299 réponses à ce sujet

[piemanz]

It's the "If you're not with us you're against us" mentality. It's easy to just lump everyone into Pro ender and Retake, without actually looking at the reason they feel the way they do on an individual basis.

[Adanu]

Total Biscuit wrote...

Alot of it is simply arguments getting out of hand.

Liking or not liking the endings is to a degree a subjective matter of opinion. There's a point where defending your position overlaps with attacking someone else's, and that's where the trouble starts. If you genuinely can't even see or understand the other persons viewpoint, then it's human nature to demonise the other person as 'wrong'.

I personally think we should all stand together on this subject though. Even if you love very single aspect of the ending, it's clear most people don't, and in a game that is built on choice, where we were promised multiple different endings and outcomes that would fit our Shepards stories, to end up with one ending in 3 colours, all with the same grim dark tone and barely distinguishable variations is a terrible thing, even if those three variations are exactly what you wanted.

I'd implore the pro enders to stand by their fellow fans, and help us all to get the same level of satisfaction and enjoyment from he series we all love as hey have now. Remember this is always going to be an OPTIONAL DLC, even if it gets made, no one will be forced to get it if by don't feel he need for it. And even if you are happy, is more variety in the endings really a bad thing? Won't it just give you more replay value, more paths to take your Shepard on? More Mass Effect to see and experience?

This isnt an us vs them scenario, this is just making sure we all get the things we not just want, but we were actually promised.

Making an attempt to be 'subtle' and prod pro enders to hold your line for you doesn't help your case.

As it is, I don't appreciate your interpretation of the endings and I'm sick anti ending people making dozens and dozens of threads every day about the same ****ing ****.

[AlexXIV]

Aurvant wrote...

The Pro-Enders use an Alinsky model of debate that dictates that the way to win the argument is to separate and polarize their opponent, use passive aggressive tactics to undermine the opponents character, and then use an assured tone of intelligence or superiority.

First they make their blanket statement of admiration of something but offer no context. Then they state an observation of disbelief that someone could disagree. Then, when someone does, they make subtle insults by using charged words like "mob" or "groupthink". These terms are mean to section off their opponent to make them appear out of the mainstream.

The opponent has no real defense to this. They are immediately put on the defensive, but it's just a trap. By becoming defensive the pro-ended can just prod at them with a smug sense of intelligence and just make the anti-ender appear stupid or uneducated.

This is evident in their other charged phrase of "you didn't get it". It's a backhanded way of saying "I'm smarter than you" and it'll make people upset.

This is why there is animosity.

Well this and people who hate the ending are upset Bioware killed the franchinse and think they should fix it before it is too late or never happens. And pro-enders are the ones who are part of the problem, not the solution. I personally think ALL FANS should stand together and tell Bioware that what they did is unacceptable. I know it is a bit gross example but at times it feels for me as it must feel if you fight for human rights and the very humans you do it for try to stab your back for some reason. That's why I can't really see why there are any other options than these people being stupid (they don't know what they are doing and/or just don't see the problem) or they have an interest to defend Bioware. Either coorporates or people who have someone in Bioware they they want to protect or whatever. Or maybe employees with 2nd account, I don't know.

What makes me especially upset at these people is simply that they can do neither. They cannot join our cause and help getting an ending that makes sense, nor can they explain why it makes sense to them. You get something along "well it had to end with sacrifice" or "they are a strong opponent, it makes sense that it is not easy to stop them", etc. Hell, that's not the point. They fight strawmen or plant strawmen or whatever. The point is that the ending breaks with the lore and consistency of the plot, it doesn't matter that everyone dies. It matters that you get no conclusion and that it feels like it doesn't match to ME at all.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 01 avril 2012 - 03:01 .

[Aurvant]

@Adanu:

Fortunately, these aren't your boards and people can still post whatever grievances they have.

[Marinemike69]

It's just that some people are content with things that aren't great or subpar. Like comunism/ socialism/ etc. You got people who like being told what to do, what to think, what to eat, have less, starve, etc.

All I've got to say is if u guys like the ending your welcome to it. That's fine.

