334 réponses à ce sujet

[Dragoonlordz]

Almostfaceman wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

JKA_Nozyspy wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

One reason is that, generally, we have our own ideas about how to design games and stories and don't design them by committee in collaboration with the players. That's not really how the developer-player relationship works.

The developer-player relationshp works like this: you give us what we expect, we keep you in business.

That might sound arrogant on the face of it, but thats how businesses work.

If i bought a car and it came without headlights or bumpers, i would send it back and expect the manufacturer to fix it. The fact that so many car companies go out of business due to doing what they want and not giving what the customers want illustrates the point.  Making a great 'artistic statement' has contributed to some car companies going bust, just look at the MG SV.

Biowares games are as close to an art form as i have ever seen in gaming, but you are a business, you are not 'artists'. You dont do what you do for enjoyment and then just sell the results to people who like it, your job is to provide a product that satisfies your customers.

Mass Effect 3 was magnificent, as were the previous two games, but the ending? You just delivered me a car without any wheels and i expect you to fix the problem. And no, saying that not including any wheels with your car was an 'artistic choice' is not acceptable.

Bioware, i still love you guys, but you dont make it easy sometimes...

They will still be in business and still making large amounts even if do not change the ending.

I'm not sure why you're inserting yourself in this conversation between customer and company. Say I walk into Toys R  Us to take back a toy that didn't do what it was supposed to do and I'm sitting at the counter talking to the clerk. You're like a second customer standing at the same counter telling me that I shouldn't be taking my toy back. The dynamic just doesn't work. If you're a satisfied customer, fine. Don't stand at the counter with the unsatisfied customers.

I worked in a company that did work for other companies like Microsoft, Sun, Avnet,etc. Big, giant companies. What did I do? My job was to get inside their customers heads and get - wait for it - feedback. That's right. The truth is, major companies are always taking surveys and trying everything they can to find out WHAT THEIR CUSTOMERS WANT. Bioware should be doing this as well, because it just makes good sense to make something that sells really well, instead of only partially well, or medium well, or not well at all. 

They already do this. You here on the method they use already called their forums. It is ignorant of you to assume they do not know what peoples issues are with the ending. The difference is just because their solution they agreed with is not the one you might specifically wanted you assume they are either not listening or need more feedback methods. Its fallacy. The reality is they simply agreed with other customers not you.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 12 avril 2012 - 08:50 .

[I am Sovereign]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Zeppex wrote...

Well then why ask for player feedback at all? Why makes statements that literally state we created something with you.

Then make other statements like, we didn't know there was a demand for it.

If you tell give me feedback on what we can do better, the people giving you that feedback will generally believe that you will take that into consideration. Unless your just asking to make them feel important,

Yes, but some people interpret "please give us feedback"n as "tell us what to do and we'll for sure do it." Some people believe "I disagree with what you did" is shorthand for "you have to fix things to my specification." And some believe "I suggest this" to be the same as "AGREE WITH ME BECAUSE I'M RIGHT!" This is where discussions start to break down and why so many unproductive arguments happen in the community.

Whats the point of asking for feedback when you just ignore it then? We told you we wanted more endings to reflect our choices and you release a statement saying "We arent changing the endings!". If the author of Sherlock Holmes did what you guys have done, the series wouldn't have continued because he would have killed Sherlock  off.

[ahandsomeshark]

how in the world did this thread last 10 pages and involve a shark. I believe some people fell for some [mythical creature often featured in fantasy stories charging prices for bridges and generally being a jerk]ing.

Modifié par ahandsomeshark, 12 avril 2012 - 08:53 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Stanley Woo wrote...

One reason is that, generally, we have our own ideas about how to design games and stories and don't design them by committee in collaboration with the players. That's not really how the developer-player relationship works.

Did you plan to address the ending's numerous plot holes through the explanation of 'your own ideas about how to design games and stories" at some point?

I don't think anyone wants to tell Bioware how to make a game or a story... but most would agree that a story should make sense (and I'm not saying that to bash anyone). 

Don't artists owe it to their audience to be clear on their work?  And aren't draft revisions acceptable if the desired vision was not achieved (even if you may have thought it was prior to audience response)?

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 12 avril 2012 - 08:54 .

[Transgirlgamer]

Hyrist wrote...

Transgirlgamer wrote...

