486 réponses à ce sujet

[wantedman dan]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Not doing what you want us to do, and not agreeing with our decisions, does not mean we have stopped listening. It is possible to completely disagree with you while still taking your feedback into account.

Too bad that's not what Bioware did, Mr. Woo.

[SaladinDheonqar]

Velocithon wrote...

Bioware: "Hey we're gonna put this, this, this, this, and even THIS into the game IT'LL BE GREAT!!!"

Fans: " OMG this is going to be so cool they're doing everything we want!!!"

*game is released*

Fans: "...dafuq nothing you said was in here..."

Bioware: "We didn't know there was such a demand for it"

Fans:

Muah! This is perfect.

[Kath]

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

....
2. [/b]An act or instance of such falseness. It could work in my situations but if you would prefer I could use the word

contradictory meaning 
Mutually opposed or inconsistent. 

Though it doesn't change the meaning of what I wrote you should pay more attention to that than your belief of my bad use of a word >>; The meaning was still legible. 

I see what you were saying, but I was confused on how you delivered your points. I feel using the word "hypocrisy" to explain all your grievances with Bioware weakens your message. It makes it look like you think everything Bioware has done (that you view as bad) has been intentional.

[wantedman dan]

SaladinDheonqar wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

Bioware: "Hey we're gonna put this, this, this, this, and even THIS into the game IT'LL BE GREAT!!!"

Fans: " OMG this is going to be so cool they're doing everything we want!!!"

*game is released*

Fans: "...dafuq nothing you said was in here..."

Bioware: "We didn't know there was such a demand for it"

Fans:

Muah! This is perfect.

This is priceless.

[Gemini1179]

sfam wrote...

No, I think Stanley is very truthfully giving us the Mr. Spock option: "He is either unable or unwilling to respond."  Its probably a fair point to say he doesn't have lots of flexibility in the matter.  I empathize with this, but would really like a way to have a constructive dialogue with them. [/diplomat power off]

If this is the case, he really shouldn't be posting ANYTHING outside his modding duties. He's certainly not helping by posting in these threads. Hell, even posting once a day to say you can't say anything would be more productive.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Opinion -- take it for what it is --

BW is going to be walking on eggshells right now on the PR stuff. We're not going to heard diddly about what's in the EC DLC or much hype about any content about what is going to be in any upcoming DLC having to do with this game other than the date it is going to be released and a basic summary about what is in it. The last thing they want is another overpromise/underdeliver episode to happen.

It is the end user's perception that matters here. Perception is reality.

For one, I am not going to believe any hype about any game from BW, or from any other game company for that matter. I know about trade magazine reviews and how skewed they can be based upon advertizing revenue from a given company. About the only magazine that offers fairly unbiased product reviews is Consumer Reports and they don't do video game reviews.

[Ajosraa]

'I don't agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it' - Voltaire.

Those British soldiers would understand..

[Infiltrat0r_N7]

Stanley Woo wrote...


And having a difference of opinion has absolutely no effect on the "legitimacy" of those issues. If you dislike X in a game, my saying "I disagree with you" has no effect on your opinion. It has no effect on BioWare already choosing to create clarification DLC. It doesn't make me right, it doesn't make you wrong. The only reason people want BioWare to (or me) to agree is to give you more ammunition to say "see? even Stanley Woo agrees with this!" or "even BioWare agrees. this proves we are right!" which does nothing except, well, make you feel better about being right.

But I'm not going to provide answers that will only be used to be either wielded as a weapon or given as proof that we hate you, because neither is conducive to productive discussion.

Modifié par Infiltrat0r_N7, 13 avril 2012 - 01:55 .

[Gwtheyrn]

Narayan23 wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Not doing what you want us to do, and not agreeing with our decisions, does not mean we have stopped listening. It is possible to completely disagree with you while still taking your feedback into account.

What's wrong with actually coming out of hiding and standing up for your vision?

What's wrong is that that vision, as presented, is completely indefensible. It is literally some of the worst writing I have ever seen in my life. Seriously, some folks should be embarassed. That a deus ex machina was even considered, much less the fact that they clearly thought it was a great idea is enough to repulse me from future purchases.

