224 réponses à ce sujet

[ahandsomeshark]

the amount of time and resources it would take to fix it vs the reward. It's basically entirely an economic optimization question. If they can stave off most of the outrage through (cheap) clarifying cut scene DLC and the artistic integrity nonsense then there's no reason to go the step further. Because any time and resources spent on the endings takes away from another profitable project, so it would depend entirely on whether the cost of sticking to the endings outweighs the cost of the resources and time that would be needed to commit to the ending. Personally I think the silence is really them just biding their time and hoping it will blow over. If so no one will really have any idea of the impact of the take back movement until sale numbers for their next AAA title comes out. If they do address it though it will mean the cost in terms of lost future sales due to consumers lost by not fully addressing it would have WAY WAY outweigh the cost of actually making it.

[Jeb231]

The can't touch it because it's art shtick is getting old. What many are asking is for a bit of clarification, be it in game or not. I'm confused by the point they were trying to make. Did they try to expand on technological singularity while contradicting the story in the process? Why are two of these endings something you have been fighting against all this time and the third one results in a genocide? If it's IT (the only thing which makes sense), why not give us a single hint via a tweet? Leaving us in limbo for weeks is uncool.

Think it's art and should stay that way...fine. Then defend it. Allow us to start grieving another failed Scifi story and move on...unless it always was about selling DLC?
.
I couldn't care less if Shepard dies. I would have been fine with a single ending where the reapers win and the cycle continues but the last sequence with the Starchild opened a whole can of worms

[streamlock]

Because it is a easy, lazy way to reset the franchise and toss all those 'choices' to the wind.

It is there easy out-and they will, WILL not abandon that.

They can't to The Old Republic route. Not much before ME that is not lore locked.
The universe is Galaxy wide-so they can't do the DA2 route and just make it some place far away. I guess Mass Effect Andromeda or Large Magellanic Cloud or something.
No one would buy the alt. Timeline thing-it is not built into the lore

It is the "Ah frak it" button of all buttons. They......are.......not.......going to give it up.

Anyway, look at that ending. Even as a galactopocolypse Kubrik ending it fails miserably. Only a huge gigantic ego that wouldn't take input from actual writers and the rest of the staff would shoe horn that in.

And I don't think John Riccitiello himself could budge an ego that big.

[Faded-Myth]

I think Garrus's maturation from being a soldier who complained about C-Sec a lot to the character he is now was intentional. Depending how you interact with him, Garrus's personality goes through a few changes as he hardens and gradually becomes basically a badass who can't be pushed around anymore. The fact that everyone loved him just meant that he got much more development time than he might have had he not been as likeable.

Also, I hated Silent Hill 4, though I liked DA1 a lot.

That said, though, I honestly think BioWare are too intent on maintaining a stony face and protecting their decisions, terrible as they were. Which as far as I'm concerned is almost as worse. Had they just outright came out and admitted the endings were poorly written and implemented, the backlash wouldn't have been nearly so great. But I think they honestly believe their finale is wonderful, which is a disturbing notion.

[FrozenDreamfall]

@Skyblade012 Exactly,and I studied art history.Nobody can tell me that even the greatest and oldest artists changed their work so their audience would be pleased and Bioware can't make a few more minutes after the end or before it to change things.

[blooregard]

NReed106 wrote...

B/c $$>Quality story to EA
And EA owns BW
EA's culture has the dominant influence over BW as they control the who get promotions etc

Therefore BW now loves $$>Quality products

There's that "money" thing again.

I was under the impression that if they stick with the rainbow we have now and do nothing/very little to fix it they'd end up losing more money in the long run as to few people would buy any DLC that doesn't fix the ending, even fewer at this point would buy MP DLC, and even fewer would buy the next BW game. If they truely think they'll make more money in the long run from leaving us with this ending and get away with it they're sadly mistaken. Quality products generate money if a product isn't quality or isn't fine tuned to be the quality product the consumer paid for nobody will buy that product or more like that product.

Plus with bioware's quotes on how mass effect "would" have been before release how many people left in the BW fan base will believe what they say about dragon age 3? The answer is damn few.

[xsdob]

LOTS OF SPECULATION....about what bioware has or hasn't even done yet.

[Kyrick]

They're bent on keeping the ending because Hudson and Walters are hacks that apparently don't know the first thing about how to tell a decent story. They're too blindingly arrogant and ignorant to bother admitting that, so they play the 'artistic' card in the hopes that people will view them as visionary instead of just insipid hacks that couldn't story-tell their way out of a child's "Jane and Dick" book without screwing it up.

[Caz Tirin]

Stygian1 wrote...

I think that the ending is in a different ball park when it comes to alteration. The ending is so pivotal to a story that for them to admit that they F'ed it up is to admit they basically failed at telling the story they set out to tell.

But, what they need to realize is they did just that. They did screw up, and admitting it is the only way for them to start correcting the issue.

This hits the nail on the head.

Sadly, I expect them to use IT as a copout instead of admitting their mistake.

