149 réponses à ce sujet

[Manton-X2]

OhoniX wrote...

Logical fallacy. It's why serious issues are rarely decided using "shout meters". If you have a crowd of 100 people and 10 of them yell REALLY loudly while the other 90 are silent, a listener might believe that the majority are on the side of the 10%.

So no, you really don't know the majority are fine with it. If that were true, I doubt you would be able to get the game 3 weeks after launch at 35-50% off release price.

You can for a lot of games. After launch most retailers just want to push used copies. You're sort of supporting my point though. All of this unfocused rage has hurt the game's image, which may have resulted in decreased sales. This means that Bioware is making less money. That means that they'll have less money to spend on developing their next games, which means that they'll be even more limited in scope. If you thought that DA2 or ME3 were "rushed" or "too limited", reducing the funding for their next project isn't likely to result in better results.

Mmm hmm ... so, if I read this correctly, you are correct because you believe you are based on nothing that you can actually point to.  And this belief supercedes the thousands of videos, articles and social media posts by distinct consumers and journalists/reviewers (both gaming and mainstream) on the subject.  Hmm interesing way to decide something.

[NickelToe]

Silence and inaction is acceptance. People who are happy rarely say so, except to game companies. Game companies charge a premium for their services while other forms of digital entertainment remained reasonable or reduce price as time goes on.

So if people stop, they stop doing more for their customers. It shows in the last 3 releases I know of, DA2, SWTOR and ME3. They planned on the usual brand loyalty. They thought their customers would eat it up no matter what they did. The response hopefully tell them to continue thinking of the customer. The more passionately a customer responds when they did not like your product tells them how much they let them down based on previous work. Hopefully this pushes them forward and they can win a lot of that loyalty back, if not the market will respond and eventually other developers will provide what fans are looking for in this genre with a similar product.

[Manton-X2]

Flextt wrote...

2 playthrough for ME 3
4 playthroughs for ME 1 and in succession ME 2
Additional 3 playthroughs for ME 1 only
Additional 2 playthroughs for ME 2 only

My Vanguard, which I started late February to prepare for ME 3 has an accumulated worth in hours of about 60-70. I would call myself quite immersed and engaged in the ME universe.

Sorry, I wasn't clear.  I meant, of the total number of ME3 games sold, how many distinct players have actually gotten to the end of ME3.  

Is it 20%, 30%, 50% of total sales?

I just wonder because one of the things that I see people do with regards to Retake is they say, "Look .. only X number are in that group out of 2million sold."  As if all 2million people have finished the game.   I'd love to know how many actually have.

[Xandurpein]

spiriticon wrote...

Does anyone seriously think that people on these forums are the ONLY ones buying BioWare products?

You're kind of forgetting the rest of the world here.

Do you seriously think that Bioware would be doing a free revised ending if they didn't think they had to do it to salvage their franchise and be able to sell paid DLC in the figures they want. They are not just giving us the new ending out of the goodness of their hearts. They are doing it because they know they need to do something or they won't be selling as much paid DLC and merchandise as they planned, because so many people dislike the ending.

[cutegigi]

Sorry, I wasn't clear.  I meant, of the total number of ME3 games sold, how many distinct players have actually gotten to the end of ME3.  

Is it 20%, 30%, 50% of total sales?

I just wonder because one of the things that I see people do with regards to Retake is they say, "Look .. only X number are in that group out of 2million sold."  As if all 2million people have finished the game.   I'd love to know how many actually have.

This data should be easy to obtain. Both origin and PSN also have achievement system. 

But this data also can not tell one side of the story: How many decide to quit (stop playing) after hearing about the ending?
Especially older gamers that did not really have a lot of free time for gaming. How many of them decide to invest their time in something that are more rewarding for them ? 
Believe me, If I know the ending is really actually is, I will not complete the game. My time is precious. 

Modifié par cutegigi, 09 avril 2012 - 09:08 .

