1895 réponses à ce sujet

[pomrink]

Retconning the starchild/catalyst's rational would presumably change everything that happens afterwards is what I was assuming when I ask what's wrong with retconning.

[Evil Minion]

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.

That's pretty much the way I took it.

We never see Ghostdweeb "forcing" Shep to do anything.

The fact that Shep doesn't have an option to say, "Kiss my butt!" is an issue of game design, not that Ghostdweeb "forced" you to do anything.

If I say, "If you put your hand on a hot stove, it will hurt," am I "forcing" you to put your hand on a hot stove? No, I'm just explaining the consequence of putting your hand on a hot stove.

Modifié par Evil Minion, 08 avril 2012 - 08:30 .

[Anduin The Grey]

balance5050 wrote...

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...

Sorry that makes as little sense as the ending you're deriding. Otherwise I want my money back on every film and game that has a manual overide :P

[pikey1969]

tobito113 wrote...

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 (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...

I don't think that would change a thing.

The catalyst is ultimately what people make fun of, because it's representative of so many of things that people took issue with, but I believe the greater and the original problem is the choices that the catalyst offers.

[gurg13]

Holoe4 wrote...

EA needed to give Bioware proper resources and enough time to complete the game.

No wonder why some parts of the game weren't up to par, the game was rushed... at least to some extent.

Bioware's being indoctrinated! They need to break EA's hold and find a loophole
in the contract of their partnership... So they can make a quality RPG on their own time.

Sometimes you have got to
get a product out before you run out of money. That’s just business. Sadly in
this case it hurt the ending and damaged the quality of the product, (which
they now have to do rework to maintain quality.)

Simply saying EA is the root cause is “speculation,” and there is a good
chance that the investment funds to make the game may have not been there is it
wasn’t for EA.  

[nevar00]

Originally we planned to have a cutscene of Reapers taking over, Reaper monsters punching buttons, et cetera. But we cut it, partially for resource reasons and partly because it disrupted the pacing.

You don't say? Because having the Citadel move randomly off screen wasn't jarring at all, nosiree!

Why do you guys do Star Wars style space battles instead of the battles described in the codex?

We want to provide a familiar, compelling visual experience for people who grew up on Star Wars and stuff like that. These are some of our favorite parts of the game.

Some of your favorite parts of the game were cutscenes where stuff happens? Why does this need to happen in a cutscene?

Interesting read. Although I also don't like all the "everyone's not dead and space flight is still possible cause I say so!" responses even if it goes against facts from the game...

[Thornquist]

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!

Thanks for the reply Gamble. I for one am waiting anxiously for the Extended Cut DLC. And dont give up on the haters, they hate because they love

[Grudge_NL]

gurg13 wrote...

Holoe4 wrote...

EA needed to give Bioware proper resources and enough time to complete the game.

No wonder why some parts of the game weren't up to par, the game was rushed... at least to some extent.

Bioware's being indoctrinated! They need to break EA's hold and find a loophole
in the contract of their partnership... So they can make a quality RPG on their own time.

Sometimes you have got to
get a product out before you run out of money. That’s just business. Sadly in
this case it hurt the ending and damaged the quality of the product, (which
they now have to do rework to maintain quality.)

Simply saying EA is the root cause is “speculation,” and there is a good
chance that the investment funds to make the game may have not been there is it
wasn’t for EA.  

That is true.  EA may have an awful reputation, but if EA didnt fund the Bioware team, Mass Effect would've had way less development time and budget. On top of that, every game is rushed. Every game isn't exactly the final product the Development team has been building.

Modifié par Grudge_NL, 08 avril 2012 - 08:34 .

[Kanon777]

pikey1969 wrote...
I don't think that would change a thing.
The catalyst is ultimately what people make fun of, because it's representative of so many of things that people took issue with, but I believe the greater and the original problem is the choices that the catalyst offers.

I believe this could change significantly the way people see the catalyst, you could even make it sound like a desperate/insane/defective machine trapped in its own directives and unable to think of other possibilities for the galaxy (therefore solving the "plothole" of the reasoning behind their actions)

[nevar00]

Also I don't like the explanation for Legion doing a complete 180 either. Sounds like a cop-out for them deciding to go in a different direction.

