169 réponses à ce sujet

[batlin]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

I get where you're coming from Batlin, but as I had a realistic view, I wasn't upset.

I'm sorry you think it's unrealistic to believe what we're told.

You see, knowing how games are made and what not, and given the number of variables IN ME3, I had no delusions into thinking the ending was going to be wildly divergent.

I'm guessing you've never played Silent Hill 2 which had 6 possible endings, each completely different. Or Heavy Rain which has TWENTY TWO different endings depending on your actions. It's hilarious how you're trying to make the idea of divergent endings as some impossible notion, even when there have been games with them dating back to the SNES. By no means was it unrealistic to expect Mass Effect 3 to take all your key choices into account, or especially only most of them.

They told a blatant lie, one that was most certainly not outside the realm of probability, and they didn't deliver on it. You cannot argue against this.

Modifié par batlin, 06 avril 2012 - 03:11 .

[Cainne Chapel]

batlin wrote...

Cainne Chapel wrote...

I get where you're coming from Batlin, but as I had a realistic view, I wasn't upset.

I'm sorry for thinking it's unrealistic to believe what we're told.

You see, knowing how games are made and what not, and given the number of variables IN ME3, I had no delusions into thinking the ending was going to be wildly divergent.

I'm guessing you've never played Silent Hill 2 which had 6 possible endings, each completely different. Or Heavy Rain which has TWENTY TWO different endings depending on your actions. It's hilarious how you're trying to make the idea of divergent endings as some impossible notion, even when there have been games with them dating back to the SNES. By no means was it unrealistic to expect Mass Effect 3 to take all your key choices into account, or especially only most of them.

They told a blatant lie, one that was most certainly not outside the realm of probability, and they didn't deliver on it. You cannot argue against this.

wasn't meant as an insult my friend nor did I say it was impossible.  I just figured given what they're working with it was improbable to me, thus I didn't even believe it.

Like I said I get and understand being upset by that blatant quote that wasn't true.  But IF and keyword here is IF they do factor in those choices FINALLY into a concise epilogue, while late and lackluster at that point admittedly, it'd technically change the endings and thus deliver on what they promised.

keyword here being "IF" of course.

[InvincibleHero]

aimlessgun wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

aimlessgun wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Apologize for what you didn't like their ending. Subjective opinion is not fact or denote an error on someone else's part.

I dislike relativitism. You look at all the opinions, take in the available information, but at some point a man has to make a stand and say "this is what is right and what is wrong". 

Except by virtue of authority I'd say your subjective opinion about the ending has less value than BW's authority as IP creator. They say the endings are fine they have more credibility. Your demand for an apology is overboard.

And by virtue of many many well reasoned arguments about what makes a good story and what does not, what works in writing and what does not, the ending is bad. An IP creator is not a higher authority than the established conventions of good writing. 

By virtue of consumer response, the ending is bad. The first rule of good writing is that you are writing for your readers, not yourself. That's why most fanfiction is awful: fanfiction is written for the writer. When the majority of people who experienced your story think you screwed up, and then give you really good reasons for why you screwed up, you might want to consider that you may have screwed up. 

Have you ever written fiction, and had it reviewed by a writing group? I have. Sometimes everyone at the table thinks part of my story doesn't work, and they give me good reasons why it doesn't work. Do you think aritistic integrity and good writing mean that I should tell them "the hell with all of you, none of you understand my vision!". No. Artistic integrity and good writing mean I probably change that part of the story. 

Do you think Aristotle, Shakespeare, Poe or Faulkner wrote according to established conventions of good writing? More like pattern drivel and tropes. It may help get published, but it may not make it a work of high art. Did J.K Rowling or whomever wrote Twilight follow those rules? They are multi-millionaires. There is no right way or wrong way to write. Horribly written novels can placate the masses and books of genius can gather dust. It is still subjective opinion of what is good and always will be.

Sure maybe sometimes you don't get your point across but you made no error that requires an apology. BW is clarifying things as a consequence.

Opening yourself to peer review while constructing a book is different than altering said book after it is published. It would depend on the reasons and if that part was critical to my goals for the story. Maybe you didn't get what you were feeling across so well. It could also be those few people have set likes and are irrelevant to give feedback on that. They were pre-disposed to not like it. Again you seem big on the rules and maybe they are too so something outside of that will be hated by them. Not necessarily so in readers for your book.