[ArchDuck]

As a reminder people:
Listening, understanding and caring are 3 very different things.

[Oakenshield1]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Not doing what you want us to do, and not agreeing with our decisions, does not mean we have stopped listening. It is possible to completely disagree with you while still taking your feedback into account.

Were you listening to our feedback before the game came out? If you weren't you should have been. Anybody could have told you they didn't want a Deus Ex Machina and an ending that didn't reflect our decisions.

[sfam]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

For one, I am not going to believe any hype about any game from BW, or from any other game company for that matter. I know about trade magazine reviews and how skewed they can be based upon advertizing revenue from a given company. About the only magazine that offers fairly unbiased product reviews is Consumer Reports and they don't do video game reviews.

This is the one that blows me away.  Granted, I'm a 40-something at this point, but I long since gave up any notion that gamer review magazines/websites were objective.  Clearly, many still felt they had serious ethics before Mass Effect 3 came out (hence the Jessica Chobot "outrage").  Yet the dychotomy betwee the "professional gamer" reviews and actual gamer reviews for Mass Effect 3 pretty much laid this issue bare: Bottom line, there are no unbiased gamer websites.  By their nature, they must be biased.  Any group dependent on those they cover by definition are biased.  Same with White House reporters for instance - they need access or they have no story, which clearly tones down their statements. 

The other issue of course is that between us, we know that many of those professional reviewers did not make it to the end of the game before posting their review. Lazy is "in" in internet reporting these days.

Modifié par sfam, 13 avril 2012 - 01:51 .

[Spectre Impersonator]

Oakenshield1 wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Not doing what you want us to do, and not agreeing with our decisions, does not mean we have stopped listening. It is possible to completely disagree with you while still taking your feedback into account.

Were you listening to our feedback before the game came out? If you weren't you should have been. Anybody could have told you they didn't want a Deus Ex Machina and an ending that didn't reflect our decisions.

They acted like they were listening prior to release since they made promises that, if adhered to, would have made a much better game.

[garf]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Not doing what you want us to do, and not agreeing with our decisions, does not mean we have stopped listening. It is possible to completely disagree with you while still taking your feedback into account.

Mister Woo, perhaps you would care to rephrase this or to specify exactly which opinons on this thread it is in response to because right now it comes accross as misdirected, and condescending. Which frankly tends to convince people that bioware is indeed not listening. Not in a meaningful way.

[zarnk567]

Velocithon wrote...

Bioware: "Hey we're gonna put this, this, this, this, and even THIS into the game IT'LL BE GREAT!!!"

Fans: " OMG this is going to be so cool they're doing everything we want!!!"

*game is released*

Fans: "...dafuq nothing you said was in here..."

Bioware: "We didn't know there was such a demand for it"

Fans:

^win^

[Gwtheyrn]

Zuka999 wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Not doing what you want us to do, and not agreeing with our decisions, does not mean we have stopped listening. It is possible to completely disagree with you while still taking your feedback into account.

You can disagree with us in most cases. When it comes to a colossal failure like what we were given at the end of Mass Effect 3 - something which is literally eroding your fanbase right beneath you - you can't afford to disagree with us. We're not just "fans", we're customers. Who have spent money on a product that was made in the pursuit of profits. People want something different, but it sounds like we're going to be given the same thing with more polish.

We'll see how it plays out. I hope the guys up in the Mass Effect 3 development team know what this DLC means for the future of BioWare... defend the "artistic integrity" of Mac Walters and Casey Hudson all you guys want, because it might end up being the only thing you have left.

"Hmm, your ideas are intriguing to me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter." - Homer

[sdfgdsfsdfsfs]

Orthodox Infidel wrote...

I bolded "your patrons/customers/subjects" to point out that this is the weakest part of your argument, because it assumes that every person who purchased ME3 wanted the same thing for the ending, and wants the same fix for it now in the Extended Cut. Which is usually what people who claim "OMG BIOWARE ISN'T LISTENING TO ITS CUSTOMERS" usually fail to realize.

