279 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

DOYOURLABS wrote...
Senior Writer- Their vision was essentially what you saw, but with more focus on the details. They wanted players to use their lore knowledge and look carefully at the subtle differences in the endings to piece together what happened. They were running out of money so they could not as effectively represent that. 

So here's an idea: why didn't they drop MP to free up the MONEY?  Look I love MP and it's hella fun, but if sacrificing MP meant that ME3 could have had a more sensible ending, then why not?

I know BioWare kept insisting that a separate team made MP, but are they also insisting that the funds given to that team couldn't have been given to the SP team?

MP was developed in parallel, by a sister studio. By the time they realized that they weren't going to have enough time to finish the ending properly, the money had already been spent on developing the MP. One can't just take finished content and take it back for a refund in game development, no matter how much one wishes one could.

That also assumes MP isn't making them money and something they'd have any interest in having been removed.  

Which, considering the free DLC they're offering to encourage people to keep playing, is probably a poor assumption.

I'm saying that has someone who hasn't played a second of mp.

But yeah, multiplayer and cinematics are different budgets.  All zots are not the same.  It's not like there's this pool of zots from which you draw a zot to add romances, and a zot to do your ending, and a zot to do multiplayer.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 09 avril 2012 - 05:29 .

[DOYOURLABS]

Imperium Alpha wrote...

DOYOURLABS wrote...

tobito113 wrote...
All they need to do to make destroy the super happy ending (some?) people are asking is let the geth live but make the reconstruction of the relays take a few years)

And another thing I remember! I added it to the main post, Destroy with Shepard being alive is considered a golden ending to many. 

No way synthesis will ever be consider golden in my book.

Synthesis is the odd ball ending, no one really knows what it is. 

[Comradejim]

Imperium Alpha wrote...


THATS NOT ENOUGH! 

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!
SKULL FOR THE SKULL THRONE!
LET THE GALAXY BURN!

.... Dark age of tech.... scattered human colonies falling prey to various Alien races... a devestated Earth....

Its not Indoct. theory... ITS IMPERIUM THEORY:blink:

[Joeybsmooth4]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Joeybsmooth4 wrote...

Very few people liked the ending, and I hate that they imply that most of the people that did not like the ending were to dumb to understand it . That is just yet another slap in the face.

They imply that they didn't do a good enough job of conveying what the ending *was*, and as such it was misinterpreted. They thought that they had sufficiently hinted at what it was they wanted to do, but they didn't. So they're trying to fill in the gaps. This is what happens when you don't get the whole story - you take select quotes out of context and then people jump to the wrong conclusions.

But whatever. If you still want to be personally offended by this, be my guest.

Really working overtime to defend Bioware I see . I guess I am just one of the few fans that just wanted a little more closure .

[Merwanor]

What I get from this is that there really is no ending to Mass Effect, and that every theory that people come up with is an ending, since there is no absolute answer to what really happens it is open to anything. I could imagine that an alien race of humanoid Unicorns come to the rescue at the end, shooting everyone with their rainbow guns that heal and makes everyone happy. Yes it is silly, but with an ending filled with space magic and so open to interpretations, no one can say for certain that that did not happen. It is not like they magically introduced a completly new character, alien race, AI or whatever it is at the end, did they? oh wait..... So why not Unicorn space marines?

And if true, it sounds like they just ran out of money and had to slap an ending on at the end and let the fans make up their own ending. And they apperantly thought the money they had was more important to spend on MP and pointless characters like Allers than developing a real ending.

The deal with the relays blowing up and killing everyone is mostly a problem because of the scene with the Normandy fleeing. Why does the wave damage the ship? It did not damage people on earth, but for some reason it is destroying the ship. Thus I am lead to believe the wave that shoots our from the relays are dangerous and will destroy what comes in its path. And of course because the incident with the relay on The Arrival DLC.

Modifié par Merwanor, 09 avril 2012 - 05:39 .

[upsettingshorts]

Joeybsmooth4 wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Joeybsmooth4 wrote...

Very few people liked the ending, and I hate that they imply that most of the people that did not like the ending were to dumb to understand it . That is just yet another slap in the face.

They imply that they didn't do a good enough job of conveying what the ending *was*, and as such it was misinterpreted. They thought that they had sufficiently hinted at what it was they wanted to do, but they didn't. So they're trying to fill in the gaps. This is what happens when you don't get the whole story - you take select quotes out of context and then people jump to the wrong conclusions.

But whatever. If you still want to be personally offended by this, be my guest.

Really working overtime to defend Bioware I see . I guess I am just one of the few fans that just wanted a little more closure .

hoorayforicecream is working overtime to defend reading comprehension and critical thinking as opposed to quote mining and echo chamber parroting. 