Me and alot of people like me see the ending as total garbage. I at least expect a better ending for the $80 I paid. The product was not worth what I paid. Not a color code your ending crap.

Again respectfuly differnce in oppion/ quality. You guys like the lifestyle of liveing in a place like Cuba I like liveing in america.

[Cicero.me]

Marinemike69 wrote...

It's just that some people are content with things that aren't great or subpar. Like comunism/ socialism/ etc. You got people who like being told what to do, what to think, what to eat, have less, starve, etc.

All I've got to say is if u guys like the ending your welcome to it. That's fine.

Me and alot of people like me see the ending as total garbage. I at least expect a better ending for the $80 I paid. The product was not worth what I paid. Not a color code your ending crap.

Again respectfuly differnce in oppion/ quality. You guys like the lifestyle of liveing in a place like Cuba I like liveing in america.

That is not even remotely correct. Its not about being told what to do or like. That is a bad comparison and is full of holes. On just principle, your group polarization is actually closer to socialism than not. Just because alot of people think something is so, that does not invalidate others' opinions. In fact, there is a person on the forums working towards their doctorate in literature who likes the ending. Take that for what it is, but just because many people say something is so, does not neccessarily make it true.

Well this and people who hate the ending are upset Bioware killed the franchinse and think they should fix it before it is too late or never happens. And pro-enders are the ones who are part of the problem, not the solution. I personally think ALL FANS should stand together and tell Bioware that what they did is unacceptable. I know it is a bit gross example but at times it feels for me as it must feel if you fight for human rights and the very humans you do it for try to stab your back for some reason. That's why I can't really see why there are any other options than these people being stupid (they don't know what they are doing and/or just don't see the problem) or they have an interest to defend Bioware. Either coorporates or people who have someone in Bioware they they want to protect or whatever. Or maybe employees with 2nd account, I don't know.

What makes me especially upset at these people is simply that they can do neither. They cannot join our cause and help getting an ending that makes sense, nor can they explain why it makes sense to them. You get something along "well it had to end with sacrifice" or "they are a strong opponent, it makes sense that it is not easy to stop them", etc. Hell, that's not the point. They fight strawmen or plant strawmen or whatever. The point is that the ending breaks with the lore and consistency of the plot, it doesn't matter that everyone dies. It matters that you get no conclusion and that it feels like it doesn't match to ME at all.

What makes me most upset is that "retake" members in general cannot accept the fact that other people have differing opinions and that by not agreeing with them, that makes them traitors, employees, EA moles, morons, and other nonsense. I personally did not care for the endings ,but I have no problem with people who say that they liked the ending.

Modifié par Cicero.me, 01 avril 2012 - 03:16 .

[leapingmonkeys]

I think there are a couple things going on.

1) The Internet Effect
Its been shown multiple times that when people feel they are anonymous and that their actions will have no personal consequence, that people behave in antisocial ways. I suspect that most of these people who make offensive, insulting posts would be much more civil if they were physically in the same room talking to each other.

2) Insecurity
In general, when someone reacts negatively to an opposing idea (such as "the ending was good or bad") it indicates some basic insecurity. The idea that someone could view something differently somehow threatens them. I am not quite certain how an opinion over a video game causes people to feel threatened, but there seems to be some of that going on as well.

The response that I have given to people who say they liked ME3 is "I'm glad the game meet your expectations. However there are clearly a large number of paying customers who find that the game does not live up to its expectations. As a mass produced product whose premise is that it is 'co-created' with the players and supposed to be a 'unique experience' for each player and supposed to driven by past decisions of each player, the game must have *multiple* outcomes, not just the one that you liked. The shortcoming with ME3 is that it has only one outcome. If that is the outcome that you liked, that is good - for you. There are many other consumers of this mass produced product who have made different choices than you and therefore, rightly, expect different outcomes. The game needs to have sufficient depth to include multiple outcomes to satisfy the multiple expectations set by the multiple players."

Modifié par leapingmonkeys, 01 avril 2012 - 03:14 .

[nwj94]

Rule 1 of the internet. No matter how just the cause, they will always be people on both sides who flame.