I'm sorry, but they didn't give you the equivalent of a car with no headlights, bumpers or wheels.  They gave you a complete car on which you didn't like the headlights, bumper or wheels.

ME3 has a beginning, a middle and an end.  It is a full story.  Just because people don't like the end doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


EDIT.  But something like a car is a bad analogy for a game anyway.  A car you know what will be in it before you pay for it.  With a game, any game, you may know the basic plot and some of the universe, but you don't get to know everything about it before you buy it.

Again, the point is missed.

This breaks down to absolutes, not to steal a note from the BBB communications director, but BioWare did, in fact, promise two things:

That this game would not have an A B C ending:

(snip picture)

And that our choices would ultimately provide us with highly variable endings.

(snip picture)
Ultimately, what we were provided with was choice without ultimate consequence.

Wrex or Wreav?
Ashley or Kaiden?
Save or kill Council?
Save or destory Collector Base?
Who (among the many possible deaths) survives?

None of it matters so long as you work to 4000 + EMS. It changes nothing of the ultimate results.

We can complain about the God Child and the absolutely terriblily contrived ending that involves a litteral Deus Ex Machina, but that's ultimately a seperate complaint - and can be consitered artisitic critisim.

The fact that our choices did not matter or that we were stuck with a litteral ABC ending? Those were broken promises - a direct lie about their product. If Extended Cut does not regarde these two core problems, they failed twice.

The post that you quote was a direct response to a post that made an analogy between ME3 and a car with pieces missing.  I was just saying that the analogy was wrong.  It makes the point that I intended it to make.  I wasn't commenting on the inaccuracies of what people had said about the game prior to release compared with what the game was like when it was released.  I have agreed that they don't match up.  But we do have an ending, so the analogy is flawed as nothing is actually missing.

[Dragoonlordz]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

One reason is that, generally, we have our own ideas about how to design games and stories and don't design them by committee in collaboration with the players. That's not really how the developer-player relationship works.

Did you plan to address the ending's numerous plot holes through the explanation of 'your own ideas about how to design games and stories" at some point?

The DLC addresses this very issue. However your loaded question hoping they say yes will not work. It is just as fair to believe that they never knew people would react so negatively while always expected some to dislike it as never can please everyone. Now if you never mean't it as a loaded question then my apologies but came across that way.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 12 avril 2012 - 08:57 .

[Dragoonlordz]

I am Sovereign wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Zeppex wrote...

Well then why ask for player feedback at all? Why makes statements that literally state we created something with you.

Then make other statements like, we didn't know there was a demand for it.

If you tell give me feedback on what we can do better, the people giving you that feedback will generally believe that you will take that into consideration. Unless your just asking to make them feel important,

Yes, but some people interpret "please give us feedback"n as "tell us what to do and we'll for sure do it." Some people believe "I disagree with what you did" is shorthand for "you have to fix things to my specification." And some believe "I suggest this" to be the same as "AGREE WITH ME BECAUSE I'M RIGHT!" This is where discussions start to break down and why so many unproductive arguments happen in the community.

Whats the point of asking for feedback when you just ignore it then? We told you we wanted more endings to reflect our choices and you release a statement saying "We arent changing the endings!". If the author of Sherlock Holmes did what you guys have done, the series wouldn't have continued because he would have killed Sherlock  off.

They listened, they made choice how they wanted to deal with it. Your the one not listening to them.

[Almostfaceman]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

They already do this. You here on the method they use already called their forums. It is ignorant of you to assume they do not know what peoples issues are with the ending. The difference is just because their solution they agreed with is not the one you might specifically wanted you assume they are either not listening or need more feedback methods. Its fallacy. The reality is they simple agreed with other customers not you.

I'm not discussing who is agreeing with who, did you read my post? You are arguing against surveys, which would give Bioware even more telemetry about what their customers want. I am arguing that big, successful companies have been doing surveys and will continue to do surveys because they work and they make sense. This forum is no replacement for surveys. Why do you think Bioware does telementry through their game engine? Surveys would be the logical compliment.

If Bioware had included a survey at the end of their game designed by someone who knows how to make a survey, the feedback would be much more precise and they could know what to priortize for their next product. The forum here is a tool, but a hard-to-quantify tool.