[ahandsomeshark]

And once again I don't understand why anyone is bringing up this art nonsense. That's just PR crap EA, is a publicly traded company not Picasso, not even 20 ghost written books a year John Grissham, that makes decisions based on cost analysis not "artistry". The artistic talent crap is just heging they're just throwing it out there and hoping gamers are stupid enough that it sticks It comes down to a simple cost-reward analysis. if EA can be convinced they're looking at a bigger loss by not fully engaging with and satisfying their consumers then they'll make a new ending. Or more like they'll do the typical EA thing, stick their heads in the sand and in a year wonder how they're new policy went so wrong so spectacularly and so fast.

For those wondering. Their new policies was to acquire studios with rights to AAA IP's and then release a game a year on those IPs counting on them being big hits. ME2 worked and DA: O was great partially because they had both been in development prior to EA, but now it's why we get rushed nonsense like DA:2, and ME:3, why old ips are brought back and turned into once a year shooters (Syndicate), why interesting IPs like Mirrors Edge are thrown to the side, why Madden has been the same game for 7 years, why Dice has had to shelve all ideas other than Battfield, and etc and etc.

[blooregard]

Caz Tirin wrote...

Stygian1 wrote...

I think that the ending is in a different ball park when it comes to alteration. The ending is so pivotal to a story that for them to admit that they F'ed it up is to admit they basically failed at telling the story they set out to tell.

But, what they need to realize is they did just that. They did screw up, and admitting it is the only way for them to start correcting the issue.

This hits the nail on the head.

Sadly, I expect them to use IT as a copout instead of admitting their mistake.

The worst part about this is the fans gave them several get of of jail free cards from the simple 4th "F off starchild" to the full blown indoctrination theory and yet the still don't say anything. No talking about the theories, confirming or denying them, no solid information just simple "clarification".

[ThatGuy39]

Talogrungi wrote...

It'll cost 'em money to fix it.

They like money.

There's really no other reason.

 
 
I mean, they like it. A lot.    

[Zhuinden]

Talogrungi wrote...

It'll cost 'em money to fix it.

They like money.

There's really no other reason.

Yep, which is why the ending cutscenes are all so similar.
Less time, less production cost.

[ahandsomeshark]

blooregard wrote...

NReed106 wrote...

B/c $$>Quality story to EA
And EA owns BW
EA's culture has the dominant influence over BW as they control the who get promotions etc

Therefore BW now loves $$>Quality products

There's that "money" thing again.

I was under the impression that if they stick with the rainbow we have now and do nothing/very little to fix it they'd end up losing more money in the long run as to few people would buy any DLC that doesn't fix the ending, even fewer at this point would buy MP DLC, and even fewer would buy the next BW game. If they truely think they'll make more money in the long run from leaving us with this ending and get away with it they're sadly mistaken. Quality products generate money if a product isn't quality or isn't fine tuned to be the quality product the consumer paid for nobody will buy that product or more like that product.

Plus with bioware's quotes on how mass effect "would" have been before release how many people left in the BW fan base will believe what they say about dragon age 3? The answer is damn few.

yeah but publically traded companies generally only deal in the short term, in the shortterm Mass Effect 3 is raking it in (though maybe not to the predicted volume). If it gets close enough to predicted profits then they'll just leave the ending mess for PR guys to deal with and assume gamers are idiots and will forget by the time those newer games come along. And if we don't they'll blame it on bioware end them and start on the next developer.

[Avarenda]

DeeLite808 wrote...

extent of the hatred. A vocal minority are "angry" they didn't get the ending they thought they were gonna get.

Would you tell Shakespeare that Romeo and Juliet shouldn't have died and demand him to change it?

Would you tell Van Gough that his self portrait should include his missing ear and demand him to change it?

Would you tell J.K. Rowlings that one of the Weasley twins shouldn't have died and demand her to change it?

Actually, Shakespeare DID change many of his works to suit his audience, even though it wasnt what he originally wanted. For example, King Lear has three versions that he wrote.

The True Chronicle of the History of the Life and Death of King Lear and His Three Daughters, was published in 1608. The Tragedy of King Lear, a more theatrical version, was included in the 1623, and after The Restoration, he changed it yet again to have a happy ending for an audience who disliked how sad and depressing it was.

Also, J.K. Rowling ALSO changed her ending based on fan feedback. Originally she was going to kill Harry off, but when fans became vocal about it, she changed it.

Basically, this is not unprecidented, and even 'true artists' have changed their works to suit their audiences in the past.

[chester013]

DeeLite808 wrote...

extent of the hatred. A vocal minority are "angry" they didn't get the ending they thought they were gonna get.

Would you tell Shakespeare that Romeo and Juliet shouldn't have died and demand him to change it?

Would you tell Van Gough that his self portrait should include his missing ear and demand him to change it?

Would you tell J.K. Rowlings that one of the Weasley twins shouldn't have died and demand her to change it?

Did you seriously compare Shakespeare and Harry Potter in the same post? Really?

And for the record

Romeo and Juliet didn't suck

Van Gough didn't suck

I'm not a Harry Potter fan so can't comment.

ME3 isn't art, it's a product designed for mass consumption. Some games are, not this one.

[mxfox408]

DeeLite808 wrote...

extent of the hatred. A vocal minority are "angry" they didn't get the ending they thought they were gonna get.