[beyondsolo]

Aurvant wrote...

The Pro-Enders use an Alinsky model of debate that dictates that the way to win the argument is to separate and polarize their opponent, use passive aggressive tactics to undermine the opponents character, and then use an assured tone of intelligence or superiority.

First they make their blanket statement of admiration of something but offer no context. Then they state an observation of disbelief that someone could disagree. Then, when someone does, they make subtle insults by using charged words like "mob" or "groupthink". These terms are mean to section off their opponent to make them appear out of the mainstream.

The opponent has no real defense to this. They are immediately put on the defensive, but it's just a trap. By becoming defensive the pro-ended can just prod at them with a smug sense of intelligence and just make the anti-ender appear stupid or uneducated.

This is evident in their other charged phrase of "you didn't get it". It's a backhanded way of saying "I'm smarter than you" and it'll make people upset.

This is why there is animosity.

While I don't claim that everyone supporting the ending on the forums has done so, the majority has strictly ignored every single bit of argumentation that has been made against the ending (which can be researched more than easily to get an idea what the whole debate is actually about) and continued to make statements pretty much the way you stated it, Aurvant.

I think there's no better way of proving one's own post completely invalid, as many pro-enders have repeatedly shown, than to purposefully ignore everything that has been said in a discussion so far and simply blurt their opinion in the middle of it. That is disrespectful. It is disrespectful because people have gone to great lengths to make their point about the ending. To ignore all of that and collectively dismiss all their claims without picking up on their argumentation will be interpreted as an insult.

Now don't take me wrong. Everyone, no matter their opinion, is welcome to share it (as I've stated on numerous other occasions). But you simply cannot expect that an opinion thrown into the middle of a discussion, completely out of context of any presented argumentation and evidence, will be considered a contribution of any sort.

If anyone wants to make a credible point in favor or against the ending, they need to pick up on something that has substance, i.e. presented evidence and/or game material. I have read many threads and articles in favor of and against the ending, and I must say that--based on this--the pro-enders' argumentation has lacked substance so far.

I don't mind people creating threads and posts in favor of the ending. In fact, I appreciate thought provoking argumentation from either side (regardless of the fact that I hate the ending). But if people want their posts to be considered argumentation rather than opinion, they need to present evidence to support their claims. Whether or not the reader is ultimately convinced by the post is up the reader. But if the aim of a post is to convince someone, then it better be convincing. Platonic ramblings without context or reference to the subject at hand are not convincing.

Modifié par beyondsolo, 01 avril 2012 - 03:23 .

[ericjdev]

I don't think people choose their gut response to things. Based on that I got zero problem with those that like the ending. We are all individuals not groups. When you start calling someone proender you are already on the path to srereotype land. I don't say hold the line anymore because I don't want to be viewed as part of a movement.

[withneelandi]

It is basically the same situation as the one after Da2 came out.

Lots of "you are obviously an idiot if you think that was good/bad (delete as appropriate)".

It just seems to be the way the internet works, you can't like something someone else doesn't without it turning into anger. Its odd, because in the real world if you find out someone likes a game or a band most would just shrug and move on, on the internet the same situation results in lots of anger for everyone.

[Cicero.me]

beyondsolo wrote...

Aurvant wrote...

The Pro-Enders use an Alinsky model of debate that dictates that the way to win the argument is to separate and polarize their opponent, use passive aggressive tactics to undermine the opponents character, and then use an assured tone of intelligence or superiority.

First they make their blanket statement of admiration of something but offer no context. Then they state an observation of disbelief that someone could disagree. Then, when someone does, they make subtle insults by using charged words like "mob" or "groupthink". These terms are mean to section off their opponent to make them appear out of the mainstream.

The opponent has no real defense to this. They are immediately put on the defensive, but it's just a trap. By becoming defensive the pro-ended can just prod at them with a smug sense of intelligence and just make the anti-ender appear stupid or uneducated.

This is evident in their other charged phrase of "you didn't get it". It's a backhanded way of saying "I'm smarter than you" and it'll make people upset.

This is why there is animosity.