[batlin]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

wasn't meant as an insult my friend nor did I say it was impossible.  I just figured given what they're working with it was improbable to me, thus I didn't even believe it.

Like I said I get and understand being upset by that blatant quote that wasn't true.  But IF and keyword here is IF they do factor in those choices FINALLY into a concise epilogue, while late and lackluster at that point admittedly, it'd technically change the endings and thus deliver on what they promised.

keyword here being "IF" of course.

So then you agree with me that until they release DLC that makes good on their promise that this thread is total BS?

[Tovanus]

Acidrain92 wrote...

Tovanus wrote...

Mx_CN3 wrote...

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

Um........admit you guys went overboard with bad user reviews, disingenuous fundraisers to charities, and some death threats first....

You are speaking of a rabid minority, a group of people which most of the Retakers also think are idiots.  Most of us eding-haters try to be very civil, and only view these people as hurting our cause.

However, bad user reviews are perfectly warranted.  Didn't like the game?  Give it a bad review.  That's what reviews are for (though 0/5'ing it is ridiculous).

I never did a user-review myself. However, I don't see any problem with the people who 0/5'd it. or 0/10 or whatever they do on various sites. If you do an ending so bad that it poisons people's view of the entire series, you're just lucky people can't go into negative numbers for reviews. 

Plot based games can get a lot of fan committment. There's a lot of upside to that. It also makes your ending much more important, and there's a huge downside to that if you fail hard at it. As long as people honestly believe the ending ruined the game for them, then the scores are warranted.

and Bioware doesnt think their ending is bad. Your argument is invalid. The crazy part of the retake ME movement is no better than bioware when it comes to justifying everything they talk about and do.

What argument? The argument that people can offer their honest opinions in user reviews? Are you seriously saying that's invalid?

Feel free to disagree with people who think the game is 0/5 or 0/10. I only said I don't see a problem with it. Personally, I would probably give the game a 6/10. The fighting mechanics are decent (not great), the graphics are decent (not great), the RPG elements are flimsy (side-quests of scanning planets based on hearing conversations at the Citadel? Weak gameplay and ill-fitting with the theme of being under time-pressure). The War Asset part of the game was awful. It detracts from the ending even more for having existed, because it misleads you into thinking that there'd be some actual pay-off for it. There are good parts to the game, like Tuchanka and Rannoch.

I'm kind of glad all those super negative user reviews are out there. No one makes up their mind based on a random user review. But it is eye-catching to see the sum total aggregate score for user reviews so far below what the game site reviews are. You don't get something that eye-catching without people doing the 0/5 and 0/10 reviews. And that's a good thing. It's a red flag that balances out the overly glowing reviews from IGN type reviewers that are equally undeserved.

If you want to complain about user reviews that are overly harsh, at least have the decency to complain about the publication reviews that were obviously overly glowing. Or don't complain at all about the negative reviewers and just accept that, in general, people who do research will have their eye caught by this stuff and figure out what's good about the game and what's bad.

[InvincibleHero]

KBomb wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Except by virtue of authority I'd say your subjective opinion about the ending has less value than BW's authority as IP creator. They say the endings are fine they have more credibility. Your demand for an apology is overboard.

 
As a corporation, they have a responsibility to consumers to release the product advertised. Even if you ignore people's disgust over the endings, the interviews in which they ply their product is an antithesis of what was released. As consumers, it's our responsibility to demand companies uphold their promises, deliver products that adhere to advertisements and that are quality and satisfying to their customers.


When people remove that culpability from corporations with statements like, “It's their product, they can do as they like.” or “They say it's good enough, meh, that's good enough for me.” --what you're really doing is taking any consumer power away from the people and placing it into the hands of stockholders, CEO's and other corporate climbers who care nothing about the customer, as long as that customer is smiling and reaching for their wallet.

If you have valid concrete 100% verifiable reasons then go for it. You can try, but saying the writing is bad is not a valid ciritcism as it is subjective opinion. Some want to write their own endings and that is wrong.

[Cainne Chapel]

I do agree that was a quote they made that they DID NOT deliver on, not in the ending in any case.