[Aweus]

So even more than just asking for your money back for a product that did not satisfy you, you're actually asking that they redesign the product that you already purchased to meet your specific demands? How very magnanimous of you. I should talk to Ford about getting a sunroof in my car. . .

As I said, perhaps you would be willing to pay, but the act of them even asking for payment for this sort of DLC would result in far more fan outrage, if not from you than from others, then it could possibly build in fan loyalty. If you're genuinely serious about wanting to pay for it then get a Kickstarter going, you'd only need to raise a few hundred thousand, most likely.

Would I be willing to pay? As much as ashamed I am to admit that, but if Bioware would charge a 100$ for an ending DLC that would add an awesome ending, I would buy it. I am not even joking. And I am not a wealthy sheikh from Arabia who uses 100$ bills as notecards. But that is just me being crazy. Some reasonably priced DLC however would be good for most of us. As for community willing to pay for an optional ending DLC, as far as I remember polls showed that majority of participants was ready to pay. Of course there were posts telling Bioware to go free or dont at all but I have a feeling that would be a minority of retakers. Another thing we do not agree on.

You cant do anything with Kickstarter. This is Bioware's brand and only they have a legal claim to do a thing like this. Then again, if from whatever reason Bioware would launch a kickstarter for an alternate ending DLC then I would say challenge accepted. Depending from the required amount I cant be 100% confident that required quota would be met, but I think there would be a fair chance for that. 

They are. That's a fact. If they aren't visible then they aren't, by definition, Enders.

No it is not. Stop applying a word "fact" to opinions. You only apply a term "fact" to things that supports your claim. As such if you see a poll with 90% people saying ending is bad you say that poll is biased (and I agree). But if you would see a poll which states that 90% are happy you would name it as "fact". That just does not helping at all if you want to convince someone to your arguments.

Then I would arrive at a smaller number, but that isn't necessary because the people who are fine with the ending aren't asking for anything. We don't need to prove our numbers because we aren't trying to accomplish anything on the basis that our majority position entitles us to it. If we were two camps each asking that Bioware spend thousands of manhours working in two opposite directions then we would share an equal burden of proof, but since only one side is demanding extraordinary action, it falls entirely on that side to prove their worthiness.

If you are not trying to accomplish anything than why are you posting here? I think that your mere presence debunks that "fact". I can agree with you that the community bias is towards negativity (and that is why we get polls with 90% people "hating" the ending). But instead of agreeing on the reasonable term you are basically saying smth like: "there are 61207 Retake Mass Effect fans on Facebook. This means that only 61207 people disliked the ending". Please, if you want to end up like a reasonable guy you have to admit there is something wrong with this statement. 

Again, bleeding the patient until he miraculously recovers. Stating your opinion a dozen times does not make it any more worth listening to than the first time. If all you were genuinely interested in was making sure Bioware knew you were not yet satisfied, you could do so in a private manner that would not negatively effect their public image.

BSN is an official place to voice Mass Effect feedback. Bioware itself asked to post it here. I am not doing anything beyond that. How can I do it in private matter? Send a snail mail to Bioware Edmonton? I am not asking anyone to boycot Bioware. In fact I still didnt even rated ME3 on any gaming website. I am waiting for Extended Cut.

Modifié par Aweus, 09 avril 2012 - 09:12 .

[DamonD7]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

Ha, I had the exact same thing. Thane was the only guy to die on my first playthrough. I made sure to get everyone through the second time.

[katamuro]

I agree, that is what i have been saying to people bioware forgot that it makes games for us not just for them

[SaladinDheonqar]

A list of broken promises, clear money grabbing schemes, and an ending so poorly written and broken, that even Uwe Boll or M.Night Shyamalan wouldn't touch it.

And they call us entitled through their media buddies, and use artistic integrity as defence? Yes, a big part of it is that they've gotten too big for their breeches. They thought they could do no wrong, which in itself is perplexing since a tons of people gave them crap (justified) over DA2. The line between confidence and arrogance is a thin one, and it seems Bioware doesn't realise, or are ignoring the fact that they've crossed it. As the people who keep them in business, it is our responsibility to set them straight. Hold the wallet!