While I don't claim that everyone supporting the ending on the forums has done so, the majority has strictly ignored every single bit of argumentation that has been made against the ending (which can be researched more than easily to get an idea what the whole debate is actually about) and continued to make statements pretty much the way you stated it, Aurvant.

I think there's no better way of proving one's own post completely invalid, as many pro-enders have repeatedly shown, than to purposefully ignore everything that has been said in a discussion so far and simply blurt their opinion in the middle of it. That is disrespectful. It is disrespectful because people have gone to great lengths to make their point about the ending. To ignore all of that and collectively dismiss all their claims without picking up on their argumentation is an insult.

Now don't take me wrong. Everyone, no matter their opinion, is welcome to share it (as I've stated on numerous other occasions). But you simply cannot expect that an opinion thrown into the middle of a discussion, completely out of context of any presented argumentation and evidence, will be considered a contribution of any sort.

If anyone wants to make a credible point in favor or against the ending, they need to pick up on something that has substance, i.e. presented evidence and/or game material. I have read many threads and articles in favor of and against the ending, and I must say that--based on this--the pro-enders' argumentation has lacked substance so far.

I don't mind people creating threads and posts in favor of the ending. In fact, I appreciate thought provoking argumentation from either side (regardless of the fact that I hate the ending). But if people want their posts to be considered argumentation rather than opinion, they need to present evidence to support their claims. Whether or not the reader is ultimately convinced by the post is up the reader. But if the aim of a post is to convince someone, then it better be convincing. Platonic ramblings without context or reference to the subject at hand are not convincing.

Interestingly enough I have seen more of the above stated examples come from so called "anti-enders" rather than pro enders. I again did not enjoy the ending personally, but can see and understand why someone might have enjoyed it.  Your uses of polarizing are interesting because it is generally "anti-enders" who are the most polarized group and is vocal about it. The amount of group thinking bias here is rampant. If one were to take a theoretical objective take on your post on top here they would notice that many of the example you have given are perpetuated by bost sides. Yet it is the "anti-enders" who do more of it by the fact that there are more of them.


Directed at beyondsolo:

I agree with most of what you posted about sharing opinions. I do find however, that many people say the ending just sucks without actually discussing it. I find that to rather distressing usually. If one has ever read the Death Gate Cycle novels, the authors ended the series similarly and most people I know of who have read it agrees with me that it was well done and unique.

Modifié par Cicero.me, 01 avril 2012 - 03:27 .

[malra]

This is the result of the biotroll spell. Sadly, it is semi-permanent spell that causes normally reasonable people to exhibit troll like behavior that actually increases in intensity over a long period of time. Sadly, some spell damage can be permanent even if a cure is offered.

[PSUHammer]

Torrible wrote...

http://www.blistered...bate-para-rene/ 

Great read...I definitely fall on the "Paragon" side of this conversation.

[PSUHammer]

leapingmonkeys wrote...

I think there are a couple things going on.

1) The Internet Effect
Its been shown multiple times that when people feel they are anonymous and that their actions will have no personal consequence, that people behave in antisocial ways. I suspect that most of these people who make offensive, insulting posts would be much more civil if they were physically in the same room talking to each other.

2) Insecurity
In general, when someone reacts negatively to an opposing idea (such as "the ending was good or bad") it indicates some basic insecurity. The idea that someone could view something differently somehow threatens them. I am not quite certain how an opinion over a video game causes people to feel threatened, but there seems to be some of that going on as well.

The response that I have given to people who say they liked ME3 is "I'm glad the game meet your expectations. However there are clearly a large number of paying customers who find that the game does not live up to its expectations. As a mass produced product whose premise is that it is 'co-created' with the players and supposed to be a 'unique experience' for each player and supposed to driven by past decisions of each player, the game must have *multiple* outcomes, not just the one that you liked. The shortcoming with ME3 is that it has only one outcome. If that is the outcome that you liked, that is good - for you. There are many other consumers of this mass produced product who have made different choices than you and therefore, rightly, expect different outcomes. The game needs to have sufficient depth to include multiple outcomes to satisfy the multiple expectations set by the multiple players."