There might be customers who are content with the ending, but they would have been content with a better ending as well. To say they are "okay" with it does not mean that it actually good, or that it shouldn't have been better.

[M0keys]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Not doing what you want us to do, and not agreeing with our decisions, does not mean we have stopped listening. It is possible to completely disagree with you while still taking your feedback into account.

Yeah, a lot of us have always assumed that's what you guys have been doing in the first place.

Thanks for the heads up, though.

[ShepardTheHopeful]

Katherine wrote...

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

....
2. [/b]An act or instance of such falseness. It could work in my situations but if you would prefer I could use the word

contradictory meaning 
Mutually opposed or inconsistent. 

Though it doesn't change the meaning of what I wrote you should pay more attention to that than your belief of my bad use of a word >>; The meaning was still legible. 

I see what you were saying, but I was confused on how you delivered your points. I feel using the word "hypocrisy" to explain all your grievances with Bioware weakens your message. It makes it look like you think everything Bioware has done (that you view as bad) has been intentional.

I wasn't trying ot physically attack them saying everything they did about the game was hypocritical I'm more angry about the way they've responded to us but it's all moot in the end i'm not going to write death threats or try to sue them. I'm just saying please don't tell us one then and then say something completely different at PAX etc. 

When I was saying hypocritical i'm not calling bioware hypocritical i'm stating that the comments made don't match up and contradict each other in a hypocritical fasion. I'm not attacking bioware just pointing out my concerns and personal issues. Like anything else and like Woo said they can choose to ignore me and make no comment as they are doing. 

[Oakenshield1]

Reported Woo for peer review.

[Kath]

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

Katherine wrote...

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

....
2. [/b]An act or instance of such falseness. It could work in my situations but if you would prefer I could use the word

contradictory meaning 
Mutually opposed or inconsistent. 

Though it doesn't change the meaning of what I wrote you should pay more attention to that than your belief of my bad use of a word >>; The meaning was still legible. 

I see what you were saying, but I was confused on how you delivered your points. I feel using the word "hypocrisy" to explain all your grievances with Bioware weakens your message. It makes it look like you think everything Bioware has done (that you view as bad) has been intentional.

I wasn't trying ot physically attack them saying everything they did about the game was hypocritical I'm more angry about the way they've responded to us but it's all moot in the end i'm not going to write death threats or try to sue them. I'm just saying please don't tell us one then and then say something completely different at PAX etc. 

When I was saying hypocritical i'm not calling bioware hypocritical i'm stating that the comments made don't match up and contradict each other in a hypocritical fasion. I'm not attacking bioware just pointing out my concerns and personal issues. Like anything else and like Woo said they can choose to ignore me and make no comment as they are doing. 

I understand, and I can empathize. Your list was just at bit varied, and it left me wondering what your intention was. Sorry for jumping the gun with my post!

[ShepardTheHopeful]

Katherine wrote...

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

Katherine wrote...

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

....
2. [/b]An act or instance of such falseness. It could work in my situations but if you would prefer I could use the word

contradictory meaning 
Mutually opposed or inconsistent. 

Though it doesn't change the meaning of what I wrote you should pay more attention to that than your belief of my bad use of a word >>; The meaning was still legible. 

I see what you were saying, but I was confused on how you delivered your points. I feel using the word "hypocrisy" to explain all your grievances with Bioware weakens your message. It makes it look like you think everything Bioware has done (that you view as bad) has been intentional.

I wasn't trying ot physically attack them saying everything they did about the game was hypocritical I'm more angry about the way they've responded to us but it's all moot in the end i'm not going to write death threats or try to sue them. I'm just saying please don't tell us one then and then say something completely different at PAX etc. 

When I was saying hypocritical i'm not calling bioware hypocritical i'm stating that the comments made don't match up and contradict each other in a hypocritical fasion. I'm not attacking bioware just pointing out my concerns and personal issues. Like anything else and like Woo said they can choose to ignore me and make no comment as they are doing. 

I understand, and I can empathize. Your list was just at bit varied, and it left me wondering what your intention was. Sorry for jumping the gun with my post!

