706 réponses à ce sujet

[dsl08002]

They should have definantly at least given us that choice of an happy ending.

This ending at the moment doesn´t make me feel good at all. I walked around with a lump in my stomach for a week and i felt terrible and unhappy.

[Cazlee]

I know it sucks to ask Bioware to ruin the vision of how Shepard's story should end, but I really feel bad for the fans now. They're so sad. :/

[TheHoneyRuns]

Legionaire-Shen wrote...

So students can refuse to make changes to their essay because they need to maintain academic integrity
and government can refuse to make changes to their policy when economy goes bad because they need to maintain bureaucratic integrity
and football team can refuse to make changes when they keep losing because they need to maintain tactic integrity

Okay, I don't agree with tx, but this argument is a bit flawed, yes?

A student answers to the demands of prof's will for a better grade, a government must answer to the whims of the peeps because that is democracy and football team answers to the owners because above entertainment, companies need to put the people in the seats.

I see what you're doing here, but a video game does not follow the same ruleset. Just because we support their games with our money we are not their editors nor their bosses nor their masters. We are the players. Asking for a better ending, a more cohesive ending, and recieving one would be a gift.

Not an expectation or demand based on guidelines.

[txgoldrush]

another bittersweet RPG ending, Ultima VII Part Two.

Choice driven games do not always have to HAVE happy endings.

[wookieboy15]

ZweiImpulse wrote...

I don't get where this argument that we want ONLY a happy ending came from.

What we've always been asking are the myriad of DIFFERENT ENDINGS we were promised. Yes, a happy ending should be one of these OPTIONS, but it is only one of MANY.

We don't want ONE ending. we want a logical and throughly thought out endings we were promised

Agreed.

[Edje Edgar]

There is no victory. The universe as we know it got destroyed. The only thing that was achieved was survival. So it's "survival through sacrifice", which is just downright silly.

Besides I never took Mass Effect as a Dark sci-fi about sacrifice, so are you telling me I'm enjoying it wrong? If not, why are you limiting my options? Nobody is forcing you to go for the happy ending.

Modifié par Edje Edgar, 26 mars 2012 - 07:25 .

[TheHoneyRuns]

txgoldrush wrote...



another bittersweet RPG ending, Ultima VII Part Two.

Choice driven games do not always have to HAVE happy endings.

You're only happy when it rains, huh?

That's cool.

[Relwyn]

TheHoneyRuns wrote...

Legionaire-Shen wrote...

So students can refuse to make changes to their essay because they need to maintain academic integrity
and government can refuse to make changes to their policy when economy goes bad because they need to maintain bureaucratic integrity
and football team can refuse to make changes when they keep losing because they need to maintain tactic integrity

Okay, I don't agree with tx, but this argument is a bit flawed, yes?

A student answers to the demands of prof's will for a better grade, a government must answer to the whims of the peeps because that is democracy and football team answers to the owners because above entertainment, companies need to put the people in the seats.

I see what you're doing here, but a video game does not follow the same ruleset. Just because we support their games with our money we are not their editors nor their bosses nor their masters. We are the players. Asking for a better ending, a more cohesive ending, and recieving one would be a gift.

Not an expectation or demand based on guidelines.

Welcome to capitalism, where the companies have to pander to the market/demand from their customers. A company that does not creative a satisfying product (and especially if they lie about it) will find the product to sell poorly (calling it art or artistic integrity won't change that fact) and if the company continues to produce poor selling products it will go under. 

Also, it is not the first time artists have changed their art to better fit their audience so that they can reap maximum benefits once the money starts rolling in.

Modifié par Relwyn, 26 mars 2012 - 07:29 .

[feldinor]

txgoldrush wrote...

Face it.....a happy ending WOULD break the intergrity of the game.

As a paying customer, I paid for entertainment, not art.

The MAIN THEME of Mass Effect 3 is VICTORY THROUGH SACRIFICE..

The MAIN THING that Mass Effect 3 totally lacked was VICTORY. 

[Aweus]

txgoldrush wrote...

another bittersweet RPG ending, Ultima VII Part Two.

Choice driven games do not always have to HAVE happy endings.