[Iwillbeback]

DOYOURLABS wrote...

Iwillbeback wrote...


They killed the lore and then spat on its corpse and labeled a big Artistic Integrity sign on it.

I think they wanted us to remember Saren's ideas and TIM's ideas as to what should happen.
Yeah we got that, the ending still stinks of poorly written garbage.

But isn't Shepard having an army of Geth and curing the Genophage also what Saren did? 

It was different and not similar in how it was achieved and what it meant.
And shepard didn't have to have an army of Krogan or Geth if you played it that way, its entirely optional so players wouldn't see the connection because it wouldn't exist.

[M Hedonist]

DOYOURLABS wrote...

Community Manager- They will not make a new ending, because that would be unfair to the people who liked the ending. The way they explained it was basically this: There are three groups, people who liked the ending, those who were just confused and didn't get answers so they got angry, and people who were angry because they didn't like the ending. In the closure DLC, they are aiming to make the people who were confused happy. They know they can't make everyone happy, so they want to please as many people as possible.

I completely understand what they mean, but why did they rule out adding additional endings to the game? How would a compromise that simply adds the option to oppose the Catalyst's solutions make anyone unhappy? Adding additional options at the end and additional endings can only make even more people happy, yet they have ruled that option out for no reason at all.

[nevar00]

They will not make a new ending, because that would be unfair to the people who liked the ending.

But the endings were objectively badly written, why would you want this to taint you forever? Oh well.

[zr0iq]

because adding a switch alternate endings will make people upset.

You have multiple endings because PEOPLE who played and know, can choose and pick the one they like.
Here again you only have one ending. It doesn't matter WHICH you color you pick, since the trilogy ends, so the final end is not that important. Differences... well no Consequences should have shown beforehand, as forced liniarization is bad.
Sadly this is not the case, thus in my opinion fixing the stuff fails probably not as hard, but the game will still not feel complete and after playing it you will have little ambition to play again... or maybe they are doing really good.
Which I doubt.

[Reth Shepherd]

DOYOURLABS wrote...

As for the starkid, they said he was basically bluffing with the consequences of Destroy, since its possible Shepard and EDI can live. 

Oh. Holy. Frell! This PLUS them not wanting to say that IT is false? (Consider for a moment, a modified version of IT. Everything after the beam is an indoc attempt, yes. BUT it is also actually happening. The dreamlike setting? Not arguing with the kid? You are there. You are talking to...something. But at the same time, what you are seeing is something along the lines of augmented reality.

Did you read this section of the Marauder Shields comic? I really think the author may be onto something here. For those who don't want to click, "You were supposed to be the Catalyst, Shepard. The Chosen One of this cycle. The final betrayer. Harbinger chose you himself. As Saren was once chosen by Sovereign."

[Sabrestrikealpha]

DOYOURLABS wrote...


Community Manager- They will not make a new ending, because that would be unfair to the people who liked the ending. The way they explained it was basically this: There are three groups, people who liked the ending, those who were just confused and didn't get answers so they got angry, and people who were angry because they didn't like the ending. In the closure DLC, they are aiming to make the people who were confused happy. They know they can't make everyone happy, so they want to please as many people as possible. 

So . . . isn't the solution for that first group to just not download a DLC that changes the ending? I mean, I'm assuming that being DLC, you don't have to download it.

[DOYOURLABS]

Merwanor wrote...

What I get from this is that there really is no ending to Mass Effect, and that every theory that people come up with is an ending. And if true, it sounds like they just ran out of money and had to slap an ending on at the end and let the fans make up their own ending. And they apperantly thought the money they had was more important to spend on MP and pointless characters like Allers than developing a real ending.

The deal with the relays blowing up and killing everyone is mostly a problem because of the scene with the Normandy fleeing. Why does the wave damage the ship? It did not damage people on earth, but for some reason it is destroying the ship. Thus I am lead to believe the wave that shoots our from the relays are dangerous and will destroy what comes in its path.

The waves damaging the Normandy is a good point, I never considered that. 

As for the ending, it was pre-thought out and from what I got from it they started running out of resources while making it. They didn't just slap it on. 

And for fan theories, certain parts of the ending are definite but all else is left to speculation. 

[Exeider]

assuming this is the true sentiment of the devs, maybe not verbatim, but paraphrased.

It seems to me the developers themselves don't really know what the hell is going on. Each one seems to have a different theory as to what exactly happened, and they produced it.

I think this just shows, that they didn't know how to end this saga. I mean each one seems to have a different take on what exactly happened, and I don't mean just this post, but others like it from different fans who interviewed them.

So what I can take from this is, Casey was mistaken again.... There was no vision, if anything there were several "visions" going on, which means Casey wasn't doing his job properly.

