1895 réponses à ce sujet

[shepskisaac]

tobito113 wrote...

To be honest, the way she worded it, it was easy to asume they would avoid the endings issue completely and just make a convention about cosplayers and fanart. That was my impression and i was surprised when they adressed some of the issues people had with the endings...

No it wasn't. She was talking details on EC DLC. Simple. Right now some people are actively seeking out 'ammo' to continue whining in hope that it will force Bioware to change every bit of ending. That's what it boils down to and everyone can see it. Let's not pretend "ohh just a lil' misinterpretation". The most zealot retakers have been "lil' misinterpreting" literally everything from day 1. I'm sick of it.

Modifié par IsaacShep, 08 avril 2012 - 08:18 .

[Evil Minion]

zephyr2025 wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

zephyr2025 wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

Michael Gamble wrote...

By the way, Patrick, John, Reid myself - we were all ready to answer those kinds of questions in dialogue just like the original OP. It was the whole reason we came to PAX. In fact, a lot of people may have gotten a bit *too* much out of me

Either way, we met hundreds of folks - and we were so happy and pleased that everyone just wanted to talk and have some great convo.

All of us are feeling pax with a sense of...renewal, and we are ready to work our butts off in the months ahead.

Hope you all enjoy resurgence!

So we still have to agree with a genocidal madman?

I'm getting the feeling even the developers don't believe in what space hitler says, but yeah we still have to obey him after him giving us 3 options to kill ourselves.

You were never supposed to "agree" with the logic of the friggen "villians."

That's why they're "villians."

...........................................................again... we still have to obey the villian though at the end. 

........if you interpretted that way, great.

I didn't.

[Tirranek]

pomrink wrote...

I have a genuine question, what is wrong with retconning the starchild out of existence? I'm confused.

1. Makes an alternate ending a re-write instead of an extension, a problem because:
    a) It shows Bioware altering their story in order to score points with fan complaints.
    Threatens to ****** off people who actually don't mind the starchild.
    c) Sets a precedent for future titles that is potentially rocky. If it's been done once, any future misteps will have very loud consequences.

2. Having the crucible just be an ancient explodi-beam isn't actually a satisfying alternative. It's only considered strong because it removes a negative.

3. The kid dreams become largely irrelevant (Not that i care about that, since there were plenty of alternatives to those scenes that I think would have been better.) However, it would leave another thread hanging.

4. Despite the ending not doing a very good job with explaining the true nature of the Reapers, removing the starchild would leave only more questions.

5. Without a nudge of some sort, there's no real way Shepard would be able to peceieve any choice other than destroy. Similar cutscenes aside, the actual difference in those choices are pretty profound.

Modifié par Tirranek, 08 avril 2012 - 08:18 .

[Quietness]

Still curious how they are going to keep the whole riding the wave scene and explain away how everyone didnt die when it was ripped out of FTL... no one ever starved in the first place due to them dieing from Cerenkov Radiation.

[Anduin The Grey]

zephyr2025 wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

zephyr2025 wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

Michael Gamble wrote...

By the way, Patrick, John, Reid myself - we were all ready to answer those kinds of questions in dialogue just like the original OP. It was the whole reason we came to PAX. In fact, a lot of people may have gotten a bit *too* much out of me

Either way, we met hundreds of folks - and we were so happy and pleased that everyone just wanted to talk and have some great convo.

All of us are feeling pax with a sense of...renewal, and we are ready to work our butts off in the months ahead.

Hope you all enjoy resurgence!

So we still have to agree with a genocidal madman?

I'm getting the feeling even the developers don't believe in what space hitler says, but yeah we still have to obey him after him giving us 3 options to kill ourselves.

You were never supposed to "agree" with the logic of the friggen "villians."

That's why they're "villians."

...........................................................again... we still have to obey the villian though at the end. 

Or did you aka will you? You know, they could put in indoctrination theory and pull the plug on starchild at the same time without any retcon, it's amazing what folks can do with existing footage let alone having the ability to make any additional footage they need.

I really want to see how this story ends, am desperately desperate (that's pretty desperate!), the writers are very clever folks, I'd go on but I'd like to resume my Weekes and Gamble worship thanks!

[FatalX7.0]

Michael Gamble wrote...

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

Michael Gamble wrote...

Cmon - give us some time with the DLC, and let's try to avoid hatin' on Patrick or Jessica:P

Honestly, after all the valid and incisive criticism leveled at the Catalyst and his presence in the ending, why insist on keeping him around? 90% of what's wrong with the ending can be solved simply by retconning him out of existence.

Why not just answer this question directly?

Is your question about whether or not we are going to retcon the catalyst? The answer is no. We've already said we are not changing the endings, but again - there are many things that we *can* do without changing them. 

A lot of folks had questions that we want to answer for them - but just like any piece of content, we are not going to outline the specifics before release. 

But...he ruins everything...and contradicts Sovereign and Hardby..

[zephyr2025]

Evil Minion wrote...

........if you interpretted that way, great.

I didn't.