Hurr hurr. You dont really realize that no matter what, ME3 will already never have a happy ending? Bittersweet is the best possible outcome even if entire Normandy crew and Shepard survives. Which is impossible btw since then you would have to also backtrack to deaths of Thane, Legion, Wrex/Mordin etc. How many millions already died during ME3? Yet you still keep talking about happy ending. Will space unicorns come and ressurect everybody and then we go all to have a royal wedding and dance? I just want an ending that will not make me want to shoot myself (exaggeratedly speaking).

[Cazlee]

I like my ME3 ending and I appreciate the concept of Shepard dying to save the galaxy. But look how miserable everyone on these boards are... at some point you just have to step back and realize that making the fans happy might be more important. The least they can do is add something extra to the red ending to appease the fans.

[txgoldrush]

Where is the happy ending I am ENTITLED to??? Is this the BEST ending?

Oh wait, the writers had a point, thus, even with all my choices, gave me a bittersweet ending at best.

[TheHoneyRuns]

It isn't selling poorly. The controversy over the ending hasn't hurt the sales, it's helped them. As is only natural. In capitalism.

The argument is flawed. And decidedly dangerous. These are not Firestone tires. They're games.

A new ending should not be an expectation.

[Fail_Inc]

CHANGING might break this "artistic integrity"
ADDING however is just a nod to the fans, they can still keep their canon ending and build on it.

You can end a blight and survive in DA:O
You and your every loyal crew member can survive a "suicide mission" in ME2

But suddenly in ME3 everyone must die because it's dark and mature and "happy" endings = artistic failure

Are you people saying DA:O and ME1-2 was not dark, philosophical or mature?

[Relwyn]

Cazlee wrote...

I like my ME3 ending and I appreciate the concept of Shepard dying to save the galaxy. But look how miserable everyone on these boards are... at some point you just have to step back and realize that making the fans happy might be more important. The least they can do is add something extra to the red ending to appease the fans.

The ending is so poorly written that just "adding something extra to the red ending" will only serve to ****** off the fanbase even more. If the demand is for them to actually live up to their promises about the endings, then adding something "extra" to the 3 endings..I mean the ending will solve nothing. They have 1 shot to calm their audiences down and if they blow it, it's fair to assume that many will write off Bioware for good.

Personally I don't want that to happen, but we will just have to wait and see what happens. Time is ticking however, and fans won't wait forever...

Fail_Inc wrote...

CHANGING might break this "artistic integrity" 
ADDING however is just a nod to the fans, they can still keep their canon ending and build on it.

You can end a blight and survive in DA:O
You and your every loyal crew member can survive a "suicide mission" in ME2

But suddenly in ME3 everyone must die because it's dark and mature and "happy" endings = artistic failure

Are you people saying DA:O and ME1-2 was not dark, philosophical or mature?

 

Well said, furthermore I don't get it where people got the "dark" scifi idea from, I never got it like that. You want an example of dark sci fi? Go play Dead Space 1 & 2 

Modifié par Relwyn, 26 mars 2012 - 07:34 .

[Jackal7713]

txgoldrush wrote...

Face it.....a happy ending WOULD break the intergrity of the game.

The MAIN THEME of Mass Effect 3 is VICTORY THROUGH SACRIFICE.. This requires an ending that is bittersweet at best. Yes trilogies as a whole can overlying themes throughout, such as overcoming all odds (which WAS fuffilled in ME3, Shepard DID break the cycle), but single entries in a series or trilogy has their own themes.

Bioware should, and looks like they are, provide far more clarity and closure, however, not change the tone of the ending or provide a happy ending. To do so is selling out and breaking the relevance of the ending....

Hell, ME1 was not a fully happy ending, in fact had elements of victory through sacrifice, as either the a part of the alliance navy or the council is sacrificed, and ME2 is a hollow victory at best. This isn't Star Wars either, where Alderaan and Taris can be annihilated but be no longer relevant 5 minutes later....and end on a ceremony. And ME3 is so dark, a happy ending would not be appropriate.

In fact, ending the current universe and creating a new beginning IS A GOOD THING and a smart move. That needs to stay.

No it wouldn't. It would be adding a choice.  You want a depressing ending, thats cool. But, alot of people don't. Allow them one ending, you don't have to choose it or if it comes out in DLC don't by it. Really after all the pre-launch lies and now all these grimdark "artist defense", you people are just sad.