Modifié par SaladinDheonqar, 09 avril 2012 - 09:29 .

[lillitheris]

I suppose the fundamental thing about the ‘bittersweet’ or sacrifice-style endings is that I nearly always feel like it could have been avoided. It takes a lot of skill to get that right.

There's the classic “I'll cover your exit by dying in a fight against these 20 monsters” (when you've killed about 300 of the same in the last 10 minutes) which I was quite glad Grunt sidestepped There's the “epic duel to death” (hm, why can't I shoot the dude when he's lying down?), there's the “I'll carry the bomb!” (come on, Mordin, I'm a biotic. You've seen how we can slow our fall, right? You only weigh like a buck ten, max.)

[ed87]

Ozzyfan223 wrote...

 they can't face the facts, so they hide behind their "Artistic integrity" 

We need to bring in Jerry Seinfeld to fix this:

[Sad Dragon]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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?

As for the ME2 perfect ending I have to agree that was far from hard -- as I got it on my first playthrough not knowing about it. I feel that to obtain the ME2 perfect playthrough you just have to be a player who has contracted what i would call RPGtitis. What i mean by RPGtitis is just the mindset that make you want to explore every part of a labyrinth, even after finding the way out -- you never know if there is loot in one of the other paths after all.

Now I'm a fan of perfect endings -- but it should be hard to learn how to do it and it should require that you think about how you play. I'll type out some ideas of how this could be done but I'm sure there are more ideas out there.

Forget about playing as straight paragon or straight renegade: Some decisions you will have to be renegade and others you will have to be paragon.

• Timing: Do quests in a certain order with a certain outcome. If you choose the wrong order or make the wrong decision but still did it in the right order, too bad.
• Even things you don't think matter should matter: You don't donate 5 copper to that one beggar back there, though luck. Or it might be bad if you did.
• Some things might be hidden: You might only be able to do a specific quest if you did a combination of the three above. That quest is then integral to getting the perfect ending -- but wont get you the ending alone.
• Requires multiple playthroughs: Yes it might even require that you play through the game with an imported character that you have finished the game with. Maybe that character starts with a perk that you will need to get said perfect ending.

All in all it should be a myriad of things that should determine of you get the 'perfect ending'. They should all make sense though. The beggar shouldn't just be a random factor but the reason for why its bad to donate/not-donate should make sense, as with the other factors -- though the multiple playthroughs one might be hard to make it make sense so i think of that more as an added level of difficulty and reward for people who does multiple playthroughs.

I guess what I'm saying is that if you really have to work for your perfect ending, than it's no longer a cheap ending but an ending that to some extent makes sense. It basically rewards effort.

Edited: Formating

-The Sad Dragon

Modifié par Sad Dragon, 09 avril 2012 - 09:44 .

[BadgerladDK]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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?

I think your experience is pretty typical. Stick ME2 in the hands of a "completionist" type player and it'll take a pretty monumental mistake to get a bad ending. Certainly, for me, a typical playthrough involves doing every side mission I can get my hands on before I progress to the next story mission. I've never lost anyone in ME2, over 7 playthroughs, playing like that. 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?"

[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 .

[dbt-kenny]

I all ready had no respect for EA at all but still had some for Bioware. But after the ending of ME3 I now have non for Bioware.
How can they say the ending of the game is okay. It is full of mile wide plot holes and is exactly what Bioware said they ending would not be like. It a dam pick a door but hay you lose no matter what.
Then they run about say it only a small number of fans, Artistic integrity and all that crap. They are the one acting like brat that need a good spanking.

Oh I not say a word about child’s play.

[Sad Dragon]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

@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."

YES! I am not alone!!!
Thank you mate, it feels good to finally find someone who shares that point of view!

I have had this discussion a few times with my friends. Many times I have found that if they, or I for that matter, get a -XYZ approval from a companion for doing something they tend to reload and see if they can get away from getting the negative approval. If it wasn't possible they may even swap out the companion for that dialogue. Same goes for paragon and renegade in Mass Effect.