So him giving you 3 options and telling you to choose and you having to chose 1 of those 3 options isn't doing what he wants. I didn't realize there was another way to interpret that.

Edit: all the choices you make at the end are choices that are explained to you by the villian. Sure you can just assume that running into a beam of light is going to do whatever you want but really...

Modifié par zephyr2025, 08 avril 2012 - 08:20 .

[pomrink]

Bah let me elaborate again, I thought it was assumed if they retconned the starchild/catalyst avatar out of existence and it's rational, then I thought it was assumed they'd replace it.

[xsdob]

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

The whole "everyone is dead and starving!!!!" scenario was entirely hyperbolated by rabid chicken littles in order to exaggerate and over dramatize their hatred for the near-perfect dark ending. 

Hardly. It was a pretty natural conclusion based on what we see in the ending and what we know to be true of the ME universe.

Hyperbolized, yes. A near pefect dark ending, no.

The ending has much potential but was completly mishandled in the presentation. Hopfully additional scenes whihc answer more questions will seal off the plotholes and laeav the endings with a decent 80 outof 100 score rather than the 36 out of a hundred I currently hold it in.

[Evil Minion]

IsaacShep wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

To be honest, the way she worded it, it was easy to asume they would avoid the endings issue completely and just make a convention about cosplayers and fanart. That was my impression and i was surprised when they adressed some of the issues people had with the endings...

No it wasn't. She was talking details on EC DLC. Simple. Right now some people are actively seeking out 'ammo' to continue whining in hope that it will force Bioware to change every bit of ending. That's what it boils down to and everyone can see it. Let's not pretend "ohh just a lil' misinterpretation". The most zealot retakers have been "lil' misinterpreting" literally everything from day 1. I'm sick of it.

I suspect it's one of the reasons the devs haven't bothered with a "fan Q&A" on BSN.

Why go through the trouble if everything you say is just going to be shouted down as "conspiracies" or "PR tactics?"

[M0keys]

1. Makes an alternate ending a re-write instead of an extension, a problem because:

I'm guessing it comes down to resources at this point. That's something I'm starting to realize. Creating an entirely new ending would be like starting up on a brand new game, in a sense.

[Evil Minion]

zephyr2025 wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

........if you interpretted that way, great.

I didn't.

So him giving you 3 options and telling you to choose and you having to chose 1 of those 3 options isn't doing what he wants. I didn't realize there was another way to interpret that.

Nope.

[Ozai75]

Mr. Gamble.

First thanks for being brave enough to line up in the firestorm. Second, I would just like to use this as an example of how too much PR talk can tarnish the reputation of a company of essentially good people because it sounds cold and distant. People, and fans in particular, desire true connection with the people that they feel can understand and do something about something they both mutually love. Aside from a few people, most of the fans upset about the ending love Mass Effect and they are very hurt and confused. Talking to those hurt and confused people through the mask of corporate overseer only serves to show that the company doesn't "care" about their feelings and they lash out. Talking to them as fans and as fellow people that care just as much about Mass Effect as they do works to get them on your side and allows them to helpfully release their worries on your shoulder as a friend and not rail against you as an "enemy"

Sorry for the somewhat rambling post, but this is how I feel and I hope someone @ Bioware sees this.

[Kanon777]

IsaacShep wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

To be honest, the way she worded it, it was easy to asume they would avoid the endings issue completely and just make a convention about cosplayers and fanart. That was my impression and i was surprised when they adressed some of the issues people had with the endings...

No it wasn't. She was talking details on EC DLC. Simple. Right now some people are actively seeking out 'ammo' to continue whining in hope that it will force Bioware to change every bit of ending. That's what it boils down to and everyone can see it. Let's not pretend "ohh just a lil' misinterpretation". The most zealot retakers have been "lil' misinterpreting" literally everything from day 1. I'm sick of it.

Ok i agree with you on that 

[The Wumpus]

Evil Minion wrote...

zephyr2025 wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

........if you interpretted that way, great.

I didn't.

So him giving you 3 options and telling you to choose and you having to chose 1 of those 3 options isn't doing what he wants. I didn't realize there was another way to interpret that.

Nope.

Someone, I can't remember who, actually had a pretty nice way of looking at that. You can say that the starchild isn't so much giving you choices as he is explaining what the machine that you built can do.

[Henioo]

So, the budget? Looks like the EA's fault, innit?

Meh.

[Tirranek]

pomrink wrote...

Bah let me elaborate again, I thought it was assumed if they retconned the starchild/catalyst avatar out of existence and it's rational, then I thought it was assumed they'd replace it.

Thing is, one of the complaints I've heard from the retake movement is not that it's a kid specifically, but that it's a deus ex machina. Replacing the starchild with a different sort of Star-X would still be bad thing for them.

[Neko Hibiki]

JaylaClark wrote...

The kid talking really does not do it for me. At all. Having an adult of some sort give the exposition would have uplifted this ending from a zero to a three just by itself in my book.

I agree there.

Everytime I see the kid...