And, again, you're wasting your time here trying to tell unhappy customers that they should be happy. You will never succeed. I can only guess you're arguing with them to, I don't know, scratch an itch you have for arguing?

Modifié par Almostfaceman, 12 avril 2012 - 08:57 .

[Hyrist]

Transgirlgamer wrote...

Hyrist wrote...

Transgirlgamer wrote...

I'm sorry, but they didn't give you the equivalent of a car with no headlights, bumpers or wheels.  They gave you a complete car on which you didn't like the headlights, bumper or wheels.

ME3 has a beginning, a middle and an end.  It is a full story.  Just because people don't like the end doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


EDIT.  But something like a car is a bad analogy for a game anyway.  A car you know what will be in it before you pay for it.  With a game, any game, you may know the basic plot and some of the universe, but you don't get to know everything about it before you buy it.

Again, the point is missed.

This breaks down to absolutes, not to steal a note from the BBB communications director, but BioWare did, in fact, promise two things:

That this game would not have an A B C ending:

(snip picture)

And that our choices would ultimately provide us with highly variable endings.

(snip picture)
Ultimately, what we were provided with was choice without ultimate consequence.

Wrex or Wreav?
Ashley or Kaiden?
Save or kill Council?
Save or destory Collector Base?
Who (among the many possible deaths) survives?

None of it matters so long as you work to 4000 + EMS. It changes nothing of the ultimate results.

We can complain about the God Child and the absolutely terriblily contrived ending that involves a litteral Deus Ex Machina, but that's ultimately a seperate complaint - and can be consitered artisitic critisim.

The fact that our choices did not matter or that we were stuck with a litteral ABC ending? Those were broken promises - a direct lie about their product. If Extended Cut does not regarde these two core problems, they failed twice.

The post that you quote was a direct response to a post that made an analogy between ME3 and a car with pieces missing.  I was just saying that the analogy was wrong.  It makes the point that I intended it to make.  I wasn't commenting on the inaccuracies of what people had said about the game prior to release compared with what the game was like when it was released.  I have agreed that they don't match up.  But we do have an ending, so the analogy is flawed as nothing is actually missing.

The consequence of decissions made in the ending is missing.

The ending promised to us that was not an "A B C" ending is missing.

The analogy was poor, the point was correct. We might have a car full with bumpers and headlights, but before we purchased the car, we were assured we would have halogen headlights and satalite radio.

When we got the car, we have standard headlights and a normal radio that does not even work properly.

I WORK in automotive service. I know exactly what he meant by that complaint.

[Transgirlgamer]

I am Sovereign wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Zeppex wrote...

Well then why ask for player feedback at all? Why makes statements that literally state we created something with you.

Then make other statements like, we didn't know there was a demand for it.

If you tell give me feedback on what we can do better, the people giving you that feedback will generally believe that you will take that into consideration. Unless your just asking to make them feel important,

Yes, but some people interpret "please give us feedback"n as "tell us what to do and we'll for sure do it." Some people believe "I disagree with what you did" is shorthand for "you have to fix things to my specification." And some believe "I suggest this" to be the same as "AGREE WITH ME BECAUSE I'M RIGHT!" This is where discussions start to break down and why so many unproductive arguments happen in the community.

Whats the point of asking for feedback when you just ignore it then? We told you we wanted more endings to reflect our choices and you release a statement saying "We arent changing the endings!". If the author of Sherlock Holmes did what you guys have done, the series wouldn't have continued because he would have killed Sherlock  off.

Please see my post regarding the nature of feedback earlier in this thread.

http://social.biowar...7766/6#11331117

They aren't ignoring feedback, just not using it to change a game already released.

Modifié par Transgirlgamer, 12 avril 2012 - 08:58 .

[-Area51-Silent]

I suppose at the end of the day, we are the consumers, and their goal should be to please as many of us as they can (they won't please everyone, but what are you going to do). All arguments of art aside, if they hide behind artistic inegrity and simply do not address the issues that a majority of gamers have with the ending, they may as well pack it up and call it quits, because people will become incredibly skeptical of their games, and simply will no longer be customers (which a company needs to survive).

[JKA_Nozyspy]

Transgirlgamer wrote...

JKA_Nozyspy wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

One reason is that, generally, we have our own ideas about how to design games and stories and don't design them by committee in collaboration with the players. That's not really how the developer-player relationship works.