Personally i would with that ever such statistic was hidden. An alternative for approval would be to have it affect all companions no matter if they are with you or not. Basically they will hear about it and will approve or disapprove anyway.
The reason why is just as you say, it hinders roleplaying in favour of gathering good/evil points. It rewards playing your character as a two-dimensional-character -- and lets face it most of us are far from 2d.

But there are a lot of things that could be improved with how companions are handled. But i feel that is more a Dragon Age discussion .

Again, awesome to know I'm not alone with preferring those values hidden

- The Sad Dragon

[daecath]

BlahDog wrote...

mumwaldee369 wrote...
Only we can live without their games and they'll go out of business without our money.  See how that works?   We support them, not the other way around.

And yet so many still think that "support" means control.

Actually, it's more like synthesis. I want BioWare to listen to the criticisms that the players have. I want them to realize that shoving in a character in the last 5 minutes of a story is a bad idea. I want them to realize that transforming the protagonist of your story into a plot device for your new protagonist that you introduced in the last 5 minutes is a bad idea. I want them to realize that throwing away the entire plot in the last 5 minutes, and replacing it with a plot that makes no sense based on everything that has come before it is a bad idea.

I also want them to realize that the only people who automatically think that happy = shallow and bleak = deep are emo-teenagers. You can do a great, uplifting, artistic ending that inspires and is happy. One of the central themes in these games is hope, why shouldn't that hope be realized? It shouldn't be easy to achieve, but it should be there.

Then, I want them to take all that into consideration, hand it over to the team that gave me epic moments like Tuchanka, and come back with a product that is worthy of the rest of the franchise.

For me, this isn't about getting the end that I want. It's about getting an end that matches the rest of the game in terms of quality, because I am a huge fan of the game. This franchise deserves to end just as strongly as it started, and just as strongly as it's been every step of the way. It deserves to go down in history along side great franchises like Star Wars or Star Trek, because frankly, I think it's better than both of those. As much as I love Star Trek, it is getting a bit stale. And Star Wars suffers from, well, George Lucas. This has the same action and drama as the original Star Wars, with a timeless tale of heroism. It also has the same social relevance that Star Trek does, often so subtle you don't even realize that's what you're seeing. It feels real, unlike the kind of social relevance you find in something like Avatar, which was like being hit over the head with a sermon for 3 hours.

It's also about seeing this company that I love produce the level of quality work that I know they're capable of. I feel like the parent who's formerly straight-A student just brought home their first F. I want them to succeed, I know they're better than this.

[Dean_the_Young]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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?

The issue here is that ME2 didn't actually reward 'hard choices' as much as it rewarded completionism and obvious choices.

Most of the challenges of the suicide mission, for example, simply require a loyal squadmate. All that a loyal squadmate requires is doing their mission. Given that NOT doing loyalty missions means that you skip nearly half the game and lose out on money, tech upgrades, and story, the 'choice' to not gain a character's loyalty was an obvious one. Getting loyalty good. Not getting loyalty bad.

In the entire game, there are only four choices that can allow you to lose loyalty: Tali, Zaeed, and the loyalty confrontations. Except all of these have persuasion outs: if you're too Paragon to help Zaeed with revenge, you get a paragon out. The Tali exile choice not only has persuasion outs, but the ability to rally the crowd through Veetor and Kal'Reegor. The Loyalty Conflicts only become 'hard choices' if you can't make a persuade check, because the persuade is obviously superior.



Altogether, there was never a compelling reason NOT to get everyone's loyalty, especially when a persuasion check was always handy to do so. We never had a time when a character's loyalty was set against another consideration: consider if covering up the Alarai geth experiments, for example, made Geth-Quarian peace nearly impossible. Then Tali's loyalty would have been set against peace.

That would have been a hard choice.

[Zaalbar]

My issue with Bioware is that after DAII and ME3's ending they have proven to be very untrustworthy in the promises they make.