The game itself They did a GREAT job on I feel, Up until the "levitation to heaven" scene. After that, yes they dropped the ball and hit one WAY off base. I do agree with that.

But the end is the end *shrug* doesn't effect my fun for the rest of the game and HOPEFULLY the extended cut will help ease some of my pain. Because I can overlook the ending if i have a good epilogue...

I want closure more than anything.

[Nchopper]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

I want closure more than anything.

Damn you Chapel!!!!!!!

[Tovanus]

InvincibleHero wrote...

aimlessgun wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

aimlessgun wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Apologize for what you didn't like their ending. Subjective opinion is not fact or denote an error on someone else's part.

I dislike relativitism. You look at all the opinions, take in the available information, but at some point a man has to make a stand and say "this is what is right and what is wrong". 

Except by virtue of authority I'd say your subjective opinion about the ending has less value than BW's authority as IP creator. They say the endings are fine they have more credibility. Your demand for an apology is overboard.

And by virtue of many many well reasoned arguments about what makes a good story and what does not, what works in writing and what does not, the ending is bad. An IP creator is not a higher authority than the established conventions of good writing. 

By virtue of consumer response, the ending is bad. The first rule of good writing is that you are writing for your readers, not yourself. That's why most fanfiction is awful: fanfiction is written for the writer. When the majority of people who experienced your story think you screwed up, and then give you really good reasons for why you screwed up, you might want to consider that you may have screwed up. 

Have you ever written fiction, and had it reviewed by a writing group? I have. Sometimes everyone at the table thinks part of my story doesn't work, and they give me good reasons why it doesn't work. Do you think aritistic integrity and good writing mean that I should tell them "the hell with all of you, none of you understand my vision!". No. Artistic integrity and good writing mean I probably change that part of the story. 

Do you think Aristotle, Shakespeare, Poe or Faulkner wrote according to established conventions of good writing? More like pattern drivel and tropes.

Are you serious? Aristotle is famous for having roundly criticized the use of deus ex machina in works. You do realize that "tropes" are used to describe conventions of good writing, right? Just as they're used to describe bad writing conventions? And the phrase "pattern drivel" is pointless. It means nothing, and you know it. When they used patterns, it was because they understood that good writing often makes use of certain patterns. That's not "drivel", that's skill. Generally they understood the established conventions of good writing. In the case of Aristotle, you could almost say that he helped establish one of those conventions (the convention that deus ex machina = bad writing).

If you want to argue that poor writers sometimes do very well... then yeah. It happens. No one has ever argued that poor skill has always prevented undeserved riches. But if you think the success of things like Twilight means that we should all be saying, "Game over man, game over" on having standards for plot, then... that's just a depressing way to see things.

[aimlessgun]

InvincibleHero wrote...
Do you think Aristotle, Shakespeare, Poe or Faulkner wrote according to established conventions of good writing? More like pattern drivel and tropes. It may help get published, but it may not make it a work of high art. Did J.K Rowling or whomever wrote Twilight follow those rules? They are multi-millionaires. There is no right way or wrong way to write. Horribly written novels can placate the masses and books of genius can gather dust. It is still subjective opinion of what is good and always will be.

Sure maybe sometimes you don't get your point across but you made no error that requires an apology. BW is clarifying things as a consequence.

Opening yourself to peer review while constructing a book is different than altering said book after it is published. It would depend on the reasons and if that part was critical to my goals for the story. Maybe you didn't get what you were feeling across so well. It could also be those few people have set likes and are irrelevant to give feedback on that. They were pre-disposed to not like it. Again you seem big on the rules and maybe they are too so something outside of that will be hated by them. Not necessarily so in readers for your book.

As you say, there is no absolute standard for how to write. Writing is communication, and writing conventions and advice focus on improving that communication and reaching people with a powerful story that they will appreciate. And the conventions are there because they work most of the time. But the final reckoning is not in whether you followed certain conventions, but in whether people liked what you wrote. 

Most people did not like the ME3 ending. And then we looked at it and found that it did a lot of things that usually don't work in writing. Works of genius can sometimes get away with breaking the mold. The end to ME3 was not such a work of genius in the eyes of most. 

In the final reckoning, it failed for so many of us. 

To fail so many of your audience is, I believe, objectively an error that can be admitted to. That's where I make my stand. 