The developer-player relationshp works like this: you give us what we expect, we keep you in business.

That might sound arrogant on the face of it, but thats how businesses work.

If i bought a car and it came without headlights or bumpers, i would send it back and expect the manufacturer to fix it. The fact that so many car companies go out of business due to doing what they want and not giving what the customers want illustrates the point.  Making a great 'artistic statement' has contributed to some car companies going bust, just look at the MG SV.

Biowares games are as close to an art form as i have ever seen in gaming, but you are a business, you are not 'artists'. You dont do what you do for enjoyment and then just sell the results to people who like it, your job is to provide a product that satisfies your customers.

Mass Effect 3 was magnificent, as were the previous two games, but the ending? You just delivered me a car without any wheels and i expect you to fix the problem. And no, saying that not including any wheels with your car was an 'artistic choice' is not acceptable.

Bioware, i still love you guys, but you dont make it easy sometimes...

I'm sorry, but they didn't give you the equivalent of a car with no headlights, bumpers or wheels.  They gave you a complete car on which you didn't like the headlights, bumper or wheels.

ME3 has a beginning, a middle and an end.  It is a full story.  Just because people don't like the end doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


EDIT.  But something like a car is a bad analogy for a game anyway.  A car you know what will be in it before you pay for it.  With a game, any game, you may know the basic plot and some of the universe, but you don't get to know everything about it before you buy it.

I respectfully disagree. The 'ending' to ME3 invalidated the entire lore, technology, relationships and story of ME3 and the rest of the trilogy up to that point. It didnt 'end' anything, it just added more questions and bizzare plotholes. it is like Bioware crafted the most beautiful car in the world, then just as it was on its way out of the factory to be delivered to you, they had a guy at the end of the line that riddled it with bullet holes with an AK-47.

I understand the artistic goal of the end, standing on its own, it wasnt that bad, but it just has so little connection to the rest of the Mass Effect Trilogy that it simply does not belong in this game.

To be honest, Bioware should have played it safe, and given us the 'happy' fulfilling ending that we were able to achieve with the previous two games. I dont recall anyone ever complaining that surviving getting hit by Reaper debris in ME1 or getting your entire team out of the Collector Base in ME2 was 'too disney-ish'. The endings were in safe territory and they worked, there was no reason to change that so dramatically for ME3.

I loved ME3, but the way i see it, Bioware tried to be too clever with the ending and totally fluffed it up. 

[Dragoonlordz]

Almostfaceman wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

They already do this. You here on the method they use already called their forums. It is ignorant of you to assume they do not know what peoples issues are with the ending. The difference is just because their solution they agreed with is not the one you might specifically wanted you assume they are either not listening or need more feedback methods. Its fallacy. The reality is they simple agreed with other customers not you.

I'm not discussing who is agreeing with who, did you read my post? You are arguing against surveys, which would give Bioware even more telemetry about what their customers want. I am arguing that big, successful companies have been doing surveys and will continue to do surveys because they work and they make sense. This forum is no replacement for surveys. Why do you think Bioware does telementry through their game engine? Surveys would be the logical compliment.

If Bioware had included a survey at the end of their game designed by someone who knows how to make a survey, the feedback would be much more precise and they could know what to priortize for their next product. The forum here is a tool, but a hard-to-quantify tool.

And, again, you're wasting your time here trying to tell unhappy customers that they should be happy. You will never succeed. I can only guess you're arguing with them to, I don't know, scratch an itch you have for arguing?

You must not have been reading these forums long if do not realise just how many people turn off the data collection in the game. Amount of people who try to block EA information collection and Biowares. There simply is no need for a survey at the end of the game, in fact in general doing such puts most people off products. Most of the people here I bet are no different to me in that when you uninstall a product you don't spend 10 or 20 minutes telling them why you just close the web page asking for feedback. With these forums they get enough feedback without being forced upon a user as a form to fill out on top of data collection many turn off already. The optional method of leaving feedback exists, here.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 12 avril 2012 - 09:02 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

One reason is that, generally, we have our own ideas about how to design games and stories and don't design them by committee in collaboration with the players. That's not really how the developer-player relationship works.

Did you plan to address the ending's numerous plot holes through the explanation of 'your own ideas about how to design games and stories" at some point?