They practically lied to the fan base about what to expect from the ending to ME3.
Our choices were supposed to influence the endings and give us wildly different conclusions that's not broken down to a simple A, B or C decision or in ME3 case, Blue, Green and Red.

There is nothing artistic about the ending to ME3, it was obviously tact on at the last minute without any thought and boy does it show, major plot holes, contrivance, nonsensical cut scenes and a complete boycott of the war assets mechanic making it pointless and gimmicky.
It is worst written work Bioware has ever turned out. It's hard to imagine that the very same people who written this diarrhea, written the Turchanka and Rannoch missions that in my opinion, is some of the best work Bioware has ever done to date. So what the hell went wrong?

Also about the extended ending DLC, there is the old saying... "You can't polish a turd"

Bioware's creative people are being hindered by EA's prophet mongering, its all about prophet and less about the quality of the product.

I predict the next ****storm of controversy will be in the form of Dragon Age 3
Just wait and see.

Congrats to EA for winning the worst company in america award.

Modifié par zaalbar76, 09 avril 2012 - 01:21 .

[OhoniX]

[quote]
Using the example of ME2, the number of people who got the mission
perfect on the first try is probably minuscule. Most probably hadn't
even gotten all the necessary loyalty missions done before hitting it.[/quote]

I did. The only thing even remotely tricky about it was the order you sent people in. Who would beat the game without completing every other mission first?

[quote]How he rallies the Quarians during Tali's trial. How he makes a speech
to his squadmates at the end of ME 2. This could go on forever. ME 3
abandoned this quality at the end for something, that Walters would
later describe as "[...] high level".[/quote]

I think my Paragon Shep did plenty of rallying before launching the final mission.

[quote] By giving them some off-screen demise / future, I lose that connection and stop suspending disbelief.[/quote]

So wait you're telling me that by saving all life in the universe, Tali and Garrus included, you did not feel that you had personally saved your teammates?

[quote]

Mmm hmm ... so, if I read this correctly, you are correct
because you believe you are based on nothing that you can actually point
to. [/quote]

Hmmm, more like, I'm not wrong because nobody can point to any data that proves me so. There are between 1% and 10% of the people who bought this game (depending on minimum or maximum sales figures), that dislike the ending. Fact. There are 90-99% of people who bought the game that have not publicly expressed a strong opinion either way on the issue. Fact. Assuming that any portion of that latter group would agree with the former is no less speculative than to assume the other way around. My point is just that any claim that the Enders make to having a definite majoirty on their side is flawed reasoning.

[quote]
I just wonder because one of the things that I see people do with
regards to Retake is they say, "Look .. only X number are in that group
out of 2million sold."  As if all 2million people have finished the
game.   I'd love to know how many actually have.[/quote]

Well, they sold nearly a million copies on their first day, I kind of doubt that many of the people who were that committed to the game would have failed to complete it at least once within the first month and a half.

[quote]Would I be willing to pay? As much as ashamed I am to admit that, but if
Bioware would charge a 100$ for an ending DLC that would add an awesome
ending, I would buy it. I am not even joking. And I am not a wealthy
sheikh from Arabia who uses 100$ bills as notecards. [/quote]

Maybe, but my point is that they should be able to charge for it, but they can't charge for it, it's a bit of a catch 22. They deserve people's money for making them do extra work, but they can't ask for it becaue then thousands of entitled Enders would scream about how this was a grand conspiracy to bilk them out of extra DLC moneies just to get the ending that the game "should have had" already. You know that's true. Yes, I'm sure there are plenty of fans willing to pay ridiculous sums to get the ending they want, but there would be ten times as many fans that, as much as they dislike the existing endings, would find being asked for a penny more to be an outrage. You personally seem more reasonable than most, but read a few of the posts around you, there are a lot of yahoos out there.

[quote]
No it is not. Stop applying a word "fact" to opinions. You only apply a term "fact" to things that supports your claim.[/quote]

I only apply facts to facts. Opinions I don't use "fact" on.

