420 réponses à ce sujet

[KBomb]

wizardryforever wrote...

Nothing, it's acting like you're entitled to a reward for neglecting a significant portion of the game that I have a problem with.

 
Multi-player is a significant portion of the game? Mass effect has always been a single player experience. Multi-player is not a significant portion of the game. It's an add-on that allows you an alternative way to gain EMS points—or so they said—and to have a reason to charge for map packs and weapons and characters. Please explain this completely clueless ideal you have that it is so significant to the story and plot of the Mass effect Universe, or why it should be. Honestly, I'm not sure I can even take anything you say seriously.


Shepard has been the main protagonist in all three games, a protagonist you, as the player controls and shapes. You're telling me that the fact of him/her living should only be a reward for those who play multi-player? Oh, and if this is just a reward for those who play MP, then why only tack it on to Destroy? Why not some easter egg that suits all endings?


Really, entitlement is such an over-used word. It's a word people are now beginning to use because they can't come up with a counter-argument as to why people are—and should be—upset over being misled. 


And I must say, the first “rule” in your signature should be the definition of ironic.

 

[KBomb]

thunderhawk862002 wrote...

Unless you have a PC and look into the coding, Shepard being alive is complete speculation. Everyone takes a breath before they die. Not to mention dying from mortal wounds suffered in combat isn't unheard of. A certain Drell gets mortally wounded and dies, just not right away.

 
Your argument may hold some merit if it showed Shepard take a breath, then still and fade to black.


The fact it shows him still..then breathe and then fade to black eludes to life, not death.

[redplague]

It isn't, but when has Bioware ever been interested in making claims that are accurate.

[wizardryforever]

KBomb wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

Nothing, it's acting like you're entitled to a reward for neglecting a significant portion of the game that I have a problem with.

 
Multi-player is a significant portion of the game? Mass effect has always been a single player experience. Multi-player is not a significant portion of the game. It's an add-on that allows you an alternative way to gain EMS points—or so they said—and to have a reason to charge for map packs and weapons and characters. Please explain this completely clueless ideal you have that it is so significant to the story and plot of the Mass effect Universe, or why it should be.

Yes, it is significant, largely because Bioware worked hard to give it to us and balance it out, spending a significant amount of time and money.  It ties into the single-player game by not only increasing your EMS, but when you promote your characters, you get them as war assets in all single-player games from that point forward.  Your haughty "I shouldn't have to play multiplayer" doesn't change multi-player's significance to the story.

Honestly, I'm not sure I can even take anything you say seriously.

  Well that's your problem, isn't it?  You've made up your mind, and won't listen to alternative points of view, yet you continue arguing as though it will matter.

Shepard has been the main protagonist in all three games, a protagonist you, as the player controls and shapes. You're telling me that the fact of him/her living should only be a reward for those who play multi-player? Oh, and if this is just a reward for those who play MP, then why only tack it on to Destroy? Why not some easter egg that suits all endings?

  I never said that it should.  That's academic, and not something I particularly care about.  Simply that it is, and people keep claiming that not having it is a punishment.  It isn't.  The lack of a reward doesn't not constitute punishment.  An analogy: Two brothers bring home their report cards.  One got all A's, while the other got mostly C's.  The one with straight A's gets rewarded with a new video game, while the one with C's gets nothing.  Getting nothing is not a punishment; a punishment would be getting grounded for bad grades.  You know, actual negative reinforcement.

Really, entitlement is such an over-used word. It's a word people are now beginning to use because they can't come up with a counter-argument as to why people are—and should be—upset over being misled. 


And I must say, the first “rule” in your signature should be the definition of ironic.

 

Perhaps, but in this case it's apt.  People are complaining "I don't want to do this part, but I should be rewarded as though I did anyway."  If that's not entitlement, I don't know what is.  And yes, people will believe any lie, even if the lie is that other people are trying to deceive you.  Because they want it to be true.

[thunderhawk862002]

KBomb wrote...

thunderhawk862002 wrote...

Unless you have a PC and look into the coding, Shepard being alive is complete speculation. Everyone takes a breath before they die. Not to mention dying from mortal wounds suffered in combat isn't unheard of. A certain Drell gets mortally wounded and dies, just not right away.

 
Your argument may hold some merit if it showed Shepard take a breath, then still and fade to black.


The fact it shows him still..then breathe and then fade to black eludes to life, not death.

Eludes to is the key phrase here.  Quite simply nothing about it is conclusive.  There is nothing about any ending that is conclusive beyond the Normandy and the Reaper threat.  You say he lives, I say he dies.  Only if you look into the pc coding does it say that he actually lives, unless someone made that up.