The DLC addresses this very issue. However your loaded question hoping they say yes will not work. It is just as fair to believe that they never knew people would react so negatively while always expected some to dislike it as never can please everyone. Now if you never mean't it as a loaded question then my apologies but came across that way.

From what I understand regarding the DLC, it's just there to provide closure (ie. additional scenes showing your war assets in battle + epilogues).  That doesn't address the plot's inconsistencies/the very valid points brought up on this forum.

All data indicates that the ending is not what they intended it to be (as far as how they wanted the audience to react to it), which means that (as an artist) they can do better... or at least explain themselves.

[jumpingkaede]

Transgirlgamer wrote...

Please see my post regarding the nature of feedback earlier in this thread.

http://social.biowar...7766/6#11331117

They aren't ignoring feedback, just not using it to change a game already released.

So what are they doing with this feedback?  Now they'll know better than to introduce a new character in the final game of their next trilogy?

...I guess the DA team could stand to hear it.

[ahandsomeshark]

Stanley Woo wrote...

One reason is that, generally, we have our own ideas about how to design games and stories and don't design them by committee in collaboration with the players. That's not really how the developer-player relationship works.

but at this point we're not really talking about the developer-player relationship. We're talking about the producer-consumer relationship. So why doesn't bioware do a survey asking how many perma customers they're likely to lose if the endings remain the quality they are and then make their decision based on that? And/or specifically how many customers who were likely to pre-order/buy new and/or spend on the other things where developers really make their sustaining profit from. Isn't building brand loyalty a big reason why bioware has always considered and listened to player feedback. So why would they pass an oppurtunity to directly gauge the current status of brand loyalty BEFORE it affected future sales.

Basically just from an I/O stand point this seems like a unique and awesome oppurtunity for Bioware/EA to build bridges that are likely to be eventually forced on developers due to technology changes in the future anyway. The gaming industry has already seen mass profit loss (in what was once considered a recession proof industry), breakdown of the highly vertical integrated business model and the line between developer and player steadily bluring. Reverting to the classic "batten down the hatches" stance seems counter productive in these day of increased producer-consumer interaction.

[Diokana]

They don't do it because they are afraid to see the real numbers. They won't be able to claim a "vocal minority" if their own survey says otherwise

[I am Sovereign]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I am Sovereign wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Yes, but some people interpret "please give us feedback"n as "tell us what to do and we'll for sure do it." Some people believe "I disagree with what you did" is shorthand for "you have to fix things to my specification." And some believe "I suggest this" to be the same as "AGREE WITH ME BECAUSE I'M RIGHT!" This is where discussions start to break down and why so many unproductive arguments happen in the community.

Whats the point of asking for feedback when you just ignore it then? We told you we wanted more endings to reflect our choices and you release a statement saying "We arent changing the endings!". If the author of Sherlock Holmes did what you guys have done, the series wouldn't have continued because he would have killed Sherlock  off.

They listened, they made choice how they wanted to deal with it. Your the one not listening to them.

Yes, thats right I'M the one not listening. Thats why why ive been following Bioware's Twitter feed, constantly checking news about Bioware's response and why I basicaly quoted their blog post about not adding endings.

You are SO good at analysing people over the internet.

[Hyrist]

Transgirlgamer wrote...
Please see my post regarding the nature of feedback earlier in this thread.

http://social.biowar...7766/6#11331117

They aren't ignoring feedback, just not using it to change a game already released.

The issue with this matter is - we can no longer take that in faith.

The feedback regarding choice having true consequencs, and a variable ending, were feedbacks that were consistant during the enerity of Mass Effect's lifespan, after the releace of the first game. It was an ongoing and heavily discussed concern that BioWare would write themselves into a corner and ultimately not be able to deliver on the promise they made in the beginning.

If BioWare was truely listening to their fans and taking this feedback into account for 'their next game' then they had ample time to do this correctly - and ultimately they failed. As players are highly invested in THIS storyline, and ultimately the promises made were for THIS seriese. A simple "Oh, we'll do better next time." Will not cut it, because nobody will beleive that.

So 1. There was feedback enough for them to make the right choices the first time, they ignored it.

2. There needs to be a restoration of good faith between producer and customer - and it needs to be done for the product in question, not for future works.

[ahandsomeshark]

jumpingkaede wrote...

Transgirlgamer wrote...