RE your points 1 & 2 I totally agree.  I have to say, you run across #2 all the time, in life.  Some people are just not capable understanding that others view things differently then they do.  Some of this comes down to maturity, life experience and education.

[iamthedave3]

Adanu wrote...

Total Biscuit wrote...

Alot of it is simply arguments getting out of hand.

Liking or not liking the endings is to a degree a subjective matter of opinion. There's a point where defending your position overlaps with attacking someone else's, and that's where the trouble starts. If you genuinely can't even see or understand the other persons viewpoint, then it's human nature to demonise the other person as 'wrong'.

I personally think we should all stand together on this subject though. Even if you love very single aspect of the ending, it's clear most people don't, and in a game that is built on choice, where we were promised multiple different endings and outcomes that would fit our Shepards stories, to end up with one ending in 3 colours, all with the same grim dark tone and barely distinguishable variations is a terrible thing, even if those three variations are exactly what you wanted.

I'd implore the pro enders to stand by their fellow fans, and help us all to get the same level of satisfaction and enjoyment from he series we all love as hey have now. Remember this is always going to be an OPTIONAL DLC, even if it gets made, no one will be forced to get it if by don't feel he need for it. And even if you are happy, is more variety in the endings really a bad thing? Won't it just give you more replay value, more paths to take your Shepard on? More Mass Effect to see and experience?

This isnt an us vs them scenario, this is just making sure we all get the things we not just want, but we were actually promised.

Making an attempt to be 'subtle' and prod pro enders to hold your line for you doesn't help your case.

As it is, I don't appreciate your interpretation of the endings and I'm sick anti ending people making dozens and dozens of threads every day about the same ****ing ****.

You could just not click them.

[AlexXIV]

Cicero.me wrote...
What makes me most upset is that "retake" members in general cannot accept the fact that other people have differing opinions and that by not agreeing with them, that makes them traitors, employees, EA moles, morons, and other nonsense. I personally did not care for the endings ,but I have no problem with people who say that they liked the ending.

I have no problem with people who liked the endings. I have problems with people who say the endings are fine. Mind you most people know themselves good enough to know if they are shallow, easy to please, or what part of the game they are interested and which not. But saying that something is fine implies that it is important for you and works. Both cannot be true for someone who says the ending is fine. Either you don't care, or, if you care, then you have higher expectations.

You don't seem to realize that some people just come here to defend Bioware. For them it is not about ME, ME3 or the ending, they just come here to make a point that everything is perfect and people are just a bunch of crybabies. That's why I have really become more and more rude lately. I don't care if certain people hate me for that either because they are just moles in my book.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 01 avril 2012 - 03:41 .

[beyondsolo]

Cicero.me wrote...

beyondsolo wrote...

Aurvant wrote...

* anti-pyramid snip*

.While I don't claim that everyone supporting the ending on the forums has done so, the majority has strictly ignored every single bit of argumentation that has been made against the ending (which can be researched more than easily to get an idea what the whole debate is actually about) and continued to make statements pretty much the way you stated it, Aurvant.

I think there's no better way of proving one's own post completely invalid, as many pro-enders have repeatedly shown, than to purposefully ignore everything that has been said in a discussion so far and simply blurt their opinion in the middle of it. That is disrespectful. It is disrespectful because people have gone to great lengths to make their point about the ending. To ignore all of that and collectively dismiss all their claims without picking up on their argumentation is an insult.

Now don't take me wrong. Everyone, no matter their opinion, is welcome to share it (as I've stated on numerous other occasions). But you simply cannot expect that an opinion thrown into the middle of a discussion, completely out of context of any presented argumentation and evidence, will be considered a contribution of any sort.

If anyone wants to make a credible point in favor or against the ending, they need to pick up on something that has substance, i.e. presented evidence and/or game material. I have read many threads and articles in favor of and against the ending, and I must say that--based on this--the pro-enders' argumentation has lacked substance so far.

I don't mind people creating threads and posts in favor of the ending. In fact, I appreciate thought provoking argumentation from either side (regardless of the fact that I hate the ending). But if people want their posts to be considered argumentation rather than opinion, they need to present evidence to support their claims. Whether or not the reader is ultimately convinced by the post is up the reader. But if the aim of a post is to convince someone, then it better be convincing. Platonic ramblings without context or reference to the subject at hand are not convincing.

