282 réponses à ce sujet

[jds1bio]

Shermos wrote...

The_Crazy_Hand wrote...

Not surprising, he should note the current ending is certainly NOT consistent with the narrative of anything in ME.

*Face palm*

The game prepared the player for the ending with the subtlety of a sledge hammer. The themes of cycles and the consequences of breaking them were there right from the start of ME3. This and other themes dealth with were arguably there as far back as ME1.

On Topic: Good on you Bioware for taking a stand! I for one am happy with the endings the way are they are and even if I wasn't, it's YOUR story to tell as YOU wish, regardless of it being interatcive.

Regardless of being interactive?  If it wasn't interactive, why would I buy it as a game?

I get that there are consequences and sacrifices for breaking a cycle, and that the themes of control and synthesis can be attributed to TIM and Saren.  But the consequences and sacrifices presented at the end were too arbitrary FOR SHEPARD AND HIS SQUAD.

Just curious, how many of the endings have you actually played through? (and I don't mean just the three choices, I mean having high EMS vs. low EMS, etc.)

Modifié par jds1bio, 02 avril 2012 - 01:15 .

[jds1bio]

fchopin wrote...

What i want to see is a better explanation on what really happens with the 3 different endings.

For example if you have 1500 EMS and you choose the destroy option does the Earth and other planets in other solar systems get destroyed?

If you have 3000 EMS and you choose the destroy option does the Earth and other planets in other solar systems get destroyed?

If you have 4000 EMS and you choose the destroy option does the Earth and other planets in other solar systems get destroyed?

The same with the other options you choose and also what happens to Normandy and how do our teammates end up with Joker.

When you play through the scenes with the Catalyst with these different EMS levels, the Catalyst makes less and less sense each time.  It's bizarre the way this was all stitched together.

[Dr_Hello]

Greed1914 wrote...

1.From what I've heard, Rowling didn't kill Harry because so many asked her not to do that. Not sure it's a good example for them to use.   I could just as easily throw in Doyle and Dickens in there for counter-examples.  This isn't as unprecedented or an assault on art like they seem to think.

2. Wanting it changed to something consistent with the narrative is exactly what most are asking for.   That's really been one of the consistent things regardless of which retaker you ask.

3. Of course it won't please everybody, but right now it has displeased a whole lot. We've let them know what we'd like to see and why we didn't like what is there, so it's up to them now.

Yep

[Dridengx]

The Angry One wrote...

There's nothing wrong with having the option for a happy ending, you know.

There's nothing wrong with not having every game have a happy ending as well.

You can't always get what you want and if ME3 is the instance in your life it takes to notice it, so be it.

[zarnk567]

Dridengx wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

There's nothing wrong with having the option for a happy ending, you know.

There's nothing wrong with not having every game have a happy ending as well.

You can't always get what you want and if ME3 is the instance in your life it takes to notice it, so be it.

do you do anything besides troll?

[DamonD7]

I'm sorry Mr. Barnett, I just cannot get my head around this way of thinking and I think it's a sad disconnect with the fanbase.

If you really don't care what the fans think, then sure, fine. Just don't pretend any more that you do or be surprised if your sales drop.

[LieroOnTheMoon]

I guess if Harry Potters EMS was too low he would have died and whole world would have been enslaved by "you know who".

[Icinix]

You'll never please anyone, so we'll deliberately try to please as few as possible.

Yep. Thats StarChild logic right there.

[Lancane]

I laugh at the artistic integrity argument and any who defend that stance. Nothing is beyond reproach, from political agendas and world leaders to comic books and their publishers. People act like this is the Italian Renaissance, problem is that even then artistic value and integrity was dependent on the people themselves, many artisan works remain unknown because the people simply did not like what those works depicted in whatever form. Authors, Journalists, Comic Book Artists all have publishers that drive the overall direction and make suggestive changes because they're focused on the success of the material, the same for musicians and producers, movie directors and studio heads, this is nothing new. While video games are considered a form of entertainment art, the industry itself has been changed like other forms that fall under that category by the consumers and those who protect consumers. That is why there are screeners, game testers, singles and more. The bottom line is that artistic integrity has no place in modern society because it's driven by the demands of the people, the consumers or it otherwise becomes worthless.

[nevar00]

The Harry Potter series did not end with Harry sacrificing himself in front of Dumbledore's ghost to fuse muggles and wizards into one in order to stop muggles from killing all wizards, and as a byproduct of that Voldy and the Death Eaters left. And then the broomsticks and ability to apparate were not destroyed. Therefore Harry Potter was not art.

[Rune-Chan]

The Angry One wrote...

"You can't please everyone, so let's settle for pleasing the absolute minimum amount of people!"

I don't get this argument.

It's cheaper.

[cutegigi]

Dridengx wrote...

There's nothing wrong with not having every game have a happy ending as well.

You can't always get what you want and if ME3 is the instance in your life it takes to notice it, so be it.

your other posts shows more effort.
please try harder. dont fail on me now......

[Nightdragon8]

I think the comments really speak for themselves they don't really have a clear Idea about what we want. Which is sad. As alot of us have said, then ending was "Bad" as in Plot hole wise. And the starchild Reaper overload is just completely out of place. I mean seriously. The AI that controls the Reapers is located on the Citadel.... I mean if thats really the case.... plz explain why we where able to stop Sovereign in the first place?

That is why we think the ending is "Bad" we are fine if bittersweet endings, I mean Mordin/Legion arcs where wonderful and bittersweet. Sheps ending was the downer. Plus the green ending just seems too "Magical" to fit in the genre

[cavs25]

Dridengx wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

There's nothing wrong with having the option for a happy ending, you know.