Please see my post regarding the nature of feedback earlier in this thread.

http://social.biowar...7766/6#11331117

They aren't ignoring feedback, just not using it to change a game already released.

So what are they doing with this feedback?  Now they'll know better than to introduce a new character in the final game of their next trilogy?

...I guess the DA team could stand to hear it.

Also the "already released" argument holds less water in this area of DLC and patches. I don't see how they can in one hand claim changes can't be made because it's "already been released" and in the other hand actively produce DLC that does change the nature/story of "already released" games. 

ESPECIALLY, considering bioware themselves has already made comments, in regards to DA:2, implying they don't consider the actual developmental period of a game over until there are no more plans for patches or DLC.

[THEE_DEATHMASTER]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Zeppex wrote...

Well then why ask for player feedback at all? Why makes statements that literally state we created something with you.

Then make other statements like, we didn't know there was a demand for it.

If you tell give me feedback on what we can do better, the people giving you that feedback will generally believe that you will take that into consideration. Unless your just asking to make them feel important,

Yes, but some people interpret "please give us feedback"n as "tell us what to do and we'll for sure do it." Some people believe "I disagree with what you did" is shorthand for "you have to fix things to my specification." And some believe "I suggest this" to be the same as "AGREE WITH ME BECAUSE I'M RIGHT!" This is where discussions start to break down and why so many unproductive arguments happen in the community.

The proposal was for in game feedback. That's not a community, you can't even type to other players in the game. It sounds to be a simple fill out form. I'm not saying whether you should do it or not, but that your argument doesn't really make sense.

[Dragoonlordz]

I am Sovereign wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I am Sovereign wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Yes, but some people interpret "please give us feedback"n as "tell us what to do and we'll for sure do it." Some people believe "I disagree with what you did" is shorthand for "you have to fix things to my specification." And some believe "I suggest this" to be the same as "AGREE WITH ME BECAUSE I'M RIGHT!" This is where discussions start to break down and why so many unproductive arguments happen in the community.

Whats the point of asking for feedback when you just ignore it then? We told you we wanted more endings to reflect our choices and you release a statement saying "We arent changing the endings!". If the author of Sherlock Holmes did what you guys have done, the series wouldn't have continued because he would have killed Sherlock  off.

They listened, they made choice how they wanted to deal with it. Your the one not listening to them.

Yes, thats right I'M the one not listening. Thats why why ive been following Bioware's Twitter feed, constantly checking news about Bioware's response and why I basicaly quoted their blog post about not adding endings.

You are SO good at analysing people over the internet.

I'll put it same way you did then, it's ignoring what they have told you. They told you they listened, they told you they are going with clarification which even members of retake and others have asked for. They told you that they are not replcing the endings but in reality that is just one of the many things people asked for. You have no proof that the majority wants a rewrite out of the 3.5+ million customer. You have a few biased polls with thousands not millions who cared enough to take part.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 12 avril 2012 - 09:08 .

[Almostfaceman]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

They already do this. You here on the method they use already called their forums. It is ignorant of you to assume they do not know what peoples issues are with the ending. The difference is just because their solution they agreed with is not the one you might specifically wanted you assume they are either not listening or need more feedback methods. Its fallacy. The reality is they simple agreed with other customers not you.

I'm not discussing who is agreeing with who, did you read my post? You are arguing against surveys, which would give Bioware even more telemetry about what their customers want. I am arguing that big, successful companies have been doing surveys and will continue to do surveys because they work and they make sense. This forum is no replacement for surveys. Why do you think Bioware does telementry through their game engine? Surveys would be the logical compliment.

If Bioware had included a survey at the end of their game designed by someone who knows how to make a survey, the feedback would be much more precise and they could know what to priortize for their next product. The forum here is a tool, but a hard-to-quantify tool.

And, again, you're wasting your time here trying to tell unhappy customers that they should be happy. You will never succeed. I can only guess you're arguing with them to, I don't know, scratch an itch you have for arguing?

You must not have been reading these forums long if do not realise just how many people turn off the data collection in the game. Amount of people who try to block EA information collection and Biowares. There simply is no need for a survey at the end of the game, in fact in general doing such puts most people off products. Most of the people here I bet are no different to me in that when you uninstall a product you don't spend 10 or 20 minutes telling them why you just close the web page asking for feedback. With these forums they get enough feedback without being forced upon a user as a form to fill out on top of data collection many turn off already.

