9 réponses à ce sujet

[Ozzyfan223]

Is this the case with Bioware? Think about, aside from DAII (which, in my opinion, they suspected such backlash for the risks they took), Bioware hasn't really been the bane of such serious, unified backlash.

I believe this is the first time where Bioware has had it handed to them, and that what they thought was great, really wasn't. And they can't face the facts, so they hide behind their "Artistic integrity" and seem to completely contradict themselves when it comes to them being dedicated to their fans.

I get the feeling Bioware has never had to experience this kind of thing before, where their grand centerpiece goes up in flames, and all they can do is go about acting as if they are not the ones to blame. When a spoiled kid is so used to getting what he wants, when the time comes that he is told "no" he throws a hissy fit and continue to live in complete denial of the fact that life doesn't always give you what you want.

Bioware lacks humility, and I'm sorry to say it. No company that truly believes in its fanbase would point to critics reviews and wave their banner of "artistic intergrity". I company that really cares about itself, and its fans, is one that, yes, can be proud of it's creation, but also have the guts to stand up and say they messed up.

[Allan Schumacher]

Freedom1 wrote...

nhsknudsen wrote...

The ending wouldn't have been so bad if... (yes it would still suck with a god kid, but expectations).

It was literally impossible to save everyone in the suicide mission, make both Miranda and Jack stand down happily. Make Legion and Tali stand down happily. Get both Krogan AND Salarian support and making peace between Geth and Quarians.

Now if we had forced choices of death like the VS and we had to make those choices throughout the series with forced loss people wouldn't expect the happy ending, at least not the happy ending where everyone is saved (that we care about; read; crew and Shepard)

Actually in the suicide mission, everyone survived and i didn't have the loyalty of miranda. granted maybe that was because i had her in my party fighting the human reaper but who knows. Point is, everyone survived.

i think the poster's point was that the ability to have pretty much unmitigated success in ME2 helped lead to people's expectations of being able to do so in ME3.

I actually was disappointed myself when I learned that ME2's suicide mission could be completed flawlessly (for me Thane died... ), as I was expecting it to require a sacrifice, similar to ME1.  Though while I think it makes for a less interesting story personally, I do think that that sequence is a well done demonstration of how to make interesting reactivity in a game.


EDIT:  I should have kept reading thread as this was already clarified :S

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 09 avril 2012 - 03:32 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Dartbeast54q wrote...

umm...apparently all that lag I got made me quote w/o words?  Anyway, I had said that I liked how the suicide mission was played out where you could get everyone through it.  However I would not have minded if you were required to leave someone behind like Virmire in ME1.

I think, like a lot of ideas, it's something that works really well when not overused.  As a gamer, I think I'd be disappointed if every BioWare game had it so that you could get through every big plot point with some sort of ideal solution.  It'd also be bad if you never had that hope that you might be able to pull through.

So I think I appreciated that everyone could survive more than I would have, because I was expecting NOT to.


I good example for myself through ME3 was Tuchanka and Rannoch.  With Tuchanka, I had no choice but to let Mordin, probably my favourite NPC from ME2, sacrifice himself to cure the genophage.  It was a great scene and gave me that lump in my throat.  Fast forward to Rannoch, and I when I was presented with only the two options initially, I was very "NO!  BOTH THOSE CHOICES SUCK!!! :crying:"  Buuuut, as it turns out it WAS possible to get an ideal solution and make peace, which pretty much had me high fiving myself for how awesome I was.  If I went into that sequence thinking "Eh, there's undoubtedly going to some way to make peace" instead of "I really really hope there's some way to make peace!!!!" I don't think the scene would have been as awesome.

I also think that that scene is a great example of reactivity.  Reading up about the various things that need to be accomplished, going back to ME2, in order for it all to work out is pretty damn awesome.  Rannoch is easily my favourite part ot the entire trilogy.  It probably seemed more awesome because I figured nothing would top Tuchanka earlier!

[Allan Schumacher]

Dartbeast54q wrote...

I can agree.  I remember when I was given a choice between the Geth/Quarians I paused the game, stood up and paced for about 5 minutes deciding what to do, I then decided I had to go with the Quarians (mostly cause Tali was my LI) 

I was very happy to see in the next line of dialog I had the choice to broker peace.  I loved how choices we made, sometimes even small ones since I'm a stickler for doing every mission/side mission etc from 1 and 2 made large impacts on how things turned out while playing 3.  Situations with many variables and have many different outcomes are great, having a certain level of unpredictabilty and such.

I ended up watching the alternative outcomes on youtube, and one of my favourite things was watching the guy's dialogue wheel spin around maniacally.  He was clearly having a hard time picking which choice haha.

IMO the most powerful outcome is the destruction of the Quarians.  I actually find it very difficult to watch.  All the dust and sand in my room suddenly manifests itself in my eyes!  It's very annoying!

[Allan Schumacher]

Bantz wrote...

dude with all respect, if thane died you fked up go back and do it over again! Thane is a badass and must be around to live out his badassary in ME3.

I get the point that a "suicide mission" isn't as dramatic if you can all live. But I thought it was a tribute to how badass shepherd was and it added to his lore. Here's a guy that's built a career on doing them impossible. But I do see your point.

now go fix the suicide mission thing, thane must live. If you gotta lose someone kill jacob he's kind of a douche anyway.