I think of Justin Bieber in his grey hoodie.

[pomrink]

Tirranek wrote...

pomrink wrote...

Bah let me elaborate again, I thought it was assumed if they retconned the starchild/catalyst avatar out of existence and it's rational, then I thought it was assumed they'd replace it.

Thing is, one of the complaints I've heard from the retake movement is not that it's a kid specifically, but that it's a deus ex machina. Replacing the starchild with a different sort of Star-X would still be bad thing for them.

Nevermind, you're not really getting what I'm asking.

[Anduin The Grey]

Neko Hibiki wrote...

JaylaClark wrote...

The kid talking really does not do it for me. At all. Having an adult of some sort give the exposition would have uplifted this ending from a zero to a three just by itself in my book.

I agree there.

Everytime I see the kid...

I think of Justin Bieber in his grey hoodie.

Did someone send him a ticket to Earth just before the Reapers invade? DOH! Didn't think so!!

[zephyr2025]

The Wumpus wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

zephyr2025 wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

........if you interpretted that way, great.

I didn't.

So him giving you 3 options and telling you to choose and you having to chose 1 of those 3 options isn't doing what he wants. I didn't realize there was another way to interpret that.

Nope.

Someone, I can't remember who, actually had a pretty nice way of looking at that. You can say that the starchild isn't so much giving you choices as he is explaining what the machine that you built can do.

At the end though, he brought you to that room, he explains to you what the choices are, he tells you to choose. You can argue what his intent was, but you owuldn't have these choices unless the villian gave them to you.

[balance5050]

The Wumpus wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

zephyr2025 wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

........if you interpretted that way, great.

I didn't.

So him giving you 3 options and telling you to choose and you having to chose 1 of those 3 options isn't doing what he wants. I didn't realize there was another way to interpret that.

Nope.

Someone, I can't remember who, actually had a pretty nice way of looking at that. You can say that the starchild isn't so much giving you choices as he is explaining what the machine that you built can do.

So it was designed to destroy the reapers by having a switch that you "shoot at" to activate? GOD the ending makes so little sense...

[pikey1969]

Neko Hibiki wrote...

JaylaClark wrote...

The kid talking really does not do it for me. At all. Having an adult of some sort give the exposition would have uplifted this ending from a zero to a three just by itself in my book.

I agree there.

Everytime I see the kid...

I think of Justin Bieber in his grey hoodie.

we have the makings of a pro-canadian conspiracy here.

the justin bieber theory.

[The Charnel Expanse]

Tirranek wrote...

pomrink wrote...

I have a genuine question, what is wrong with retconning the starchild out of existence? I'm confused.

1. Makes an alternate ending a re-write instead of an extension, a problem because:
    a) It shows Bioware altering their story in order to score points with fan complaints.
    Threatens to ****** off people who actually don't mind the starchild.
    c) Sets a precedent for future titles that is potentially rocky. If it's been done once, any future misteps will have very loud consequences.

Counterpoint: It wins BW a TON of goodwill for actually listening to the strongest, most well-thought-out criticisms of the ending. It makes them appear far less tone-deaf and more responsive. That is how you [re]build a fan base and ensure future profitability. 
And furthermore, while there are some who 'don't mind' Casper, I strongly doubt they'll be angry to see him go.
Unfortunately, I don't expect EA to see it that way. BW is just numbers on a ledger to them.

2. Having the crucible just be an ancient explodi-beam isn't actually a satisfying alternative. It's only considered strong because it removes a negative.

Why not? It's presented throughout the game as a hail-mary, last-ditch attempt to defeat an enemy that can't be defeated through conventional means. Why is that not enough to satisfy?

3. The kid dreams become largely irrelevant (Not that i care about that, since there were plenty of alternatives to those scenes that I think would have been better.) However, it would leave another thread hanging.

Personally, I think it cheapens those scenes. Instead of the emotional impact of Shepard remembering the death of a child he couldn't save, which underscores one of the core themes of the third game, it associates the image with a nonsensical exposition fairy that most people seem to loathe.

4. Despite the ending not doing a very good job with explaining the true nature of the Reapers, removing the starchild would leave only more questions.

Why do the Reapers need to have their "true nature" explained beyond what was already established? 
Yes, it's nice to know how they function, but only to the extent that it helps you defeat them.  To me, the Reapers need their motivations laid bare no more than an earthquake or a hurricane does. As Sovereign so impetuously put it, they 'simply are'. In the scope of this narrative, that's enough.

Modifié par The Charnel Expanse, 08 avril 2012 - 08:27 .

[Kanon777]

Its my impression that peple would find it much easier to swallow what the Catalyst say if it took the form of the original race that created the reapers, it dosent have to change the motives or most the dialogue (they could make the voice actor sound just like harbringer).

Seeing it as an old alien form could help us understand who created the reapers (dont forget VIs like Avina and Vedetta take the form of the species who created them) and add more exposition to the species that are older than the proteans...

Modifié par tobito113, 08 avril 2012 - 08:29 .