[quote] As such if you see a poll with 90% people saying ending is bad you say
that poll is biased (and I agree). But if you would see a poll which
states that 90% are happy you would name it as "fact". That just does
not helping at all if you want to convince someone to your arguments.[/quote]

No, I would say that either poll is cripplingly inaccurate, so long as it's self-selecting. Now, if it was a scientifically managed and rigorous poll then I would accept even the 90% Enders vote as being accurate.

[quote]
If you are not trying to accomplish anything than why are you posting here? [/quote]

My point was that I'm not asking Bioware to do any extra work. I'll gladly take the ending DLC they're making, and it will probably enjoy the ending even more, but if they never made another Mass Effect 3 conclusion element then I'd be fine with that too. I'm making no demands of them, so I have no reason to prove anything. If I were trying to convince them that it was worth it for them to waste their time, then I would need to have a basis for that claim bigger than "because I think so."

[quote] But instead of agreeing on the reasonable term you are basically saying
smth like: "there are 61207 Retake Mass Effect fans on Facebook. This
means that only 61207 people disliked the ending". Please, if you want
to end up like a reasonable guy you have to admit there is something
wrong with this statement. [/quote]

But there are 828,793 people who bought the game on day one and aren't on that facebook group.

[quote]BSN is an official place to voice Mass Effect feedback. Bioware itself
asked to post it here. I am not doing anything beyond that.[/quote]

You're allowed to do so. That doesn't mean that you should. It certainly doesn't mean that you're in any way being helpful, certainly not to Bioware, and not really to yourself or your cause either. Constructive feedback doesn't need to be an ongoing thing. If you have an opinion then state it, but repeating it ten times doesn't make it ten times more valid, or ten times more worth listening to.

When everyone who disliked the ending posted as such, "I disliked the ending, and here is why. . ." That is helpful, constructive criticism. Everything beyond that is pure destructive behavior. Every lengthy post about how the players deserve new endings, how EA and/or BIoware are the great satan for releasing the game as it was. How games are not art and should not have artistic integrity, Facebook and petition campaigns, all of that is destructive behavior.

It might get you guys your way on this one, in th way that a screaming child in a store might get his candy or toy he's screaming for just to shut him up, but in the process you'd be harming a company that you claim that you want to help. By being so agressively negative about this 9.5/10 game, you've given the public perception to people who have not played the game that it is not worth playing, when nothign could be further from the truth. The Ender's actions likely have cost them sales, which costs them profits, which costs them resources for their next projects. It's probably also cost them sales on those future projects, which makes the ones next down the road even more limited. There is no spin that makes this a good thing for people who claim to enjoy the games Bioware has made in the past. Whether you liked the ending you got with 3000EMS, you'd probably like the one you get with 1000EMS even less.

[quote]
Allan Schumacher wrote...
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."[/quote]

I actually much prefer when there is no "Paragon" or "Renegade" at all, that the choices you make should have the consequences you make, and that's it. If you choose to kill someone, then that person should be dead, and maybe things he would have done, both positive and negative, wouldn't get done, and you'd have to live with that, but nowhere would it be tracked that you made a "bad" choice. If you did a bunch fo nice things and a bunch of naughty things, no meter, visible or hidden, would track that you are "50% moral", and there would be no direct bonuses for being 75% moral or 75% evil (ie no dialog options that are locked to a certain morality level), the only record of your actions is the actual results of those actions.

Modifié par OhoniX, 09 avril 2012 - 12:41 .

[Sad Dragon]

OhoniX wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...
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 actually much prefer when there is no "Paragon" or "Renegade" at all, that the choices you make should have the consequences you make, and that's it. If you choose to kill someone, then that person should be dead, and maybe things he would have done, both positive and negative, wouldn't get done, and you'd have to live with that, but nowhere would it be tracked that you made a "bad" choice. If you did a bunch fo nice things and a bunch of naughty things, no meter, visible or hidden, would track that you are "50% moral", and there would be no direct bonuses for being 75% moral or 75% evil (ie no dialog options that are locked to a certain morality level), the only record of your actions is the actual results of those actions.