[Darth Wolfenbarg]

 That post was intended for new players. It wasn't intended for meta-gaming data miners who were scouring every last detail so they could see the secret ending in their perfect playthroughs. You can get synthesis without multiplayer, that's a detail new players will want to know. I mean, what would really be accomplished by removing that post? Well, you'll confuse the hell out of new players. That's it. To put it simply, that post wasn't for you.

Modifié par Darth Wolfenbarg, 31 mars 2012 - 07:13 .

[Lalalandia]

@Darth Wolfenbarg So they're only misleading those who are unfamiliar with the incredibly tortured definition of the word 'best' implied in your post? The post wouldn't need to be deleted, a simple 'best is defined as almost but not quite all the game content, for all the game content please play multiplayer'

Of course that would contradict what numerous Bioware employees have promised and how they have pitched the MP from the start, namely as an addition not a core part of the game. IF Bioware had sold the game as being a SP/MP hybrid that required MP I wouldn't have bought it as I don't want that product. Yet to get all the game content I apparently do have to play MP which would contradict those statements.

It's easy to fix or it would be easy to just say 'play MP' but instead we get vague comments like the twitter reply to Kub666 which seems to imply they don't know how their own end game sequence works. Why would they need players to report to them? They have the design specs just read them and reply yes/no.

@Kub666 Cheers for trying, yet another non-answer alas.

[KBomb]

 

wizardryforever wrote...

Yes, it is significant, largely because Bioware worked hard to give it to us and balance it out, spending a significant amount of time and money. It ties into the single-player game by not only increasing your EMS, but when you promote your characters, you get them as war assets in all single-player games from that point forward. Your haughty "I shouldn't have to play multiplayer" doesn't change multi-player's significance to the story.

The fact that Bioware spent a lot of man power and money on MP is something I don't dispute. But, as to the bolded: So glad you brought that up. You see, that is the point of contention, how you missed that is odd. All those things that MP adds to the SP, is exactly what Bioware stated you did not need. All those war assets and EMS points? Yeah, we're suppose to be able to obtain those in SP. Bioware stated MP was just an alternate way to gain them. You know, for those who want to play MP as to opposed to those who don't.
Not wanting to play MP isn't haughty. When something is presented as optional, it's intended usage of the word and implementation is “Available to be chose but not obligatory” Taking advantage of that isn't being entitled or haughty. Insults are the first sign you're losing grasp of the proper lexicon for discussion.

I never said that it should. That's academic, and not something I particularly care about. Simply that it is, and people keep claiming that not having it is a punishment. It isn't. The lack of a reward doesn't not constitute punishment. An analogy: Two brothers bring home their report cards. One got all A's, while the other got mostly C's. The one with straight A's gets rewarded with a new video game, while the one with C's gets nothing. Getting nothing is not a punishment; a punishment would be getting grounded for bad grades. You know, actual negative reinforcement.

You're building a strawman with your two brothers analogy. Especially when the “easter egg” theory isn't even something from Bioware, but from BSNers who can't accept that a mistake was made somewhere. But let's say it is true. The statement they made about the player not being walled off from any content in single player contradicts that. Either way, the statement is misleading.


“You don't have to play MP, it won't keep you from any content in SP. But if you do play MP, we'll reward you with a nice little easter egg in SP.”

You don't see that as contradictory?

Perhaps, but in this case it's apt. People are complaining "I don't want to do this part, but I should be rewarded as though I did anyway." If that's not entitlement, I don't know what is. And yes, people will believe any lie, even if the lie is that other people are trying to deceive you. Because they want it to be true.

People are complaining because they were told they didn't have to do it and would not miss out on any content and that is exactly what's happening. Your signature is ironic because some people will believe anything a company says because they want it to be true.

Modifié par KBomb, 31 mars 2012 - 08:25 .

[wizardryforever]

KBomb wrote...

 

wizardryforever wrote...

Yes, it is significant, largely because Bioware worked hard to give it to us and balance it out, spending a significant amount of time and money. It ties into the single-player game by not only increasing your EMS, but when you promote your characters, you get them as war assets in all single-player games from that point forward. Your haughty "I shouldn't have to play multiplayer" doesn't change multi-player's significance to the story.

The fact that Bioware spent a lot of man power and money on MP is something I don't dispute. But, as to the bolded: So glad you brought that up. You see, that is the point of contention, how you missed that is odd. All those things that MP adds to the SP, is exactly what Bioware stated you did not need. All those war assets and EMS points? Yeah, we're suppose to be able to obtain those in SP. Bioware stated MP was just an alternate way to gain them. You know, for those who want to play MP as to opposed to those who don't.
Not wanting to play MP isn't haughty. When something is presented as optional, it's intended usage of the word and implementation is “Available to be chose but not obligatory” Taking advantage of that isn't being entitled or haughty. Insults are the first sign you're losing grasp of the proper lexicon for discussion.