Of course people turn off data collection and turn off surveys, but companies still use them to get any feedback they can. It may turn YOU off, but there will be people who will take the time to give valuable feedback. My job was to actually call people at work and bug them, that's right, get "in their face" and bug them. Why? Because feedback is valuable. It out-weighs the possible annoyance factor a customer may experience by being asked to fill out a survey. My job actually evolved into the quantification and reports of the data we collected. It was very detailed. Again, the forum is a tool, but it is not precise. A survey is just another tool, and one Bioware should use to help them avoid customer relations problems like the ending to Mass Effect 3.

[Transgirlgamer]

Hyrist wrote...

Transgirlgamer wrote...

Hyrist wrote...

Transgirlgamer wrote...

I'm sorry, but they didn't give you the equivalent of a car with no headlights, bumpers or wheels.  They gave you a complete car on which you didn't like the headlights, bumper or wheels.

ME3 has a beginning, a middle and an end.  It is a full story.  Just because people don't like the end doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


EDIT.  But something like a car is a bad analogy for a game anyway.  A car you know what will be in it before you pay for it.  With a game, any game, you may know the basic plot and some of the universe, but you don't get to know everything about it before you buy it.

Again, the point is missed.

This breaks down to absolutes, not to steal a note from the BBB communications director, but BioWare did, in fact, promise two things:

That this game would not have an A B C ending:

(snip picture)

And that our choices would ultimately provide us with highly variable endings.

(snip picture)
Ultimately, what we were provided with was choice without ultimate consequence.

Wrex or Wreav?
Ashley or Kaiden?
Save or kill Council?
Save or destory Collector Base?
Who (among the many possible deaths) survives?

None of it matters so long as you work to 4000 + EMS. It changes nothing of the ultimate results.

We can complain about the God Child and the absolutely terriblily contrived ending that involves a litteral Deus Ex Machina, but that's ultimately a seperate complaint - and can be consitered artisitic critisim.

The fact that our choices did not matter or that we were stuck with a litteral ABC ending? Those were broken promises - a direct lie about their product. If Extended Cut does not regarde these two core problems, they failed twice.

The post that you quote was a direct response to a post that made an analogy between ME3 and a car with pieces missing.  I was just saying that the analogy was wrong.  It makes the point that I intended it to make.  I wasn't commenting on the inaccuracies of what people had said about the game prior to release compared with what the game was like when it was released.  I have agreed that they don't match up.  But we do have an ending, so the analogy is flawed as nothing is actually missing.

The consequence of decissions made in the ending is missing.

The ending promised to us that was not an "A B C" ending is missing.

The analogy was poor, the point was correct. We might have a car full with bumpers and headlights, but before we purchased the car, we were assured we would have halogen headlights and satalite radio.

When we got the car, we have standard headlights and a normal radio that does not even work properly.

I WORK in automotive service. I know exactly what he meant by that complaint.

The consequences are built into the variations in the cutscenes.  And the endings aren't A B C as they have the variations in the cutscenes.

I agree that what we were told would be wildly different endings, aren't wildly different, but the choices do make changes to the ending.  One word was wrong, the word wildly.

I feel I must point out that I am not defending how it was done, just saying that we were given endings that varied with our choices.  I'm sure that if whoever it was that said it could go back and not say the word wildly, they would. 

Although, when considered from the perspective of somone in the universe of the game, I imagine it could be said that there is a large difference between being vaporised or not or becoming part synthetic or carrying on as before the reapers arrived, but without the mass relays.  Maybe that's what they meant by wildly different.

[JKA_Nozyspy]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

They already do this. You here on the method they use already called their forums. It is ignorant of you to assume they do not know what peoples issues are with the ending. The difference is just because their solution they agreed with is not the one you might specifically wanted you assume they are either not listening or need more feedback methods. Its fallacy. The reality is they simply agreed with other customers not you.

I understand that there are people who like the ending and thats fine, but those people are apparently in the minority. The majority of fans, a multitude of gaming and non gaming publications, the 'Better Business Bureau' and even other developers say that the ending was not up to scratch. Heck, if companies like Blizzard are actually making fun of the ending, you know something is very wrong.

As a business, Bioware should side with the majority of customers, otherwise they will find their business decreasing.