Interestingly enough I have seen more of the above stated examples come from so called "anti-enders" rather than pro enders. I again did not enjoy the ending personally, but can see and understand why someone might have enjoyed it.  Your uses of polarizing are interesting because it is generally "anti-enders" who are the most polarized group and is vocal about it. The amount of group thinking bias here is rampant. If one were to take a theoretical objective take on your post on top here they would notice that many of the example you have given are perpetuated by bost sides. Yet it is the "anti-enders" who do more of it by the fact that there are more of them.

I think I see where you're coming from. You're essentialy quantifying insubstantial content posted by both sides, claiming that because there're more anti-enders active on the forums they must subsequently also be posting the larger amount of insubstantial content (i.e. content that doesn't pick up on any previous train of thought, argumentation, evidence, or game material).

I'm not going to speak against this point of yours because I have no evidence. While I don't think that you have, either, I'm willing to surrender the quantity argument because I tend to agree that there are more anti-enders activeley posting.

However, among the many threads and articles in favor of the ending I have read, I have not once seen anything that has convincingly addressed the points made in substantial content posted by pro-enders. I have seen insults (on both sides, granted) on the forums, insults in what calls itself "gaming journalism," but I haven't seen anything that actually explains the problems with the ending. And those problems are there, or otherwise the ending controversy wouldn't have arisen in the first place. Where the pro-enders have been losing so far is in the field of quality.

Modifié par beyondsolo, 01 avril 2012 - 03:41 .

[AlexXIV]

Hammer6767 wrote...
RE your points 1 & 2 I totally agree.  I have to say, you run across #2 all the time, in life.  Some people are just not capable understanding that others view things differently then they do.  Some of this comes down to maturity, life experience and education.

So out of curiousity. Do you think ALL things in life are a matter of opinion? Or do you think there are some facts that you can't interpret in any way you like?

[SaleemRa]

Thanks guys for having this discussion in what was mostly a civil discussion. We may not like the same thing but its important to behave properly even if they arent any repercussion for being a jerk. All this flame baiting chain pulling get people no where and only makes the community look like a bunch of tools. Fighting amongst ourselves here only reinforces the negative stereotype type of video game players in the media. I swear I would not be surprised if some douchebag politician trying to earn his stripes will in a few months point to this and say "see how unreasonable they are - the internet needs more regulation blah blah blah".

Despite liking the ending as I have said before I do hope that Bioware addresses the concerns of those who dont. I for one would love a couple extra hours of new content in the game. So I will hold that line with you even if I am content with what I got so far.

[Aurvant]

@Cicero.me

Whether you meant to or not you used the exact same tactics I told you about. You immediately dismissed the anti-Enders arguments by claiming they're a product of rampant groupthink. This implies that you don't believe these people are actually thinking for themselves. This is the type of slight insults I warned you about and you went and used it anyways.

[MoonsKisu]

GlassElephant wrote...

I just stay out of it. That's my general rule when it comes to internet flame wars- they're not worth it. I hate the ending, but if someone else likes it I'm not going to give them a hard time about it. I'm happy that there are people who enjoy the ending. I wish that I could have too.

[OhoniX]

No one on the retake movement is saying I didn't like the ending, they
are saying it was objectively bad. There is such a monumental difference
that it has to be taken into consideration.

Ah. Well if they're being objective about it then they're just objectively wrong then, because it definitely isn't an objectively bad ending, it's just an ending that you can choose to hold the personal opinion that you don't like it. As is the case with any ending.

“I did not like the ending, and this is why. Let me try to
convince you to see the same problems that I do and, if you do, to take
steps to fix it. I'm sorry to inform you that if you either cannot see
the problems, or do see them but refuse to fix them, then I no longer
have faith in you as an author, and will no longer seek out your works;
nor can I in good conscience recommend them to others.”

That is my ‘entitlement’. BioWare will do what it will with the information.