The job of an Executive Producer is to ensure the project maintains its connection to its "Vision" and to act as a unifying force among the different departments to maintain that "Vision". Even if its a bad vision or idea, at least maintain some level of unity.

It seems this situation almost mirrors Cryptic Studios in a very odd way, part of their problem is that the project(dev) team has lost its focus on the vision of that game. The same can be said here, the team lost focus and that is what has happened.

Now I'm not pointing fingers and saying Casey did it on purpose, or he's incompetent so that's why it happened. Maybe he just flat screwed up, it happens.

But regardless of HOW it happened, what is clear is that it DID happen, the team lost focus, majorly and the project went flying off the rails. Resulting in the cavalcade of horror that was this ending.

-Æ

[PlumPaul93]

Upsettingshorts wrote...hoorayforicecream is working overtime to defend reading comprehension and critical thinking as opposed to quote mining and echo chamber parroting.

Well done.

[viperabyss]

DOYOURLABS wrote...

Synthesis is the odd ball ending, no one really knows what it is. 

Then it seems that the possibility of the ending being written by Hudson and Walters are very high. If the rest of the dev team are struggling to answer the questions posed by fans, chances are they can't really understand the logic behind the ending.

I really wonder what kind of story does Bioware want to tell by giving us this ending. I still can't figure out what they're trying to say to us.

[HBC Dresden]

Cool info.

Side note: yeah, I do not think the ending was a last minute sweep and was actually a calculated decision to make it that way (who participated in writing it is another matter). It takes a long time to make those cutscenes and there is dialogue throughout the game building up to the Crucible's purpose (i.e. Vendetta in the Thessia temple). You can definitely say the ending was rushed because of resources, but to say the team lack the enthusiasm and just wanted it done is wrong.

[Siven80]

dafangirl wrote...

If this is true...*nostrils flaring* "Their vision was essentially what you saw, but with more focus on the details. They wanted players to use their lore knowledge and look carefully at the subtle differences in the endings to piece together what happened" ? They simply and utterly failed at its deliverance.

By using the lore of the game of ending is indeed broken...

Destroying Mass Relays destroys the system. If, only going on given "lore" in the game, how is one supposed to realize they don't "supernova"?

Synthesis is not viable considering the entire cat/mouse scenario in ME1, given the "lore" in the game, the Reapers still wanted to DESTROY not become part of the inhabitants of the galaxy.

Control is not viable, hence the whole Illusive Man showdown, given the "lore" in the game, the Illusive Man controls Shepard to the point of Shepard shooting Anderson, how is Shepard expected to believe "lore" wise that the Reapers can be controlled?

Synthetics and Organics can get along, the "lore" of the game not only suggests it but confirms it, Legion became an ally in ME2, and the Geth/Quarian made peace in ME3. EDI chose to ignore the Normandy lockdown command issued by the Illusive Man following the Collector Base issue in ME2. Ergo, given the "lore" within the game the entire Catalyst's presupposition is rendered moot.

"Control means Shepard can't reunite with the crew but can rebuild the relays quickly" Correct me if I'm wrong but that is the exact reason the galaxy is in the current mess, given the "lore" of the game Sovereign says it's because the galaxy relies on the Citadel, the Mass Relays, all Reaper technology. Not to mention handling, being near or coming into contact with Reaper technology at all "lore" wise has never been a good idea.

The "lore" of the game states that the Reapers are sentient beings capable of independent thought, the Catalyst insists he controls them, based on the "lore" of the game how is this possible?

Fans, like myself, have been using the "lore" of the game and this is the exact reason the endings will never make sense within the ME universe, PERIOD, no matter how much extra footage is created.

great post.

[M Hedonist]

@Doyourlabs: Do you recall any of those people mentioning why they wouldn't want to add new, additional endings? I get the reason why they don't want to change the ending, but why rule out adding new endings?

[Luiginius]

viperabyss wrote...

DOYOURLABS wrote...

Synthesis is the odd ball ending, no one really knows what it is. 

Then it seems that the possibility of the ending being written by Hudson and Walters are very high. If the rest of the dev team are struggling to answer the questions posed by fans, chances are they can't really understand the logic behind the ending.

I really wonder what kind of story does Bioware want to tell by giving us this ending. I still can't figure out what they're trying to say to us.

I'd guess it's the "Don't analyze this one, just believe everything will be allright" - solution. So many ways it can be looked at.

[shadowreflexion]

DOYOURLABS wrote...

 I made a thread thanking BioWare for being friendly at PAX East, but I also implied I got information from them on the ending. Which I did, but that thread was in the non-spoiler section, so I'm putting the information I got here. In case there is something I wasn't supposed to post, I won't mention their names. 