Next time I'll just keep my money when I hear about a Bioware title.

Modifié par Jackal7713, 26 mars 2012 - 07:42 .

[Megachaz]

The game continued with the theme of victory through sacrifice all the way up till Shepard went up the great glass elevator. The fleets sacrificed, the ground forces sacrificed, Anderson sacrificed. Shepard's acts at the end can't really count as sacrifice because she had no other options. She was already dying.

[Aweus]

Cazlee wrote...

I like my ME3 ending and I appreciate the concept of Shepard dying to save the galaxy. But look how miserable everyone on these boards are... at some point you just have to step back and realize that making the fans happy might be more important. The least they can do is add something extra to the red ending to appease the fans.

You know this is kind of poster that I can respect. You liked the ending. Thats great for you. I am happy that you found what you were looking for. I respect your taste. Yet you are still able to understand a different standpoint and possibly even support something that will make other people happy and not hurt you in any possible way.

I would understand the resistance if fans were asking for something that would destroy your accepted story. We just want more options which you can completly ignore. 

And to OP: You keep beating same thing into your drum without addressing lots of valid replies/questions in this thread.

[Relwyn]

Megachaz wrote...

The game continued with the theme of victory through sacrifice all the way up till Shepard went up the great glass elevator. The fleets sacrificed, the ground forces sacrificed, Anderson sacrificed. Shepard's acts at the end can't really count as sacrifice because she had no other options. She was already dying.

Sacrifices only have a meaning when the sacrificial goat/"son of a god"/shepard has the option to escape their "fate" but chooses not to. Shoving down a sacrifice someone's throat does not make it meaningful in any sense.

[desirearune]

I am commander shepard and this is the most pointless thread in the galaxy.

[txgoldrush]

Fail_Inc wrote...

CHANGING might break this "artistic integrity"
ADDING however is just a nod to the fans, they can still keep their canon ending and build on it.

You can end a blight and survive in DA:O
You and your every loyal crew member can survive a "suicide mission" in ME2

But suddenly in ME3 everyone must die because it's dark and mature and "happy" endings = artistic failure

Are you people saying DA:O and ME1-2 was not dark, philosophical or mature?

DAO really isn't true dark fantasy, it just tried to be....Its The Witcher Lite advertised with Marylin Manson music...easily Bioware's most overrated game along with Neverwinter Nights.

ME2 did not have a "happy" ending, and really for what is to come, it was a hollow victory.

[recentio]

From another thread about how revising the ending is actually vital to restore "artistic integrity" to ME3:
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10484483#10484483

Eun0miac wrote...

Preamble:  I am writing this in response to Dr. Muzyka's statements, and though I phrase my points strongly, I truly mean no disrespect.  I love Bioware and the people responsible for these great games, which certainly includes Dr. Muzyka!  I understand things have grown heated in here of late, so I don't want this to be misinterpreted as an attack—rather, it's an invitation for counter-arguments and discussion.

There's been a lot said about Dr. Muzyka's all-too-carefully worded message to us all. It was welcomed and, I am sure, well-intentioned, but it smacked of bureaucratic damage control: a delay tactic, seeking to appease while admitting to little and committing to less.  We should all appreciate that this is an unfortunate necessity of "art meets business," but at the same time, we shouldn't be misled by it.

There's also been a lot said about the new theme du jour: artistic integrity vs. changing the ending. After putting in some thought, I've come to believe this new theme is nothing but smoke and mirrors.

As Dr. Muzyka would have us believe, "changing the ending" requires making concessions to the "artistic integrity of the original story." The implication is that the two are in fundamentally different camps, and the difficulty before Bioware right now lies in finding the proper balance between them.

But this is an entirely wrong way to look at it: The "change vs. artistic integrity" dilemma is a false dichotomy, premised on an equivocation fallacy.

Consider the arguments being made against the ending (and this list is by no means exhaustive):

• it nullifies player choice, an artistic cornerstone of the entire trilogy
• it contradicts the espoused philosophies and key artistic themes of the trilogy (e.g. the capacity for disparate races to live in harmony; the baffling reversal of the "organics vs. synthetics" debate; the out-of-character cowardice implied by the Normandy's escape; etc.)
• it employs one of the most maligned cliches in all of writing (Deus Ex Machina)—just about as literally as is possible
• it starkly contrasts the rest of the trilogy by riddling itself with objectively illogical plot holes, nonsensical writing and space magic

All of these arguments for change share a common underlying principle: The current ending erodes the "artistic integrity of the original story." 