[xsdob]

tobito113 wrote...

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 

Eeyup. Lucky though, the number of people no longer falling for the PR speak that bioware uses and the propoganda and hyestria that some of the retakers are using is starting to grow. Now people are starting to see the benefit of remaining calm and cauciously optimistic and have decided wait to judge the upcoming dlc.

Hopefully this trend continues.

[Tirranek]

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

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.

Those are all perfectly reasonable counterpoints. I do get the feeling though that the issue is they would be removing part of the game to please a very clearly identified group who want such a change, but then potentially risk angering a whole other group of people. I'm not talking about the pro-enders, who are very much a reaction to to the retake movement, but the unknown majority.

This is the trouble with the starchild, it's a defining moment (as iffy as it is) in a game that has been played by loads of people. Outright removing him may be the best way to satisfy a lot of fans on BSN, but there is a big unknown factor to doing so. The compromise of extending the ending potentially satisfies a number of angered fans, while not risking majority backlash.


Just to be clear though, I would be happy if he wasn't in the game. He irritates me for various reasons but I was happy with how things turned out overall because of reading in to what suggested during the endings, not necessarily what was outright stated.

[Vox Draco]

Grudge_NL wrote...
That is true.  EA may have an awful reputation, but if EA didnt fund the Bioware team, Mass Effect would've had way less development time and budget. On top of that, every game is rushed. Every game isn't exactly the final product the Development team has been building.

Too bad that Bioware isn't under Zenimax-Rule (Bethesda). Not to say that they are the White Knight of Publishers, but nevertheless I think they'd be better for Bioware's "artistic integrity". And at least Bethesda is a somewhat more fan-friendly developer-team...and just imagine: An elderscrolls game with cool characters and a true story + cinematics! And a new Bioware-game with open-world-elemts! Woohoo!

But then..Bethesda also invented the dreaded DLC! Damn, forget what I just wrote *laugh*

[FrozenDreamfall]

Thanks for the post,everyone should see this,it gives hope,I won't hold my breath cause I know EA,but I also know BW and I know they were rushed.

[hwf]

Reading Gamble's responses here I feel like a lot of middle-management needs to be cut out the communication lines.

You should drop in more often to quell some fires!

[mugwuffin1986]

pikey1969 wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

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 (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...

I don't think that would change a thing.

The catalyst is ultimately what people make fun of, because it's representative of so many of things that people took issue with, but I believe the greater and the original problem is the choices that the catalyst offers.

A couple of things...

• Who said the Catalyst is a villian/antagonist?
• The Catalyst is only explaining what the Crucible does it did not create these options for you.

The Catalyst had a hand in creating the Reapers to safe guard the galaxy from total destruction. I think people are making far too many assumptions about its intentions/purpose.

[zephyr2025]

Evil Minion wrote...

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.

That's pretty much the way I took it.

We never see Ghostdweeb "forcing" Shep to do anything.

The fact that Shep doesn't have an option to say, "Kiss my butt!" is an issue of game design, not that Ghostdweeb "forced" you to do anything.

If I say, "If you put your hand on a hot stove, it will hurt," am I "forcing" you to put your hand on a hot stove? No, I'm just explaining the consequence of putting your hand on a hot stove.

I wasn't saying he was forcing you. I'm saying you have no choice though. The game doesn't give you any option other than put your hand on a hot stove. Whether he was forcing you wasn't part of this discussion.

Modifié par zephyr2025, 08 avril 2012 - 08:42 .

[MrPuschel]

It's a little sad that bioware didnt give us something like this interview just after the protests had started. Maybe they where to afraid of taking even a neutral position. Never make your point clear, that's the sad part of this business.

[Tirranek]

tobito113 wrote...

pikey1969 wrote...
I don't think that would change a thing.
The catalyst is ultimately what people make fun of, because it's representative of so many of things that people took issue with, but I believe the greater and the original problem is the choices that the catalyst offers.