Nah it's cool i'm not ragin about it it's a forum easy to misunderstand questions and comments for trolling and hate lol

[Orthodox Infidel]

sdfgdsfsdfsfs wrote...

Orthodox Infidel wrote...

I bolded "your patrons/customers/subjects" to point out that this is the weakest part of your argument, because it assumes that every person who purchased ME3 wanted the same thing for the ending, and wants the same fix for it now in the Extended Cut. Which is usually what people who claim "OMG BIOWARE ISN'T LISTENING TO ITS CUSTOMERS" usually fail to realize.

There might be customers who are content with the ending, but they would have been content with a better ending as well. To say they are "okay" with it does not mean that it actually good, or that it shouldn't have been better.

The point is that "customers" are a diverse group of people.

People who say "BIOWARE IS NOT LISTENING TO ITS CUSTOMERS" often act and speak about all Bioware customers as if they all think exactly the same way they do.

Note that I've not made any statement in this thread about what I think the ending is like, and you've already assumed that I'm agruing that there are customers who are "okay" with it. My opinion is that the endings are objectively bad, because they've evidently failed to convey whatever they were intended to convey. Some people think the endings are bad because Shepard didn't get blue babies. Some people think the endings are bad because the relay network blew up. Some people think that Starbrat ruins everything (which I also agree with; ME1's plot fell into the hole Starbrat gave us).

To suggest that there is one easy way to make the endings "better" is to ignore the fact that there are large divisions among the fanbase about what is wrong with the ending.

[tomcplotts]

Cyne wrote...

It's possible to listen to someone without agreeing with their opinion, but bioware are not even explaining WHY they disagree, what is RIGHT about the ending the way it is, etc.

That's the real problem, not the lack of agreement, but the lack of an explanation behind it. What does that say? Either they do not respect us enough to offer that information, or their hands are tied, or (worse case) they themselves have no legit arguments to offer in favor of the ending, that the ending really does suck and they won't simply come out and admit it.

Yes, it is possible, and it's fairly normal for that to occur. This case is different for two reasons, one of which you and others mention. First, the lack of a rationale defending the companies rejection of many of the fans perspective. But I think more telling is the fact that, after all this garbage for a full month, not one fan or even small group of fans has proposed or critiqued this game in any way that's perceived as valid enough to act on. Thats either incredible arrogance or institutional helplessness. I lean towards B.

[clos]

Stanley Woo wrote...

sdfgdsfsdfsfs wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Not doing what you want us to do, and not agreeing with our decisions, does not mean we have stopped listening. It is possible to completely disagree with you while still taking your feedback into account.

It's possible to disagree, but a lot of the "issues" people raised with the ending are extremely legitimate, and to say that you "completely disagree" with those legitimate points is... troubling, to say the least.

And having a difference of opinion has absolutely no effect on the "legitimacy" of those issues. If you dislike X in a game, my saying "I disagree with you" has no effect on your opinion. It has no effect on BioWare already choosing to create clarification DLC. It doesn't make me right, it doesn't make you wrong. The only reason people want BioWare to (or me) to agree is to give you more ammunition to say "see? even Stanley Woo agrees with this!" or "even BioWare agrees. this proves we are right!" which does nothing except, well, make you feel better about being right.

But I'm not going to provide answers that will only be used to be either wielded as a weapon or given as proof that we hate you, because neither is conducive to productive discussion.

I respectfully disagree. We are not talking about a small vocal minority of players that have issue with the "legitimacy" of those issues. When the vast majority of players (whom we really are) are saying the ending is really really bad and give very logical arguments for it which in no way or manner have been refuted then there is no choice but to reach the logical conclusion that the game didn't deliver on its multiple pre-release promises of which there were many.

We, the fans who support your income with our hard earned money, are not seeking to destroy you. We want a 2 way conversation that's truly honest and not filled with PR spin to the point were no real conversation can be achieved. If PR or defensiveness are driving the conversation, like all relationships in real life, it eventually leads to a divorce.

I could go on but then this post will get TL;DR all over it. It's too long of a response as it.