Senior Writer- Their vision was essentially what you saw, but with more focus on the details. They wanted players to use their lore knowledge and look carefully at the subtle differences in the endings to piece together what happened. They were running out of money so they could not as effectively represent that. 

Community Manager- They will not make a new ending, because that would be unfair to the people who liked the ending. The way they explained it was basically this: There are three groups, people who liked the ending, those who were just confused and didn't get answers so they got angry, and people who were angry because they didn't like the ending. In the closure DLC, they are aiming to make the people who were confused happy. They know they can't make everyone happy, so they want to please as many people as possible. 

They also all but confirmed that in Destroy endings if you are alive you can reunite with the crew but cannot rebuild the relays (quickly at least, as reaper tech is destroyed) and in Control you cannot reunite with your crew but can rebuild the relays quickly. Synthesis remains a mystery. THE RELAYS DO NOT SUPERNOVA.

As for the starkid, they said he was basically bluffing with the consequences of Destroy, since its possible Shepard and EDI can live. Starvation may occur, but it isn't going to wipe out large amounts of people. (Near exact words were: "They think everyone is going to starve to death, but no that's not happening")

Also, their personal theory is that in control you become a "being of light". I'm pretty sure they said they believed Indoctrination Theory. Their main point was that the devs won't tell you what exactly happened, because they want the game itself to do that. They said: "In 200 years, there won't be a Casey Hudson to tell you what happened, so ME3 has to do it itself."

Multiplayer Developer- He can't confirm anything, but they are considering new enemies in MP. He also said they don't plan on taking the Mass Effect franchise out of the Milky Way galaxy.

For any more information, email me at admin @ lukgaming.com

I really hope this is not the case. I would also like to know if they did some unknown universal poll where those who liked the ending outweighed those who know that they know this wasn't the way to end it? I knew MP would appeal to that certain group who just wanted to play in a different setting with friends, so I did not dispute that. I knew that ME3 would be hard as hell to make better than ME2 but I still had hope they would accomplish it. But what gets me is that the sheer amount of negativity towards the ending still is not enough to make them sit down and think. I don't see too many vids and articles that outweigh those who liked the ending compared to those who didn't.

I've heard people from around the world vocalize their dissatifaction with the whole thing and still with all of that, it seems as if ME3 will cater to those who "liked" the ending. You have got to be kidding. I know that from what I've read and seen, that number is reversed. I hope they aren't comparing units sold to those who didn't like the ending because that would be highly unfair and unforgivable. We were told we would have total control of how OUR game would end based on decisions and playthroughs. Many of us have multiple Shep's just to see the different perspectives that would materialize as the cause of our choices. And after I beat it multiple times just to see if there was something I missed and I even went out and borrowed my friends collectors edition strategy guide which he paid 39.99 for and looked up the endings which were printed upside down, I was appalled. They knew there were only minor distinctions between them all.

I'm saddened that it reads as if the "true" minority who liked these endings will be pandered to because they some how "got it". These endings were not universal. ME1 and ME2 had universal endings that appealed to many people because everyone was given consideration and it was clearly understandable who and what you were fighting. (Even though it was the Terminator on steroids. but I digress.) My point was that the story, with plot holes was still acceptable. But to feel that I am pushed aside by reviewers who give accolades without really knowing the series. Bloggers that praise the game but can only tell you the key points just like in Mass Effect Genesis. To tell me that these are the people these endings are tailored for......And that the only thing WE deserve is ending cutscenes? I mean really? This is a sci-fi genre to me so I'll end it on a Star Trek quote that rings true for this situation. Spock: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one. A quote with similarities to Jeremy Benthams' philosphy.

[Joeybsmooth4]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Joeybsmooth4 wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Joeybsmooth4 wrote...

Very few people liked the ending, and I hate that they imply that most of the people that did not like the ending were to dumb to understand it . That is just yet another slap in the face.

They imply that they didn't do a good enough job of conveying what the ending *was*, and as such it was misinterpreted. They thought that they had sufficiently hinted at what it was they wanted to do, but they didn't. So they're trying to fill in the gaps. This is what happens when you don't get the whole story - you take select quotes out of context and then people jump to the wrong conclusions.

But whatever. If you still want to be personally offended by this, be my guest.

Really working overtime to defend Bioware I see . I guess I am just one of the few fans that just wanted a little more closure .

hoorayforicecream is working overtime to defend reading comprehension and critical thinking as opposed to quote mining and echo chamber parroting. 

Wow quote minding ... Look on there offical FAQ where they state SOME fans need more closure . SOME means less than a majority. And as number of polls have shown there is a majority of people who dislike this ending .