1895 réponses à ce sujet

[dsl08002]

if it was really a resource issue then i might forgive bioware for the few holes that you might find in the game.

However this is a unique oppurtunity for bioware to actually improve the game and give it the Finishing touch.

[tango jack]

why they could have been bit more open from the start is rediculous. All the spin in the last month has done nothing but get people angry but then this info has alleviated that somewhat and it was so easy to say.

I for one feel bit more optimistic now!

[Caz Tirin]

Grudge_NL wrote...

Caz Tirin wrote...

Grudge_NL wrote...

Vorodill wrote...

Looks like some people at Bioware WANT to do the Director's Cut DLC.

Oh wait, it's the Extended Cut DLC. Well... it would have been really funny if it was called the Director's Cut DLC Some people say that Hudson and Walters are responsible for the ending. Don't know if it is true, but I still think it is funny.

I bet the ending, as of now, is the result of many different things, including (but not limited to); singular descisions, Budget Limit, Time limit and miscommunication within the company. 

If it truly did have anything to do with budget and time constraints, they would have stated that long before PAX instead of defending "artistic integrity". 

No they wouldnt. Companies would never officially state that they made mistakes regarding time and budget. I suppose you never worked in these kind of companies before. I can assure you budget limit and time played a big role.

A person doesn't need to work for a company to understand this.  Companies officially state, all the time, that they ran out of time and/or resources (why many separate those two is another debate).  In the face of such a massive backlash, if they had really been pressed for time or been somehow underfunded, the best strategy to avoid loss of customers and keep respect is to be open and honest.  To be fair, however, they have been neither about this debacle from day one.

Modifié par Caz Tirin, 08 avril 2012 - 08:59 .

[nullobject]

devSin wrote...

nullobject wrote...

Do they have mass effect fields that allow them to make orbit adjustments? Cushion an impact on a planet? Protect it from burning up while falling through the atmosphere?

The buildings on the Wards are pressure sealed. Although I don't think they could survive crashing on the planet, they should be fine in space and could survive entry into the Earth's atmosphere (not all of them, but I'm sure some could).

The actual structure of the Citadel itself should be fairly impervious to damage. It is not going to burn up on entry. It probably won't really be damaged by crashing either.

The citadel structure may be fine with crashing, it's the effect of the catastrophic momentum adjustment on the inhabitants I was worried about. Also the inhabitants of earth may have problems with the aftereffects of the impact of a multi-kilometre wide object. (It didn't work out well in the past).

Though the people-paste covering the intact citadel structure afterwards might at least be helpful for the Reapers in building a new capital ship.

The Citadel is pretty far from the planet, and the Wards seem to open up parallel to Earth. My guess is that they'll either make them settle into orbit or launch them out of our gravity well (or the remaining ships can tether the Wards to keep them from crashing into the planet). There doesn't seem to be any reason why they'd make them impact Earth.

...other than realism. If they don't have built in drives, they'll go where Newton's laws take them, and the most likley destination is further down the giant gravity well they are sitting in. Stopping them from doing so might require some pretty quick action and a lot of power.

[Pallid]

So they practically going to reverse the ending? I mean handwave everything that was implied i.e. galaxy is not in the dark ages, traveling between the systems is possible, Normandy isn't stranded, mostly everyone(Citadel, fleets) is alive. The question is why make such an ending in the first place, if later you will need to reverse everything...

[byarru]

Awesome
So I CAN use red option withour killing EDI?
If only I could avoid killing the geth too...

[Demigod]

Grudge_NL wrote...

I bet they will   Do you really think Bioware wants to fail again for the majority of it's fans ? 

and they do need some positive buzz to sell dlc.

[Dormiglione]

Its a very good Q&A summary the fan made at pax. Im feeling positive about the extended cut. Hope there will be some post ending playable DLC's.

[CDRSkyShepard]

I toasted to Weekes in Vegas this weekend because of this.

No joke.

[Ieldra]

Thanks, OP, for summarizing this. And thank you, Mr.Weekes, for giving out some real information.

[Peregrin25]

I liked what was said. Nice to see that even people at BioWare had some negative feelings of how things turned out. It gets old always hearing about how one person defends them saying everything to them is all good.

Just finally glad to see someone being humble about ME3 Controversies. There is lots of good information in that.

Modifié par Peregrin25, 08 avril 2012 - 09:20 .

[MissFish]

Someone just put Weekes in charge of everything. Now.
I love him too much, and I definetly feel a bit better now.

[devSin]

nullobject wrote...

The citadel structure may be fine with crashing, it's the effect of the catastrophic momentum adjustment on the inhabitants I was worried about. Also the inhabitants of earth may have problems with the aftereffects of the impact of a multi-kilometre wide object. (It didn't work out well in the past).

No, I very much don't see people having fun if their Wards arm crashed into the planet. But I already assumed most of them were dead, so they typically don't factor into my guesses about how the structure might behave.

I don't know how the Citadel operates. The Wards may be fully powered and capable of propulsion and generating mass effect fields (and the atmosphere is normally maintained by mass effect fields, although we're never told where the generators are or where the power comes from). It could make sense for all the arms to have thrusters, to maintain position and steady rotation.

nullobject wrote...

...other than realism. If they don't have built in drives, they'll go where Newton's laws take them, and the most likley destination is further down the giant gravity well they are sitting in. Stopping them from doing so might require some pretty quick action and a lot of power.