I never said that it should. That's academic, and not something I particularly care about. Simply that it is, and people keep claiming that not having it is a punishment. It isn't. The lack of a reward doesn't not constitute punishment. An analogy: Two brothers bring home their report cards. One got all A's, while the other got mostly C's. The one with straight A's gets rewarded with a new video game, while the one with C's gets nothing. Getting nothing is not a punishment; a punishment would be getting grounded for bad grades. You know, actual negative reinforcement.

You're building a strawman with your two brothers analogy. Especially when the “easter egg” theory isn't even something from Bioware, but from BSNers who can't accept that a mistake was made somewhere. But let's say it is true. The statement they made about the player not being walled off from any content in single player contradicts that. Either way, the statement is misleading.


“You don't have to play MP, it won't keep you from any content in SP. But if you do play MP, we'll reward you with a nice little easter egg in SP.”

You don't see that as contradictory?

Perhaps, but in this case it's apt. People are complaining "I don't want to do this part, but I should be rewarded as though I did anyway." If that's not entitlement, I don't know what is. And yes, people will believe any lie, even if the lie is that other people are trying to deceive you. Because they want it to be true.

People are complaining because they were told they didn't have to do it and would not miss out on any content and that is exactly what's happening. Your signature is ironic because some people will believe anything a company says because they want it to be true.

You don't miss out on content.  You miss out on an exceedingly minor 5 second scene.  A cutscene that really shows or proves nothing and doesn't ultimately affect anything is not worth getting this worked up over.  You do not need to do multi-player if you have some allergy to it, and your single player game is still perfectly completable with all endings accounted for.  But oh noes!  One 5 second cutscene is missing!  However will I cope? <_<

Easter eggs are a minor tidbit that you happen to come across in games.  They are not essential in any way, shape, or form.  In most games, people wouldn't even be aware that this little thing existed.  Hence the term, easter egg.  If there wasn't so much brou-ha-ha about this game and its endings, most people who play this game would be completely unaware that such a scene existed.

Rather than look for alternate interpretations of what someone said, people immediately jump to the conclusion that they're lying.  That to me is extremely telling of these people's personality.  For me, "he's lying," is the last conclusion I jump to unless I have reason to distrust that someone.  Bioware is definitely very close to that line after some of the things that they've said, but this isn't one of them.

As for the bolded section, just calling it like I see it.  Your attitude about multi-player exudes that "I shouldn't have to do this" mentality that comes with *sigh* "entitlement."

[redplague]

You don't miss out on content.  You miss out on an exceedingly minor 5 second scene.  A cutscene that really shows or proves nothing and doesn't ultimately affect anything is not worth getting this worked up over.  You do not need to do multi-player if you have some allergy to it, and your single player game is still perfectly completable with all endings accounted for.  But oh noes!  One 5 second cutscene is missing!  However will I cope? <_<

Easter eggs are a minor tidbit that you happen to come across in games.  They are not essential in any way, shape, or form.  In most games, people wouldn't even be aware that this little thing existed.  Hence the term, easter egg.  If there wasn't so much brou-ha-ha about this game and its endings, most people who play this game would be completely unaware that such a scene existed.

Rather than look for alternate interpretations of what someone said, people immediately jump to the conclusion that they're lying.  That to me is extremely telling of these people's personality.  For me, "he's lying," is the last conclusion I jump to unless I have reason to distrust that someone.  Bioware is definitely very close to that line after some of the things that they've said, but this isn't one of them.

As for the bolded section, just calling it like I see it.  Your attitude about multi-player exudes that "I shouldn't have to do this" mentality that comes with *sigh* "entitlement."

It might only be 5 seconds, but the meaning of those 5 seconds is a lot more substantial.  It means that the person that you have taken through 3 games with such emotional investement has survived.  This indestructible figure of Shepard who has battled so many and has laid so many bodies at his/her feet as come through once again.

This is not an easter egg, this is victory.

[jspiess]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

............ space magic?

[KBomb]

wizardryforever wrote...