Think of it as tracking your reputation. If I kill 50 ppl the 51st person to get in my way might think twice as they have heard of my - renegade - reputation. If i have been diplomatic they might think they can still get out of it based on my reputation. They would be wrong but they might still think they could play me.

The point of the metric is to simulate a facet of real life. Paragon/Renegade -- to me -- is just a form of reputation. It could have been handled better but I still think its a good base.

You could say that Mass Effect doesn't soley use it as a reputation. In fact to some extent it is more of a way of gauging the psyche of the character you are roleplaying. A bit like any statistic really. If you have high enough Wisdom you open up dialogue/actions that wouldn't be available to anyone without that high of a wisdom score -- on the basis that they wouldn't think of it. This is a bit more how Paragon and Renegade was used, as well as helping to guide the tone and actions in cut scenes. In ME1 it was used a bit more as reputation, in that it did give a bonus to your diplomatic/Intimidation score -- but you could still spec into the respective skills.

Now I personally like the idea of reputation, the 1d scale is a bit too restrictive for my taste but from a technical standpoint I understand why it is the way it is. Still think it could be used for much more than it is currently being used for.

EDIT: Clarification

-TSD

Modifié par Sad Dragon, 09 avril 2012 - 01:53 .

[OhoniX]

Think of it as tracking your reputation. If I kill 50 ppl the 51st person to get in my way might think twice as they have heard of my - renegade - reputation. If i have been diplomatic they might think they can still get out of it based on my reputation. They would be wrong but they might still think they could play me.

Yeah, I'd prefer more specific metrics than that in most games, especially ones that don't have intergalactic communication, but even in ME it fits. The worst morality system, I thought, was in Fable, where if you stole or murdered, even if nobody saw you doing it, you'd get evil points and everyone would fear you. I had a good and a bad character, but my "bad" character never did anything in public that would reflect badly on her, never any witnesses, and yet was still feared by all as a monster.

I like systems where you can put on a completely false face, where you can be known to all as a paragon of virtue, while constantly doing dastardly things behind the scenes, maybe even your crew doesn't know, or maybe they're complicit. Or maybe you project the image of a hard-### monster that slaughters puppies, but in fact you've never done anything very bad at all and you help people out all the time, just in subtle and unappreciated ways. In a lot of morality-based games, you either can't do this at all, or you'll find yourself penalized for trying bylocking out all sorts of bonuses and items.

Now in ME3, I like that the two rep types seem to stack, so that your overall reputation value is a composite of both+neutral points, which is a good idea, and on my imported character I never even had to worry about it. On my second "fresh" character though, he has poor reputation stats, and so he never seems to be able to get "blue" or "red" options in dialogs, which limits his capabilities significantly.

[Persephone]

Hang on, THEY are the "spoiled children"?

The irony is irresistible here.

They are the ones whose every word since launch has been twisted into something that MIGHT not be 100% in agreement with what the "majority" of the fanbase is thinking.

I understand that pre-launch promises not being fulfilled is galling. And maybe being a Fable fan has made me immune to most of it, given that you HAVE TO read between the lines of the hype to enjoy ANY Fable release. With Molyneux gone, things MIGHT change though.

I do not blame them for being proud of 75+ perfect scores. Doesn't happen often. Say "They are all bought, WE know better!" all you like, in the end, yours are just opinions. No better than any critic's. And strange thing too... The same publishers do NOT give such scores to every game EA/Bioware puts forth (I.E. Sims Medieval....a game I love but...). Another hyped game published by a giant: Fable III. If ALL publishers BUY scores, why didn't Fable III land such scores too?

Bioware are also the ones who are willing to compromise. Spoiled children are incapable of that...ahem...need I say more?

As for artistic integrity or artistic vision being adhered to....takes guts to do so & still be willing to compromise. Again, say "We are the ones buying this stuff, we should get what we want, screw the intent of the writers." all you want but... That doesn't make BIOWARE look spoiled.....

[John Epler]

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

Locking.