As for changing things post-release, videogames have a special chance to do this, as a medium with DLC, and Mass Effect as a series where the player has been a co-author of Shepard's story. 

Modifié par aimlessgun, 06 avril 2012 - 03:27 .

[Mr.House]

Bethesda admitted they made a mistake with the FO3 ending. I wonder why Bioware or at least Mac Walters won't step up and admit they made a bad call and they are sorry.

[Chakuura]

My biggest problem with those whole ideal is that there has been no one admiting that maybe their pre release promises were false, or maybe they were just a little excited about a game they spent years developing. Casey Hudson stated that there would be no A, B or C ending here but thats exactly what we got, Mac Walters stated our choice with the Rachni Queen would have significant consequences and it the only thing it changed was a tiny bit of dialogue, hardly significant.

All I have wanted during this whole debacle is a little honesty.

[Tovanus]

InvincibleHero wrote...
You can try, but saying the writing is bad is not a valid ciritcism as it is subjective opinion. Some want to write their own endings and that is wrong.

Art has an objective technical skill component to it. You can factually say whether someone is failing at that. It's true in writing just as it's true in drawing or in music. The analogy I like most is the musical one. It's like listening to a symphony, then suddenly the last measures of the symphonic piece jarringly change to  Hot Cross Buns.... on a recorder..... as performed by a first grader.... who didn't do his homework assignment to practice it.

Bad decision for the music composer? Yeah. Objectively bad. Sure, there are subjective elements too, but we wouldn't recognize degrees in things like literature and music if there weren't objective standards to them.

[batlin]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

I do agree that was a quote they made that they DID NOT deliver on, not in the ending in any case.

The game itself They did a GREAT job on I feel, Up until the "levitation to heaven" scene. After that, yes they dropped the ball and hit one WAY off base. I do agree with that.

But the end is the end *shrug* doesn't effect my fun for the rest of the game and HOPEFULLY the extended cut will help ease some of my pain. Because I can overlook the ending if i have a good epilogue...

I want closure more than anything.

I doubt you'll get it. Unless they straight-up alter things that happen in the ending (which they said they aren't), the DLC won't provide closure.

[ObserverStatus]

they're indoctrinated.

[Cainne Chapel]

batlin wrote...

Cainne Chapel wrote...

I do agree that was a quote they made that they DID NOT deliver on, not in the ending in any case.

The game itself They did a GREAT job on I feel, Up until the "levitation to heaven" scene. After that, yes they dropped the ball and hit one WAY off base. I do agree with that.

But the end is the end *shrug* doesn't effect my fun for the rest of the game and HOPEFULLY the extended cut will help ease some of my pain. Because I can overlook the ending if i have a good epilogue...

I want closure more than anything.

I doubt you'll get it. Unless they straight-up alter things that happen in the ending (which they said they aren't), the DLC won't provide closure.

Well Like I said, I dont care if they change RGB.  I didn't LIKE the endings but if shepard dies, etc its MOOT to me.  I just want closure on my crew/friends and allies.  Thats all I'VE personally been clamoring for as I didn't get not one iota of closure in the ending as is.

I know its not what a lot of people here want it seems, but if i can get that, i'll be mostly happy again

[shurikenmanta]

KBomb wrote...

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

Um........admit you guys went overboard with bad user reviews, disingenuous fundraisers to charities, and some death threats first....

lulz Are you being serious with this?

Don't know why not, I saw evidence of all three on my time here.

Ultimately, Bioware aren't going to admit to something if they feel that's not true. And it's abundantly obvious that they believe their ending sufficed. Quite frankly I think the fact they even tried to meet you guys halfway was pretty impressive because this has shown that you guys are unpleasable and no matter what they do you guys will whine endlessly.

Deal with it.

Modifié par shurikenmanta, 06 avril 2012 - 03:33 .

[USS Cushing]

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

disingenuous fundraisers to charities

$80,000 dollars to make sick kids happy for that alone I will call Retake Mass Effect 3 a success

[aimlessgun]

shurikenmanta wrote...

Ultimately, Bioware aren't going to admit to something if they feel that's not true. And it's abundantly obvious that they believe their ending sufficed. Quite frankly I think the fact they even tried to meet you guys halfway was pretty impressive because this has shown that you guys are unpleasable and no matter what they do you guys will whine endlessly.

