another). By having Geoff on their side (with say, an exclusive behind-the-scenes look at Bioware), they gain the support of both GT and Spike TV.

Most critics already oppose the "take back" movement anyway. Critics don't have the same kind of vested interest as fans do.

To put into a Mass Effect analogy, fans are like Shepard. We CARE about what happens to the universe. We TRY to convince that there's a threat (ie. ending). Bioware is like the Consul, they have to worry about the economics, the politics, making the dead line. Sure, they know we are important, but that won't stop them from just brushing us off when we say "no everything is not alright". Last but not least, the critics are like Udina, not that they will betray us in the end (though some did apparently), but they are stuck in the middle. They can't take our side completely because their job depends on making good with the game companies (ie. consul), but they have to also voice concerns from time to time when Shepard complains.

So yeah... Geoff is Udina. Well maybe not Udina, maybe Anderson when he was ambassador.

Actually this is why many journalists find the movement less than respectful.

Geoff is none of those things even if you want to paint him as such.  He went to BioWare and asked them to do it, long before any of this ending debacle even became a common place meme.  He did this to show various sides of the game and the team behind it.  Because he felt it would make an interesting story for people to consume.  He isn't a shill and I am tired of people trying to paint him as such, it only makes BSN come off as hostile and petty.

Fight your fight, but don't fight everyone just because you can, you will find very few friends in the end.

Modifié par Naltair, 26 mars 2012 - 03:42 .

[The Almighty Ali]

Hello Geoff

What are you planning on doing next?, Going behind the scenes at a different studio or reporting something entirely different?

[Ashilana]

Naltair wrote...

Not sure how that terminology is off.

To put it another way there is no universal consensus; some people love it, others hate it, and some people just don't care.

There is never a universal consensus... but the game ends with advocating genocide or wiping out free will.  Odd that there are people who find this harmless and worthy of "speculation".  (I am not claiming you used that word... so don't worry about that.)

Modifié par Ashilana, 26 mars 2012 - 03:45 .

[sth128]

Naltair wrote...
Actually this is why many journalists find the movement less than respectful.

Geoff is none of those things even if you want to paint him as such.  He went to BioWare and asked them to do it, long before any of this ending debacle even became a common place meme.  He did this to show various sides of the game and the team behind it.  Because he felt it would make an interesting story for people to consume.  He isn't a shill and I am tired of people trying to pain him as such, it only makes BSN come off as hostile and petty.

I am not painting Geoff as a shill. I'm just stating the obvious. It is doubtful that companies will grant exclusive access to critics who reflect negatively on them. Some journalism organizations have more integrity than others. Surely you've heard of the Gamespot firing over negative reviews?

I stated in my analogy that Geoff is more akin to Anderson than Udina, obviously I don't really know his work well enough to say either way. You cannot possibly think that Bioware just invited Geoff to talk to us for our benefit? Surely Bioware / EA stand to gain at least something by this action?

In any case, I did say we as fans are like Shepard. I didn't say Paragon Shepard. So yeah from time to time you'll see fans punching random journalists and letting Volus biotic gods charge to their death for the lulz.

[Naltair]

Ashilana wrote...

There is never a universal consensus... but the game ends with advocating genocide or wiping out free will.  Odd that there are people who find this harmless and worthy of "speculation".  (I am not claiming you used that word... so don't worry about that.)

Because Shepard hasn't already committed acts of genocide, or mass murder before the end?

Also that is just your interpretation of the end, if you want to foist that off on people go ahead, but they don't have to accept that as the take away message.

As can easily be seen by just glancing at the forums, the endings have given rise to several "intepretations".

[Naltair]

sth128 wrote...
I am not painting Geoff as a shill. I'm just stating the obvious. It is doubtful that companies will grant exclusive access to critics who reflect negatively on them. Some journalism organizations have more integrity than others. Surely you've heard of the Gamespot firing over negative reviews?

I stated in my analogy that Geoff is more akin to Anderson than Udina, obviously I don't really know his work well enough to say either way. You cannot possibly think that Bioware just invited Geoff to talk to us for our benefit? Surely Bioware / EA stand to gain at least something by this action?

In any case, I did say we as fans are like Shepard. I didn't say Paragon Shepard. So yeah from time to time you'll see fans punching random journalists and letting Volus biotic gods charge to their death for the lulz.

Well don't punch a journalist, unlike Shepard you will probably go to jail for assault.

Anyway, of course both sides stand to gain but what BioWare gets is free publicity, but if you actually have read the Final Hours and not just picked what supports an agenda, it isn't an apology or anything about just the ending or controversial parts of the game.  What it conveys is the passion and love the creators have for a series that in some cases they have been working on for almost 10 years.