There's nothing wrong with not having every game have a happy ending as well.

You can't always get what you want and if ME3 is the instance in your life it takes to notice it, so be it.

How about having an ending that makes sense, doesn't use space magic , and doesn't provide LOTS OF SPECULATION FOR EVERYONE..

How about having an ending where you know, they kept their promise and didn't lie to their fans face?
Where choice matters, and what you did isn't flushed down the toilet like a dead fish?

[pistolols]

The_Crazy_Hand wrote...

Not surprising, he should note the current ending is certainly NOT consistent with the narrative of anything in ME.

yeah, you clearly havn't been paying attention then.  Every single thing in the ending, every single word the catalyst tells you is discussed at some other point in the series.

Personally i agree with this guy.  I have seen nothing but people making demands from Bioware.  "Demand a better ending." etc.  The audacity of it makes me want to scream.

[KingNewbs]

Dreogan wrote...

JK Rowling is a damn good storyteller. To even compare Bioware's craft to Rowling is metaphorically spitting in her face.

I can't agree with you here. The Harry Potter books are very good. But Mass Effect is very good too. And I don't know about you, but I never wanted to be Harry Potter.

I want to be Cmdr. Shepard.

Modifié par KingNewbs, 02 avril 2012 - 02:24 .

[iTofu]

That is the standard BioWare response. I don't think anyone can expect anything else.

I wonder how BioWare preps people for the press:

PR: If they ask any questions about the Mass Effect ending, just say it's art and art cannot be changed.
Nichols: Art can be changed though. It has been throughout history, often at the behest of the consumer and certainly commissioned arts are changed based on the expectations of the buyer.
PR: Stop over thinking it. One, BioWare's work is art. Two, art cannot be changed. It's very logical, just like our ending.
Nichols: One of those doesn't seem logical. Not sure people will buy it.
PR: Even if it isn't, you are the expert, say it with authority. They won't question it.
Nichols: Okay, I should probably use an example to back up our point. What should I use?
PR: Harry Potter.

I'm not sure how the company position is communicated, but it's funny to think about. I'm sure someone could come up with funnier dialogue.

Foulpancake wrote...

Considering they are 110% clueless, JK rowling changed the end of Harry Potter, she was originally going to have Harry die, but fan response was very negative so she changed it before the release.

Too bad they didn't do a lick of research or even have any clue what they were talking about....

Well played.

Greed1914 wrote...

1.From what I've heard, Rowling didn't kill Harry because so many asked her not to do that. Not sure it's a good example for them to use.   I could just as easily throw in Doyle and Dickens in there for counter-examples.  This isn't as unprecedented or an assault on art like they seem to think.

2. Wanting it changed to something consistent with the narrative is exactly what most are asking for.   That's really been one of the consistent things regardless of which retaker you ask.

3. Of course it won't please everybody, but right now it has displeased a whole lot. We've let them know what we'd like to see and why we didn't like what is there, so it's up to them now.

Agreed.

Modifié par iTofu, 02 avril 2012 - 02:31 .

[apieros]

xsdob wrote...
But at the same time warns that listing specific events to happen, I.E. the indoctrination theory, are the ones who he doesn't like.

So basically, he wants the artist to be the one who has final say on [...] the endings and not the fans. Let them know your displeasure but try not to list specific events you want to see[.]

Then he's full of crap. Because...

Bioware asked fans what they'd like to see in the endings. In this forum. Stickied, even. At the top of the list of threads.

So his position is:

"Bioware asked fans for specific suggestions, but those who give them are bad people oppressing us poor artists."

Modifié par apieros, 02 avril 2012 - 02:26 .

[Bantz]

I remember when Mythic made a damn good MMO. Then EA bought it out and it all turned to ****.

[razor150]

Phydeaux314 wrote...

Well... let's be fair. The writing in mass effect IS really good, with a couple of exceptions. If it was terrible, we wouldn't care about it so much.

It depends on the writing you are talking about. The overall story is pretty bad from the Crucible down to the Catalyst. The character centered plots are really good. I think that is a symtom of Mass Effect being taken over by a character writer.

[TheRisenStar]

After the disaster that was Warhammer Online, why would you listen to this guy... again?

[AlexJK]

pistolols wrote...
... Every single thing in the ending, every single word the catalyst tells you is discussed at some other point in the series.

Where was it discussed that jumping into a big beam of light which was at the top of the Citadel all along yet nobody ever went to see what it did would turn the entire galaxy into organic/synthetic hybrids? Seriously, not sarcastically, where was this mentioned?

[Bantz]

TheRisenStar wrote...

After the disaster that was Warhammer Online, why would you listen to this guy... again?

ugh, that game had SO much potential.

[Myrmedus]

What is this belief at BW that if something is art it is somehow beyond criticism and retroactive change? Just go and ask any artist at BW how he/she developed their skills from a minnow to get into that position. Simple: through critique, chopping up, changing, improving, more critique, changing it some more, producing new works that were different, critique, improving, reflection, changing etc.

That is the very essence of art and its development? That it's fluid and changing not solid and static. How could they be so wrong in their appraisal of what it is they do? Is this a case of not seeing the wood for the trees?

Modifié par Myrmedus, 02 avril 2012 - 02:42 .

[RussianSpy27]

RenascentAnt1 wrote...


[/i]

"It's the difference between wanting the ending to be changed to be
something consistent with the narrative ... to something specific," he
said. "It changes their tone from concerned fans to a list of demands."

[i]

Agreed. Consistent with the narrative is what we all want.