Deal with it.

It's abundantly obvious that EA and Bioware corporate believe the ending sufficed. Until I see honest statements from the writers themselves, I don't know anything about what they think. 

As for 'unpleasable'...wut? I just pointed out an easy way to please people. 

Modifié par aimlessgun, 06 avril 2012 - 03:36 .

[BurnOutBrighter]

This. Only with acknowledgement and apology, will BioWare ever be given the chance to redeem themselves.

[KBomb]

InvincibleHero wrote...


If you have valid concrete 100% verifiable reasons then go for it. You can try, but saying the writing is bad is not a valid ciritcism as it is subjective opinion. Some want to write their own endings and that is wrong.

 
You're addressing a wider speculation instead of the issue in my post. Bad writing is subjective. True.


I saw you in another post bring up writers like Shakespeare and Poe. The thing is, we're not talking about a novel or a painting. We're talking about an interactive video game. However, I'll play. If a painter told me that his painting would be an interactive endeavor between us—that every angle I chose would lead into a shape, every color I chose would bloom into a prism of my vision—that every stroke of his brush would be dependent of my direction and flow and then when he revealed it, it's only three strokes of green, red and blue. You damn right I would be angry that his promises weren't kept and especially on my coin.


But painters don't do that and neither do authors. Video games—specifically RPG's do. We're also not talking about a game that has one narrow path to which the ending is not determinate on the player,r but solely on the writer. Bioware has always advertised Mass Effect to be a story you shaped. Would you like to see the dozens upon dozens of interviews, tweets and statements that were not followed through?


Just because something is subjective, doesn't make a complaint invalid and artistic integrity can only stretch so far. Taste is certainly subjective, but you wouldn't eat a dish a chef prepared for you if it contained an ingredient you find disgusting. The dish may be delicious to most and it may be his signature piece. It's subjective, right? Makes no difference that you're paying for it.  Well, then sup up!

[PiEman]

shurikenmanta wrote...

KBomb wrote...

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

Um........admit you guys went overboard with bad user reviews, disingenuous fundraisers to charities, and some death threats first....

lulz Are you being serious with this?

Don't know why not, I saw evidence of all three on my time here.

Ultimately, Bioware aren't going to admit to something if they feel that's not true. And it's abundantly obvious that they believe their ending sufficed. Quite frankly I think the fact they even tried to meet you guys halfway was pretty impressive because this has shown that you guys are unpleasable and no matter what they do you guys will whine endlessly.

Deal with it.

Seriously, are you people f*cking deaf?

The endings are not the endings we were advertised.
For five years.

How can I spell it out more clearly?

[aimlessgun]

Logan Cloud wrote...

They aren't admitting to doing anything wrong because they didn't do anything wrong. They have the right to release a Rick Roll as the ending if they really want to.

As I said earlier, I'm not a fan of relativism. 

[InvincibleHero]

Tovanus wrote...

Are you serious? Aristotle is famous for having roundly criticized the use of deus ex machina in works. You do realize that "tropes" are used to describe conventions of good writing, right? Just as they're used to describe bad writing conventions? And the phrase "pattern drivel" is pointless. It means nothing, and you know it. When they used patterns, it was because they understood that good writing often makes use of certain patterns. That's not "drivel", that's skill. Generally they understood the established conventions of good writing. In the case of Aristotle, you could almost say that he helped establish one of those conventions (the convention that deus ex machina = bad writing).

If you want to argue that poor writers sometimes do very well... then yeah. It happens. No one has ever argued that poor skill has always prevented undeserved riches. But if you think the success of things like Twilight means that we should all be saying, "Game over man, game over" on having standards for plot, then... that's just a depressing way to see things.

Not everyone hates deus ex machina. It is just opinion. Writing by patterns or rules does not guaraantee the work will be good. Not using them does not guarantee that the writing will be bad anbd without merit. There is a huge industry today in selling people books that are supposed to make them better writers. So it is skill to slavishly adhere to conventions? Not in my book.

I was arguing liking a book or story is purely opinion. After all somebody buys trashy romance novels and tabloids. That is their gold and my garbage. I like fantasy novels like Tolkien's LOTR trilogy and others. To some that is garbage but my platinum. We have no idea what ideas will make it big. If the author believes in it then that might be enough.