I believe this could change significantly the way people see the catalyst, you could even make it sound like a desperate/insane/defective machine trapped in its own directives and unable to think of other possibilities for the galaxy (therefore solving the "plothole" of the reasoning behind their actions)

I think it was in this thread, that I posted earlier, but yes! I think the main issue with the Catalyst is the form it takes. Imagine if instead of being a kid, it was some old-man voice like this:

Clicky

I'd have digged that more. Even better, in my opinion, would have been it assuming the likeness of your LI, or you. Would have put a great twist on the VI of yourself you've been prodding for 2/3rds of the game

Modifié par Tirranek, 08 avril 2012 - 08:45 .

[Anduin The Grey]

MrPuschel wrote...


It's a little sad that bioware didnt give us something like this interview just after the protests had started. Maybe they where to afraid of taking even a neutral position. Never make your point clear, that's the sad part of this business.

I dunno, maybe EA are laughing their socks off with all the extra data they've harvested from us, sorry, putting tin foil hat away again.
:innocent:

[die-yng]

MrPuschel wrote...


It's a little sad that bioware didnt give us something like this interview just after the protests had started. Maybe they where to afraid of taking even a neutral position. Never make your point clear, that's the sad part of this business.

This. And why not even give us this info officially during pax. They didn't need to go into details, but to block it like this.

Seriously I can't believe how badly BW and EA PR are handling this whole crisis (i think that is what it is by now).

They are quiet where they should inform and they are boasting off and mouthing off, where it would sometimes be better to just keep it shut.

[xsdob]

Has anyone tried to PM mike gamble, we know he has an account here now.

It'd be good if we could get a Q and A through a PM going, but the only problem is finding someone who is more like Emily Wong to interview him, and not a Conrad Verner or a Khalisah al-Jilani.

Modifié par xsdob, 08 avril 2012 - 08:47 .

[Kanon777]

zephyr2025 wrote...

I wasn't saying he was forcing you. I'm saying you have no choice though. The game doesn't give you any option other than put your hand on a hot stove. Whether he was forcing you wasn't part of this discussion.

But the plot of the series is about killing the reapers, in the end you will be put in a situation where you have to deal with them, what other options do you want besides:

Kill your enemies. (destroy)
Subjulgate your enemies (control)
Make peace with your enemies (synthesis)

And dont say that you wanted to ignore the catalyst because you just admited that he didnt force you to do anything, and you can just stay put in your place and let the reapers take over the catalyst (critical mission failure)

[kimuji]

mugwuffin1986 wrote...

A couple of things...

• Who said the Catalyst is a villian/antagonist?
• The Catalyst is only explaining what the Crucible does it did not create these options for you.

The Catalyst had a hand in creating the Reapers to safe guard the galaxy from total destruction. I think people are making far too many assumptions about its intentions/purpose.

The Catalyst didn't build the Crucible so we can also assume that he doesn't know in detail what are its precise effects. That leaves some room for unexpected outcomes without having to change anything in what the Catalyst says (and he also could be lying a bit).

[Kanon777]

Tirranek wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

pikey1969 wrote...
I don't think that would change a thing.
The catalyst is ultimately what people make fun of, because it's representative of so many of things that people took issue with, but I believe the greater and the original problem is the choices that the catalyst offers.

I believe this could change significantly the way people see the catalyst, you could even make it sound like a desperate/insane/defective machine trapped in its own directives and unable to think of other possibilities for the galaxy (therefore solving the "plothole" of the reasoning behind their actions)

I think it was in this thread, that I posted earlier, but yes! I think the main issue with the Catalyst is the form it takes. Imagine if instead of being a kid, it was some old-man voice like this:

Clicky

I'd have digged that more. Even better, in my opinion, would have been it assuming the likeness of your LI, or you. Would have put a great twist on the VI of yourself you've been prodding for 2/3rds of the game

Imagine if the catalyst was voiced by this guy (the Architect form the matrix). in a new scary/surreal alien form



A change like this wouldnt harm Bioware's "artistic integrity" and wouldnt change the endings, but you have to admit it could make things much more interesting.

Modifié par tobito113, 08 avril 2012 - 08:51 .