Would you tell Shakespeare that Romeo and Juliet shouldn't have died and demand him to change it?

Would you tell Van Gough that his self portrait should include his missing ear and demand him to change it?

Would you tell J.K. Rowlings that one of the Weasley twins shouldn't have died and demand her to change it?

Watch alien 3 theactricle release then watch the special edition, the edited ending was better but the overall changes made it a vague film that the special edition better explained a lot of we didn't understand, even James Cameron prefered the directors cut of aliens which had more scenes deleted that once again clairified the movie a lot better. Why do they release changed versions? Because they realise its still in the end a product, despite the amount of art, its still a product. Now the whole art excuse is fine but if bioware want to ride that ship then they better not be suprised when it causes them to sink.

Modifié par mxfox408, 04 avril 2012 - 06:26 .

[j78]

Deltateam Elcor wrote...

They will officially admit they are wrong if they submit to the whim of its community, however the danger of going down in flames is also something they wish to avoid.

This . I can’t imagine BW not getting scorched by either choice .Get ready It won’t be good.

[Alamar2078]

I would think "almost everyone" wants to defend their work even if they believe it was just a little cruddy.

The exceptions would be those guys pointing fingers & saying "I told you so ... I told you so"

Modifié par Alamar2078, 04 avril 2012 - 06:20 .

[Trentgamer]

Talogrungi wrote...

It'll cost 'em money to fix it.

They like money.

There's really no other reason.

It will cost them even more money in lost sales if they don't fix it. I have a feeling this could kill BioWare if they don't address this correctly. It also wouldn't be the first time EA has killed a good gaming studio, and yes I believe most of the blame can be put on EA. I'm sure they had deadlines and rushed the ending...at least that's how it felt to me.

[blooregard]

ahandsomeshark wrote...

blooregard wrote...

NReed106 wrote...

B/c $$>Quality story to EA
And EA owns BW
EA's culture has the dominant influence over BW as they control the who get promotions etc

Therefore BW now loves $$>Quality products

There's that "money" thing again.

I was under the impression that if they stick with the rainbow we have now and do nothing/very little to fix it they'd end up losing more money in the long run as to few people would buy any DLC that doesn't fix the ending, even fewer at this point would buy MP DLC, and even fewer would buy the next BW game. If they truely think they'll make more money in the long run from leaving us with this ending and get away with it they're sadly mistaken. Quality products generate money if a product isn't quality or isn't fine tuned to be the quality product the consumer paid for nobody will buy that product or more like that product.

Plus with bioware's quotes on how mass effect "would" have been before release how many people left in the BW fan base will believe what they say about dragon age 3? The answer is damn few.

yeah but publically traded companies generally only deal in the short term, in the shortterm Mass Effect 3 is raking it in (though maybe not to the predicted volume). If it gets close enough to predicted profits then they'll just leave the ending mess for PR guys to deal with and assume gamers are idiots and will forget by the time those newer games come along. And if we don't they'll blame it on bioware end them and start on the next developer.

A sad day indeed when a high school graduate can think of running a international company better then the people who were trained to do so.

[TemplePhoenix]

If it turns out that certain parts of the ending (looking at you, destruction of the relay network) are the same in every ending because they are needed to set up a future spinoff game...

NO, BIOWARE.

You do NOT hobble the conclusion of an existing and much-loved series in order to shill some prospective future effort. You want a later game set in an ME universe that has lost its relays? You set THAT game a few centuries after this one, and have the relay network destroyed at the start.

P.S. note that I hope this is not what happened in this case; more likely is that the current endings were rushed as hell, and so similar in each case because they just had to use what cutscenes they already had finished for every version.

[byne]

TemplePhoenix wrote...

If it turns out that certain parts of the ending (looking at you, destruction of the relay network) are the same in every ending because they are needed to set up a future spinoff game...

NO, BIOWARE.

You do NOT hobble the conclusion of an existing and much-loved series in order to shill some prospective future effort. You want a later game set in an ME universe that has lost its relays? You set THAT game a few centuries after this one, and have the relay network destroyed at the start.

P.S. note that I hope this is not what happened in this case; more likely is that the current endings were rushed as hell, and so similar in each case because they just had to use what cutscenes they already had finished for every version.

Also, if you want future Mass Effect games, you simply dont destroy the Relays. They're emblematic of the series.

[Avarenda]

TemplePhoenix wrote...

If it turns out that certain parts of the ending (looking at you, destruction of the relay network) are the same in every ending because they are needed to set up a future spinoff game...

NO, BIOWARE.

You do NOT hobble the conclusion of an existing and much-loved series in order to shill some prospective future effort. You want a later game set in an ME universe that has lost its relays? You set THAT game a few centuries after this one, and have the relay network destroyed at the start.

P.S. note that I hope this is not what happened in this case; more likely is that the current endings were rushed as hell, and so similar in each case because they just had to use what cutscenes they already had finished for every version.

I agree so hard with the above statements.

[Sarevok Synder]

A mixture of bruised egos and cost; the funny thing is if they keep this up it will cost them a lot more in the long run. Unjustified pride can be a very expensive thing.