Framing the dilemma as Dr. Muzyka has done equivocates the artistic integrity of the story with the artistic integrity of the ending. It's semantic sleight of hand, a bait-and-switch where "artistic integrity of the story" is the bait, and "artistic integrity of the ending" is the switch. 

We argue that the artistic integrity of the story and the artistic integrity of the current ending are mutually exclusive: They cannot co-exist. 

Dr. Muzyka conflates the two, which does more than miss the point: It corrupts the point to his own devices; deftly sidesteps the fact that we want to change the ending because we want to maintain the artistic integrity of the story; and, indeed, wields this fact against us, by equivocating what we do want with what we don't—all to present a false dichotomy that could later be used to justify, well, anything.

Modifié par recentio, 26 mars 2012 - 07:36 .

[BTDUBS]

txgoldrush wrote...



Where is the happy ending I am ENTITLED to??? Is this the BEST ending?

Oh wait, the writers had a point, thus, even with all my choices, gave me a bittersweet ending at best.

The first thing I learned in film school is that "Artistic Integrity" is a load of crap. Why? Because in order to make money as an artist, your art must please people enough for you to make money. Art is open to interpretation, criticism, and suggestion. If all that mattered is what writers thought, why would film studios, book publishers, and video game companies order partial or total rewrites? Even bigger is why do movie companies do test screenings? It is all about how fans react  and how they relate to the story. 

About the whole bittersweet thing, it is nothing but bitter because the resolution offered no hope in that it raises too many questions about how everything works out. 

Also,being self entitled means that we want something for nothing. Some of us paid $80+ for this game and that is a large investment, so we have every right to speak up if it does not meet the expectations set forth by the company who made it. Let us be clear that they are here to please us so that we give them money, not so they can get out money and give us the finger. When companies do the latter I buy none of their stuff and tell my friends not to either.

[Aweus]

txgoldrush wrote...

DAO really isn't true dark fantasy, it just tried to be....Its The Witcher Lite advertised with Marylin Manson music...easily Bioware's most overrated game along with Neverwinter Nights.

Becouse you say so? May you please point out to some sort of broader consensus?

[FrozenDreamfall]

TheHoneyRuns wrote...

Legionaire-Shen wrote...

So students can refuse to make changes to their essay because they need to maintain academic integrity
and government can refuse to make changes to their policy when economy goes bad because they need to maintain bureaucratic integrity
and football team can refuse to make changes when they keep losing because they need to maintain tactic integrity

Okay, I don't agree with tx, but this argument is a bit flawed, yes?

A student answers to the demands of prof's will for a better grade, a government must answer to the whims of the peeps because that is democracy and football team answers to the owners because above entertainment, companies need to put the people in the seats.

I see what you're doing here, but a video game does not follow the same ruleset. Just because we support their games with our money we are not their editors nor their bosses nor their masters. We are the players. Asking for a better ending, a more cohesive ending, and recieving one would be a gift.

Not an expectation or demand based on guidelines.

Well I do not agree when 70-80 dollars were spent on that game and many didn't like it.If we paid that much for it we can demand it,if we were unhappy and unsatisfied we have the right to voice our opinions.When we were promised something and got something else we have the right to be angry.And if the company respects us already many gamers said they'll never buy another Bioware game again,so this reflects very bad on them as a company.My cousin is in PR and she knows this stuff too well.No,we are not their masters,no,we do not pay them.But without us to buy their products their masters wouldn't have where to pay them from.So in the end it still turns against them.

var fctb_tool=null;
function FCTB_Init_af44c60a314d4c9987ec7f44d125b0be(t)
{
fctb_tool=t;
start(fctb_tool);
}
FCTB_Init_af44c60a314d4c9987ec7f44d125b0be(document['FCTB_Init_56987fc3dce24b2383b9ed62d2d40e2c']); delete document['FCTB_Init_56987fc3dce24b2383b9ed62d2d40e2c']