You don't miss out on content.  You miss out on an exceedingly minor 5 second scene.  A cutscene that really shows or proves nothing and doesn't ultimately affect anything is not worth getting this worked up over.  You do not need to do multi-player if you have some allergy to it, and your single player game is still perfectly completable with all endings accounted for.  But oh noes!  One 5 second cutscene is missing!  However will I cope? <_<

Easter eggs are a minor tidbit that you happen to come across in games.  They are not essential in any way, shape, or form.  In most games, people wouldn't even be aware that this little thing existed.  Hence the term, easter egg.  If there wasn't so much brou-ha-ha about this game and its endings, most people who play this game would be completely unaware that such a scene existed.

Rather than look for alternate interpretations of what someone said, people immediately jump to the conclusion that they're lying.  That to me is extremely telling of these people's personality.  For me, "he's lying," is the last conclusion I jump to unless I have reason to distrust that someone.  Bioware is definitely very close to that line after some of the things that they've said, but this isn't one of them.

As for the bolded section, just calling it like I see it.  Your attitude about multi-player exudes that "I shouldn't have to do this" mentality that comes with *sigh* "entitlement."

 
It doesn't matter if it's five seconds or two seconds. It's content. What about that do you not understand? People act because it's such a small scene, some shouldn't find it important. How many would flip if they cut out the sex scenes? I say a simple kiss and fade to black is enough. You don't need those few extra seconds to have a complete romance scene. What about some of the conversation you have with squad mates? Some if it has nothing whatsoever to do with the story line and some are short, how would people feel if they cut that out? Those things don't matter to some people, but to others it does. It doesn't add any importance, but it adds to the enjoyment.


Your condescending attitude does not build your argument nor does it add credence to it. I don't have aversion to MP. I play GoW, CoD, L4D and Halo. I play those games for story and for MP with my friends. Mass Effect has always been a personal experience to me and I would like for it to remain so. Furthermore, no one on this thread should have to justify their reasons for not wanting to play MP. If you like it, fine. I am glad you find enjoyment in it. Don't be an elitist and act as though your enjoyment is a standard for why everyone should play it. What about those who don't have XBL or a good enough connection, or no internet connection at all?

And stop saying it's an easter egg. You go around telling people to stop jumping to conclusions and then you jump to a conclusion. Bioware has never said it was an easter egg, so until they do it's an assumption. One thought of to answer a question you don't have the answer to.
And for the record, I have never stated Bioware lied. I always took the diplomatic path and said that misinformation was being passed along. Whether this is a bug, or a miscalculation or misinformation—or as you believe an easter egg—all people want is an answer to it. You don't want to see any of that because again, you're jumping to conclusions.

And your “calling it like you see it” is simple sycophancy. Saying “I shouldn't have to play MP” is not entitlement when you're told you don't have to play MP if you don't want to. You know what I am entitled to? Correct information about a product I purchase. As is every consumer out there.

Now, I've said all I am saying to you. It's obvious that you're blind to the issue behind why so many are upset. You're building your argument on terms that don't apply or that you even understand. We'll have to agree to disagree. This thread is important to some people and I don't want to be the cause if it gets closed due to bickering or what ever reason they may find to shut it down. If you have further discussion, you know how to use a PM, otherwise, it is what it is.



 

Modifié par KBomb, 01 avril 2012 - 12:40 .

[BigZ7337]

Wow, the Bioware forum moderators/PR have now moved from just locking threads about this to deleting them completely. The link will fail, but check it out: http://social.biowar...ndex/10836128/3

Here's what I had to say in the deleted thread:

What I think is goofy, is that for people that do play multiplayer, they have around at least 3,000 extra points that don't stand for anything. I just don't understand the idea of the Galactic Readiness rating, it doesn't make sense. Why wouldn't Bioware just give people that successfully complete the Multiplayer missions extra war assets, like 10 for bronze 20 for silver and 40 for gold. That way people that can't or don't want to play Multiplayer wouldn't be literally punished in single player by having their Military Assets halved.

To all of the goofy people saying that Shepard being alive (which in itself is very strange as he/she is back on Earth, and would have been burned to ashes if he/she reentered Earth's atmosphere after the Citadel exploded) isn't the optimal ending, you're crazy. I personally believe that if you choose the Control or Synthesis ending Shepard becomes the Human Reaper, but no matter what any ending where Shepard survives and the Reapers are still defeated is optimal. However, even if you have a different opinion on what is the best ending, the fact that people are denied any material in the single player by not playing multiplayer (especially when developers officially state otherwise) is wrong. There is also absolutely zero doubt that people that only play single player are punished, what else would you call a 50% reduction in your War Assets, the score that determines the ending of the game?