BioWare did not invite him here, Geoff came here to talk to people that bought his app and discuss his work.  Or if they did they didn't let people know because there was confusion early on in the thread.  If you look at his replies he has been pretty honest and forthcoming and isn't here to change our minds.  He is here to hear what we have to say.

Modifié par Naltair, 26 mars 2012 - 03:53 .

[Gyspy Jive]

This guy has answered all of like, three questions. Pointless thread is pointless.

[Naltair]

Gyspy Jive wrote...

This guy has answered all of like, three questions. Pointless thread is pointless.

Umm no, he answered several, he tends to do one large post and addresses many people.

[Gyspy Jive]

Naltair wrote...

Gyspy Jive wrote...

This guy has answered all of like, three questions. Pointless thread is pointless.

Umm no, he answered several, he tends to do one large post and addresses many people.

Ummm, ummmm, ummmmm. Awesome use of sarcasm.

[Naltair]

I wasn't being sarcastic?

[Gyspy Jive]

I was.

I suppose I'm just irritated that I was expecting to maybe get some clarification on the ending through this thread. But, there is none to be found.

[Naltair]

Gyspy Jive wrote...

I was.

I suppose I'm just irritated that I was expecting to maybe get some clarification on the ending through this thread. But, there is none to be found.

Geoff has stated that he isn't just here to discuss the ending but his work, which just happens to be called the Final Hours, the same name used for the Portal 2 app he did.

Again for the billionth time he is not affliated with BioWare.

Modifié par Naltair, 26 mars 2012 - 04:02 .

[Kanon777]

Ashilana wrote...

Naltair wrote...

Not sure how that terminology is off.

To put it another way there is no universal consensus; some people love it, others hate it, and some people just don't care.

There is never a universal consensus... but the game ends with advocating genocide or wiping out free will.  Odd that there are people who find this harmless and worthy of "speculation".  (I am not claiming you used that word... so don't worry about that.)

What endings advocates genocide or removal of free will? As far as i know none of them advocates genocide. In fact there is not a SINGLE quote from the endings where sheppard agrees with what the reapers are doing... 

Modifié par tobito113, 26 mars 2012 - 04:05 .

[Costin_Razvan]

The Destroy ending where you wipe out the Geth is genocide.

As for Shepard not agreeing to the Catalyst, he does in Synthesis.

[Kanon777]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

The Destroy ending where you wipe out the Geth is genocide.

As for Shepard not agreeing to the Catalyst, he does in Synthesis.

Geth arent alive,and arent a species so its not genocide at all. Just breaking some machines...

And syntesis ELIMINATES the need of the reapers, that is very diferent from agreeing with them...

Modifié par tobito113, 26 mars 2012 - 04:08 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Geth are alive and have a soul, anyone claiming otherwise misses the entire point of Rannoch if you side with the Geth/achieve peace.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 26 mars 2012 - 04:09 .

[sth128]

Naltair wrote...
Well don't punch a journalist, unlike Shepard you will probably go to jail for assault.

With words, my dear, punch with words... Sadly I lack the space magic which allows me to punch people over the internet. Though had I such powers I would probably only use it on L4D2 griefers (people who kill their team on purpose).

it isn't an apology or anything about just the ending or controversial parts of the game.  What it conveys is the passion and love the creators have for a series that in some cases they have been working on for almost 10 years.

I did not state that "final hour" is an apology of any kind. You are mistaken if you interpret my words as such. I have no doubt Bioware worked hard on the franchise and I have deep respect for them despite my dislike of the ending. I'm saying that Bioware is a business first. They probably make decisions base on how they stand to benefit. As such, having Geoff publishing his report (and app, instead of say, a free featurette on their site or a bonus in the collector's edition) is just another one of those decisions.

BioWare did not invite him here, Geoff came here to talk to people that bought his app and discuss his work.  Or if they did they didn't let people know because there was confusion early on in the thread.  If you look at his replies he has been pretty honest and forthcoming and isn't here to change our minds.  He is here to hear what we have to say.

Priestly did clarify the identity early on in the thread (if only they did the same for the ending). I very much doubt Geoff came here of his own accord. Who in their right mind wants to talk to angry fans on an internet forum, without getting something in return? And even if he did, like you said, he's here to advertise the Final Hours app.

Geoff can't answer our questions regarding the ending. Geoff can't comment on the controversy beyond what we already know. As far as I can tell Geoff hasn't stated explicitly his stance on "artistic integrity" (in regards to this specific situation) or his thoughts on the apparently broken (or leap of) logic in the game.

But he is here to tell us about Final Hours...

(Again, I'm not painting him as a shill, just a regular journalist doing his job. I mean no disrespect; if I seem rude or disingenuous please excuse that as my poor communication skills. After all, I am no journalist.)