Hahaha, I'm the type of person that, especially on my first playthrough, accepts the consequences of my decisions and never reloads unless I have to (i.e. game over).  I know not everyone is like that, but I started doing tha with KOTOR and it actually really made the experience so amazing for me.  I've stuck with it and don't regret it. 

I thought I might have lost Jacob in the next sequence actually.  But I empathized with Thane more, and since I chose him to go into the tube in part because of his illness, it was touching to feel that his death had meaning.  I actually got goosebumps seeing his name on the memorial on the Normandy in ME3.  Really nice touch.


I did have a fully successful playthrough, that also included Zaeed, as a Renegade shep.  Sadly though that save seemed to be AWOL so I haven't gotten a chance to bring it into ME3.

[Allan Schumacher]

Bantz...

the destruction of the quarians was powerful but for me having legion lash out to try and save his people only to get stabbed in the back (twice once literally once figuratively) by his friends and then turn to Tali and ask if he has a soul before he dies, was pretty damn powerful stuff.

Agree wholeheartedly. Seeing Tali empathize with him as she tearfully says yes is amazing. From a character perspective this is stuff I don't quite get from the peace ending.

Same goes with Mordin getting shot. Watching that I actually was hoping he'd STILL make it to the console and cure the genophage, just to spite Shepard. Watching him crawl with all that determination = shudder haha.

Still, anyone that shoots Mordin is a monster. >.>

[Allan Schumacher]

garf wrote...

THIS....

Bioware should pay you your weight in gold. You and few others like you... (Patrick Weekes comes to mind) are the only reason Bioware has even a chance to win back its bewildered and wounded (and yes ANGRY) fans.

Suddenly I'm debating if this weight loss goal is a good idea....

I've seen many other posts say thanks and I've kind of just skimmed over it, but you're welcome.  It started as I was reading (been lurking off and on since I beat the game) and felt like commenting on a post regarding the destroy ending.

It's as much a kudos to you guys as well though for providing some interesting discussion.  My Easter weekend had no real plans (I'm THAT cool) and now most of it is gone and it's been fun.  Last time I posted this regularly was probably KOTOR, long before I started here

[Allan Schumacher]

Flextt wrote...

I fully agree. By making it possible to save everyone the story loses a tragical component and your commitment towards the stakes is actually lower. But it required good decision-making in the very first playthrough and its orchestration was excellent. So for all I know, while ME 2 perfect ending was cliché, it is an example of how cliché and orchestration can work for each other and create something nevertheless satisfying and demanding. I was REALLY REALLY on edge, because I didn't know if I would lose somebody in my first playthrough. Damocles' sword over everyone!

That's actually a really good point.  I remember pointing out to a friend of mine that he shouldn't let a game's illusion of choice stain his opinion of Deus Ex, because on a second playthrough he tried to do something he thought was a genuine option in the first playthrough (join UNATCO).

In this sense, as long as I have kept myself spoiler free, an ideal ending that is very difficult to achieve isn't something I should hold against the game.  Thinking about it a bit more, I think one issue with ME2 is that I didn't find the optimal ending that difficult to actually achieve.  In fact, without realizing the scope of my decisions, I almost achieved it my first playthrough and would have if I had chosen someone other than Thane to go into the tube.  All I really did though was play the game the way I would have normally (doing most side missions taht I found interesting).

Is this that atypical of a playthrough?  Or maybe we should consider requiring more "off the beaten path" type of stuff in order to obtain our super ending of awesome?

[Allan Schumacher]

@Sad Dragon

I think you and I see eye to eye on a lot based on your post. I also find it interesting when situations come up for a Paragon to have to be a bit Renegade, and for a Renegade to have to be a bit Paragon. I'm actually of the old school in that I prefer that these values get hidden because I find a lot of the times, people gloss over what might be an interesting decision simply because "eh, this gives me paragon/renegade."


I think I'm much more open to having a clear "best ending" if it's more made up of a not so obvious sequence of choices, rather than simply having a completionist playthrough. I know ME2 isn't exactly like this, but I think it's close. If it's based on how we choose to proceed through the game, it's more interesting, for a lot of good reasons you provided. And choosing to NOT do something like a loyalty mission isn't really a "choice" IMO. I mean, it's fair that things might end up bad, but then good endings are more just a grind, rather than something meaningful.

As for ending choice, I think I more prefer the term consequence as what I am looking for. I don't think that any "bad ending" is something that I should "choose" to do, but rather a result of my previous actions and the game saying "You did good son. But it just wasn't enough." Though I am being a hypocrite because I think the idea of choosing a "bad ending" by refusing the Catalyst is a good idea haha. I guess for those people, it's not so much a bad ending but just a different way of completing the game.


Off to bed now for me, but thanks for the response!

Allan



EDIT:

And I think that's what made me rage so much at the ME3 ending, that
feeling of "I did everything right, why am I not being rewarded for
this?"

I don't think this is fundamentally a bad thing, but figuring out the right execution so that a completitionist is still satisfied is tricky.  It may not even be possible haha.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 09 avril 2012 - 09:53 .

[John Epler]

And that's enough of that. This is neither story nor campaign related, sorry.

Locking.