Yeah, you're more polite than some, but you're still on the list. Really, you guys should just start a kickstarter to pay for all this extra work you want Bioware to do to tailor their game to your tastes.

I can debate a 4 year old on whether or not the sun exists, but that
doesn't change whether or not is it a fact......objectivity only implies
that something is factual. Whether or not a couple of people decide to
debate something has no relevance with whether or not something is
actually objective.

Yes, but claiming that your opinion is a fact does not make it a fact.

So what you're saying is that the entire field of literary criticism
is invalid and nothing more than opinion, and that there is no such
thing as narrative causality at work in a story.

Both true. Literary criticism is by no means objective fact. It's a shared opinion consensus. A critic, no matter how well trained, is only of value to the degree that people agree with what he has to say. Within formal literary circles this tends to mean how well he follows the accepted orthodoxy as to what constitutes "good" literature, but that doesn't make what he says objectively true, it only makes it in compliance with the orthodoxy.

I'd implore the pro enders to stand by their fellow fans, and
help us all to get the same level of satisfaction and enjoyment from he
series we all love as hey have now. Remember this is always going to be
an OPTIONAL DLC, even if it gets made, no one will be forced to get it
if by don't feel he need for it. And even if you are happy, is more
variety in the endings really a bad thing? Won't it just give you more
replay value, more paths to take your Shepard on? More Mass Effect to
see and experience?

Yes, but it also means extra work for Bioware, and since this was something they hadn't planned ahead for, it'll likely mean a LOT of work, and I'd rather they spend their time working on the DLC and new games that they'd planned to be working on right now, rather than candy for spoiled brats. By insisting that they work on new endings for you (which I assumre you will NOT satisfy a lot of people, no matter what they turn out), that means that they will not be working on new content for the rest of us that have already moved on from the ending.

In regards to this whole opinion thing . . . while I agree people are
entitled to their own opinions, I think there is a line that has to be
drawn. For example, I can go around saying "In my opinion, zebras are
red!" Just because I threw in a "In my opinion . . . " at the beginning
doesn't make it a valid opinion, because its factually incorrect.

Nah, it's a valid opinion. It's by no means a valid fact, but it's a valid opinion. You're entitled to your own opnion as to what a zebra is, what the word "red" means, etc. Of course that doesn't mean that anyone else has to agree wtih your opinion on the matter, but so long as you make it clear that you're only stating an opinion, you're entitled to do so.

So out of curiousity. Do you think ALL things in life are a matter
of opinion? Or do you think there are some facts that you can't
interpret in any way you like?

Many things can be factually true or untrue. As a rule of thumb, qualitative analysis almost never fits into the "factual" column. You can say something is "pretty", or "tasty", or "bad," but it's pretty much always going to have to be your opinion on the matter.

Modifié par OhoniX, 01 avril 2012 - 04:03 .

[Biotic_Warlock]

It's quite popular to call people who like the ending "not proper fans" if you don't like the ending.

Who are the real trolls?

[PSUHammer]

AlexXIV wrote...

Hammer6767 wrote...
RE your points 1 & 2 I totally agree.  I have to say, you run across #2 all the time, in life.  Some people are just not capable understanding that others view things differently then they do.  Some of this comes down to maturity, life experience and education.

So out of curiousity. Do you think ALL things in life are a matter of opinion? Or do you think there are some facts that you can't interpret in any way you like?

Well, I think facts can be interpreted in different ways depending on your world view.  Not to go into politics, but it (politics) is an example of people taking factual things that happen and spinning two different opinions on them.

What my point, above, was saying is that there are people who refuse to accept that people are different and react to
disagreements as if they are a personal affront to what they believe.  To me, that is a sign of immaturity and lack of education/experience.  In the business world, those are the people that tend to fail as they lack the ability to compromise.

For another entertainment analogy, there are people that think Katy Perry music is awesome.  I happen to think it is overproduced and voice assisted, pop garbage.  I don't personally think someone is stupid or attacking my opinion simply because they happen to LIKE her music.  They just feel a different way about it.  All is well.  

Modifié par Hammer6767, 01 avril 2012 - 05:56 .