Menalaos1971 wrote...
jdi_knght wrote...
Menalaos1971 wrote...
The biggest issue I have with Casey Hudson is his great Lie. He said before ME3 was released that we wouldn't get some "Choose A, B, or C" ending to the game, and that's exactly what we got. Pretty much all of the pre-launch press that referred to the Ending were flat out, bold faced lies.
When was the statement made?
Just asking because if it's before the ending was done, it could very well have been the initial intention. Things do change (another BW example being that in SWTOR BW was clear that companions could be killed, though that ended up changing during testing).
If that was the case, backlash over "but you said...." just means we'll have fewer tidbits coming from devs during development, since I'd imagine getting bit by the player-base over something changing probably isn't fun.
Not saying that's necessarily what happened (hey, maybe he was like "lolol you'll never believe what I just told the community"), but I'm generally apt to giving BioWare's devs, Casey Hudson included, the benefit-of-the-doubt.
Here. There are a large number of other Bioware quotes about the ending, but this is the one I specifically referenced. This was less than two months before the game was released. The Ending would have been done by then...
Interview with Casey Hudson (Director) 1/10/12
http://www.gameinfor...PostPageIndex=2
Interviewer: [Regarding the numerous possible endings of Mass Effect 2] “Is that same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect 3?”
Hudson: “Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot more different. At this point we’re taking into account so many decisions that you’ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that stuff. It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and variety in them.”
“We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player decide what your story is.”
Thanks for linking the article (just checked it out). After looking at this though, I think the "ABC" stuff is really being taking out of context.
He expands by saying:
It’s more like there are some really obvious things that are different and then lots and lots of smaller things, lots of things about who lives and who dies, civilizations that rose and fell, all the way down to individual characters. That becomes the state of where you left your galaxy. The endings have a lot more sophistication and variety in them. It would be interesting to see if somebody could put together a chart for that.
To me (and let's be clear, this is the way *I* interpreted it when reading - I could always be misinterpreting) it looked as though he was talking about the way the game ends on the whole. The "obvious things" he mentions presumably being things like Tuchunka and Rannoch, extending down to the piddly stuff like whether Chakwas is a war asset. He seems to be looking at the end as "the state of where you left your galaxy". And by that reasoning, there certainly are a lot of possible "endings".
That said, I do find it disappointing that the only impact this has on what-you-actually-see-at-the-end is negligable, and at best, boiled down to an arbitrary "War Asset" number (don't get me wrong - war assets was a cool addition - I just think the final-gameplay-stuff would have benefitted from showing reprocusssions of some of the plot decisions themselves rather than simply relying on the number). In ME2, the decisions affected how the ending in terms of final-gameplay-minutes turned out (and by ending-in-gameplay-minutes, I mean everything once you enter the Omega-4 relay). In ME3, that aspect was virtually absent.
I suppose to be fair, he did say that "we don't have to worry about eventually tying them back together somewhere", but I tend to think that most readers would have taken that to mean for-the-next-game, and would expect that they would be tied together to an extent for-the-end-of-ME3.
Anyway, guess what I'm saying is that I don't really see that ABC thing as the blatant lie others do. In the context it was given, it makes sense. Don't get me wrong, I'm fine with people hating on the ending, but I see the ABC argument as taking something out of context to support a case rather than a true justification. And to be honest, there are plenty of other (better) reasons to dislike the ending and/or be angry. If Casey had said that "the final choice in the game is between 3 options" (similar to ME2), people wouldn't have been any less angry at the current game.
Just my opinion (obviously).
Modifié par jdi_knght, 09 avril 2012 - 07:41 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
Shepard can avoid fights - the reason is not stated. In fact, in perspective, Shepard can be forced into a fight after being backed into a corner, trying to avoid it, not headbutting his/her way through everyone.