Further, as to how Bioware could fix this issue, they should first come out and explain themselves. If they can't explain themselves (due to some PR or legal issue) they NEED to at least delete the Sticky thread in which they blatantly lie. Then, since I doubt they could or would release a patch that gets rid of the Galactic Readiness rating, Bioware needs to increase the base GR to at least 60%. That way it wouldn't necessarily be easy to obtain the Shepard breathing scene, but it would be possible without playing Multiplayer. The other option, of course, is to release new DLC that provide enough War Assets to get over 4,000 EMS, but players shouldn't be forced to buy anything to get the optimal ending of single player.

[oblique9]

Gtacatalina wrote...

I really would like to know to!

I've imported a charater from ME1, ME2. I have the CE version. I've done all the side missions, and only come up with 3700EMS.

Someone has mentioned that there is a possible bug with not adding the war assets correctly. I don't know if this has been verified though.

Certainly sounds like it. They planned on it being possible, didn't take the time to test it, now slowly realizing it's not, and adding it to the list of things to un****.

[Tazzmission]

the mp is mainly for the third ending synthesis because if you dont have your ems up you only get controll and destroy

also note in destroy you have i believe 3 outcomes

[Kub666]

Tazzmission wrote...

the mp is mainly for the third ending synthesis because if you dont have your ems up you only get controll and destroy

also note in destroy you have i believe 3 outcomes

Synthesis is possible without MP. The "Shepard lives" variation of Destroy ending is not.

[KBomb]

Tazzmission wrote...

the mp is mainly for the third ending synthesis because if you dont have your ems up you only get controll and destroy

also note in destroy you have i believe 3 outcomes

 
No.


You don't need MP to gain Synthesis, Control or Destroy. I believe you only need 2,800 EMS to get Synthesis. You need at most 1,750 for Destroy and 2,050 for Control. All easily obtained within SP.


The difference for Destroy is if you obtain 4,000 EMS and are able to pass the persuasion check with TIM, or 5,000 EMS if you cannot. With each of those two outcomes, you get a special cutscene at the end called Deep Breath. This is only gained by choosing Destroy with the proper amount of EMS.


The only differences in outcomes for Destroy is Earth being destroyed (below 1,750), devastated (below 2,350) , or saved (2,650). Again, all easily obtainable in SP.


Considering Destroy does have the most variants and most consequences (though not really visually different) and the fact it's tied to Deep Breath, I would say it's the “optimal” ending. You cannot gain 4,000 EMS without MP. So, without MP, you're only able to see a partial ending. Which sucks.

[admcmei]

You guys forget about somthing a lot more significant you need 4000 EMS for, the Anderson scene. It's a great scene, a lot more relevant than those useless 15 seconds.

[KBomb]

-Deleted due to change of information!-

Modifié par KBomb, 01 avril 2012 - 07:54 .

[Prism]

admcmei wrote...

You guys forget about somthing a lot more significant you need 4000 EMS for, the Anderson scene. It's a great scene, a lot more relevant than those useless 15 seconds.

What scene? That last convo when you look at Earth? You don't need 4000 ems for that.

[KBomb]

Prismvg wrote...

What scene? That last convo when you look at Earth? You don't need 4000 ems for that.

Oh, crap. You're right. It's getting too late for me! But you do have to get that scene if you want to get the Deep Breath for just 4k. Thanks for pointing it out to him--and to me!

[Forsythia]

I don't get why some are defending BioWare in this. They said multiplayer was completely optional, it is not. Why is that so hard to understand? And 'just play 2 or 3 matches' doesn't cut it, some do not want, or cannot, play multiplayer. Some don't want to pay for Xbox Live. Whatever reason, it's a valid reason. BioWare is now clearly punishing those who do not play multiplayer.

[Kub666]

Forsythia wrote...

I don't get why some are defending BioWare in this. They said multiplayer was completely optional, it is not. Why is that so hard to understand? And 'just play 2 or 3 matches' doesn't cut it, some do not want, or cannot, play multiplayer. Some don't want to pay for Xbox Live. Whatever reason, it's a valid reason. BioWare is now clearly punishing those who do not play multiplayer.

I suppose some just don't understand the EMS / Assets / GR system. It is convulted and silly. Maybe even Chris and Jarrett do not understand how this works for SP, as I would not like to assume they are misleading us on purpose. Or maybe this really is a misunderstanding, and they consider the only ending in which Shepard lives not the "best" one? Whichever it is, I would like them to stop ignoring this issue.

[Super.Sid]

As far as I can tell , it could have been done to prevent piracy. There is no way to get the best ending without having over 4k or 5k ems.That number cannot be got from SP alone and hence MP is indirectly mandatory to get that ending.

[Lalalandia]

But it won't prevent piracy as all the 'scene' has to do is edit the WA values in coalesced.ini, this only inconveniences legitimate purchasers.