There comes a point where you do something because it looks cool.

Having the Citadel spread its legs looked cool. That's why they did it.

The writers are not going to have pieces of it crash into the planet (they're already walking back anybody really dying when the Reapers move it to Earth), whether you think physics demands it or not. :-)

Modifié par devSin, 08 avril 2012 - 09:27 .

[Huojin]

-Why did Joker leave Shep behind?

Joker would never abandon Shep without a good reason. Hopefully this will be clear in the Expanded Cut.

^ Great example of why the ending sucked ass. Something so obviously flawed (Joker just abandoning the fight AND Shepard) should have been included in the first place.

[GuardianAngel470]

My takeaway from this thread?

PR tactics are f*cking irrelevant. Seriously, most of them are designed to manipulate the consumer base to avoid damage to the company image yet, if what Bioware's been doing is called "damage control", it served only to infuriate most of us.

Then when someone FINALLY comes out and is honest and actually answers our questions, it's proven to be all we wanted to hear.

It's like current PR tactics used in damage control serve only to do more damage.

God I hate psychology.

[Grudge_NL]

Caz Tirin wrote...

Grudge_NL wrote...

Caz Tirin wrote...

Grudge_NL wrote...

Vorodill wrote...

Looks like some people at Bioware WANT to do the Director's Cut DLC.

Oh wait, it's the Extended Cut DLC. Well... it would have been really funny if it was called the Director's Cut DLC Some people say that Hudson and Walters are responsible for the ending. Don't know if it is true, but I still think it is funny.

I bet the ending, as of now, is the result of many different things, including (but not limited to); singular descisions, Budget Limit, Time limit and miscommunication within the company. 

If it truly did have anything to do with budget and time constraints, they would have stated that long before PAX instead of defending "artistic integrity". 

No they wouldnt. Companies would never officially state that they made mistakes regarding time and budget. I suppose you never worked in these kind of companies before. I can assure you budget limit and time played a big role.

A person doesn't need to work for a company to understand this.  Companies officially state, all the time, that they ran out of time and/or resources (why many separate those two is another debate).  In the face of such a massive backlash, if they had really been pressed for time or been somehow underfunded, the best strategy to avoid loss of customers and keep respect is to be open and honest.  To be fair, however, they have been neither about this debacle from day one.

appearently it does. Unofficially, they always state they run out of time and money. Officially they state that everything within the game was an artistic choice. Normally, a company barely makes a statement on this, and forums never cry this loud because of an ending.

[R3MUS]

Where was Harbinger? Can we ASSUME DIRECT CONTROL of him?

I definitely want more closure on Harbinger. That'd be hilarious. Stop punching yourself, Harbinger


Man this made me smile and shed a tear....  We need a conclusion & a final showdown to Harbinger. I am really hoping a dlc will come with the final showdown.

[Simzyy]

well that was a great interview...addressed so much i think people wanted to know

[byarru]

Just one question. How can I get alive EDI in Destroy ending?

[shin-zan]

Seems like they got the right idea here, the bit about "Starflight will continue using conventional FTL" the most significant, I want my galaxy to recover. Was skeptical at first but this is shaping up to be a good thing, maybe I'll get my happy ending after all.

Modifié par shin-zan, 08 avril 2012 - 09:36 .

[aetheldod]

So EA made Bioware screw this up again? First DA2 now Mass Effect ... EA when will you understand? This was supposed to be THE GAME .... why they do that? why does the suits always wants to screw our beloved hobby?

[shin-zan]

byarru wrote...

Just one question. How can I get alive EDI in Destroy ending?

Use her a lot and be nice to her in conversations. The ending scene with the normandy shows the crew you had the highest relationship with, not accounting for deaths or plot. It's a bug but it seems like they'll run with it.

Modifié par shin-zan, 08 avril 2012 - 09:38 .

[Reorte]

nullobject wrote...

...other than realism. If they don't have built in drives, they'll go where Newton's laws take them, and the most likley destination is further down the giant gravity well they are sitting in. Stopping them from doing so might require some pretty quick action and a lot of power.

If the Citadel is using mass effect to stay in the same place relative to the Earth (e.g. over London) the bits will plummet to the ground. It was too close to the earth to be in geostationary orbit, and that only works straight over the equator yet the beam went up vertically.

If it was truly in orbit then the exploded bits will remain in orbit. Some will have been blasted into a higher orbit, some into a lower one (the smaller the piece the more likely a bigger change is) and the lower ones may have a perigee that takes them into the atmosphere. The most possible result is a ring of debris orbiting the Earth, with a few of the (relatively) small bits coming down every now and then.

Back to the interview, it's exactly the sort of thing BW should've been doing for damage control and the complete opposite to what they have done. I can't get my head around that. It certainly gives me a lot more hope. I didn't have much because I couldn't see how clarification could do anything other than confirm my worst fears (why bother having a scene in there if it doesn't mean anything?)

Modifié par Reorte, 08 avril 2012 - 09:41 .

[devSin]

Huojin wrote...

^ Great example of why the ending sucked ass. Something so obviously flawed (Joker just abandoning the fight AND Shepard) should have been included in the first place.

It makes me so mad.

Who in their right mind thought it was OK to put that junk in there?

Modifié par devSin, 08 avril 2012 - 09:41 .

[Eterna]

I told you guys the relays didn't supernova hahahahaha eat it!