[alberta]

From http://www.gameranx....versial-ending/


The Final Hours of Mass Effect 3, Geoff Keighley's behind-the-scenes iOS app, has revealed some new details about the game's controversial ending that will likely give irate fans even more reason to be upset. Be warned: there are quite a few spoilers scattered throughout, so don't read on unless you've already completed the game.

While former lead writer Drew Karphysyn had said that the broader strokes of the ending were in place for years, it seems the specifics were hammered out remarkably late in the game's development cycle. The team actually delayed a recording session with Illusive Man voice actor Martin Sheen from August into November, so that the writers would have more time to finish off the dialogue for the ending.

What's more, the ending was initially written to provide a much more robust explanation of the game's surprising — and to some, confusing — last-minute twist. According to writer Mac Walters:

"Originally, with the Catalyst, the Star Child at the end of the game, I had written that much more in the guise of a investigative style conversation, where there is something he tells you but then, you get to ask a bunch of questions and you get your questions answered. But then me and Casey talked and decided, let's keep the conversation high level, give you the details that you need to know, but don't get into the stuff that you don't need to know. Like 'How long have they been reaping?'. You don't need to know the answers to the Mass Effect universe, so we intentionally left those out."

In the end, Watlers decided to end the game in a way that would lead to, in his words, "lots of speculation for everyone."

And as for complaints that the game's three endings don't provide enough variety? As late as November, the developers were considering at least one drastically different ending that was eventually scrapped. The sequence would have seen the player lose control of Commander Shepard, revealing that he or she had actually been indoctrinated by the Reapers. This ending was eventually cut for technical reasons, as the team was having a hard time making the gameplay mechanic work alongside dialogue choices.

Another common complaint centers on the ending's lack of any real boss fight. The closest thing to it, the showdown with Kai Leng at Cerberus HQ, occurs more than an hour before the game finally wraps, leaving many fans upset that Mass Effect 3's gameplay ends on a somewhat anticlimactic note.

Turns out, you were originally supposed to have a showdown with the Illusive Man just before the end of the game, but the team ultimately scrapped the idea because it felt too "video gamey" and predictable.

To add insult to injury, the app apparently also reveals that the much contested day-one DLC pack, From Ashes, was, in fact, originally intended to be a part of the main game before time constraints caused the team to convert it to DLC instead.

Frankly, none of these revelations bode particularly well for BioWare, as many of them only serve to confirm the suspicisions of the game's unruly fanbase. Given the nature of game development, it's wholly unfair to claim that BioWare ruined the ending by rushing it out the door at the last minute, but it certainly won't be easy to convince the detractors of that when these new details play so handily into their arguments.

[Kanon777]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Geth are alive and have a soul, anyone claiming otherwise misses the entire point of Rannoch if you side with the Geth/achieve peace.

Yeah because machines cant decieve and pretend to know what is like to be a real living being right? (Dr. Eva? Reapers?). Geth are machines, nothing more... 

[Naltair]

I just think you are implying he can't answer because BioWare won't let him, I don't think that is the case. It may just be he does not have satisfactory answers to what many fans want to know about the endings and can only offer his interpretations.

Geoff came to Casey Hudson and asked him if he wanted to do the app, they provided him access and even insider materials which sadly have been used out of context to support anti-ending agendas. Of course both sides benefit but I don't see it as a conspiracy. All data points to the fact that he isn't here doing BioWare PR.

I just feel like you have a negative disposition towards Geoff's intentions, that is your prerogative, but I believe a poor one. It may just be he is here to gather information for his project and speak with actual fans.

[FemmeShep]

Naltair wrote...

FemmeShep wrote...

You keep using "polarizing" and "contoversial" instead of "dissapointing" and "awful".

Becauase I don't feel disappointed and I think the game on the whole is not awful.

I do think the endings have polarized the audience; not everyone hates them, but on BSN you either love the endings or hate them... because even if you don't mind them, the community automatically puts you in the love them camp.  I am moderate, I feel it could have been better, I don't think the ME3 endings killed my dog and murdered my family though.

The endings are also extremely controversial, look at all the coverage they are getting, even from more "mainstream" markets.  So yes in my mind, polarizing and controversial is how I would describe them.

That's fine, but you are ignoring how a lot people feel, and inserting your own feelings into your words to describe what a segment of the fanbase is feeling. 

Those that do not like the ending, do not find it to be controversial or polarizing, but instead poorly written and awful.

EDIT: Nevermind, I'm in the wrong here. I went back and re-read your posts, and you weren't using those words to describe others, but only yourself. That's more than fair. I of course disagree, but more than fair. 

Modifié par FemmeShep, 26 mars 2012 - 04:22 .