362 réponses à ce sujet

[MikeC99]

ioannisdenton wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

ioannisdenton wrote...

there is a survey that proves that for most people the ending was bad written.
i really fail to see how anyone can actually liked the ending at all and felt 
rewarded after all the journey from Me1 to Me3. no offence here.

I spoke poorly. Most of us do indeed agree the ending was bad. What is dividing the fanbase so much is "those who think DLC can salvage it" and "those who want it scrapped entirely and redone."

well "anything we can salvage is at least worth getting" is my opinion. i wish the whole part after the elevator would be erased from all media but at this pont i simply want a reason to care for mass effect again. 

RE:  "Most of us do indeed agree the ending was bad. What is dividing the
fanbase so much is "those who think DLC can salvage it" and "those who
want it scrapped entirely and redone." "       Agreed. But as much as it pains me, I've learned that putting all your efforts into the long shot but highest goal leaves you no room for lesser (and less satisfying) improvements to happen. But just going for the stuff you know will probably get done is a sure fire success strategy for not getting much improvement at all; and can lead to less than what might have happened. Devil if you do, Devil if you don't sort of thing. So you have to find and stick to some ill defined, wavering middle line - not where everything is compromised, but where there is room to grab high and also to glean the changes that may not seem like much, but are in the end improvements.

(Following on and also picking up " i wish the whole part after the elevator would be erased") -  It's was reasonably obvious before the survey - and the results simply confirm - that the range of issues and the depth of impact of the things folks identified needing changing in the existing narrative and technical/ artistic structues of the ending could not be met within the bounds apparently set by Bioware - ie we are not changing the ending. But clearly there is scope to shift the conceptual basis for much of the ending and to modify through additions without fundamentally 'changing' the ending in a conceptual sense. For example - but I'm not saying I support this necessarily! - but as an example, indoctrination theory ideas abounding here could be an approach to achieve that. I personally think Bioware won't go for that - which leaves me clutching at straws to think what else is available for them to do to move a significant distance to meet the concerns voiced all over these forums, polls, articles in press etc etc - and summarised as best we could in our report - and still hold to their own line of 'we will not change the ending'. 

But - until we get to the end, it ain't the end, and I hope as many people as possible keep knocking at Bioware's doors and saying 'Hey - we're still here and we still want to be heard and we still want you to do better by yourselves and us!'  And I really really hope Bioware get the 'better for yourselves' perspective. In my humble opinion - but at least backed now by a number of media articles ( especially this one: http://www.gamesindu...or-the-industry ) - Bioware are - or were until the current ending - on the cusp of defining the watershed moment when 'games' seriously crossed into the arena of 'novel', and  'movie', where well crafted serious narrative aspirations are happily melded with 'entertainment' into something meaningful for human experience. Sounds grandiose - not at all. Great writing and screen play does that. It hits you emotionally in the gut and makes you think - all of which bring you squarely to face what it is to be human. 

In the end, I fear they may not either get it, or their courage has failed, or they have lost sight of the big stuff and took a sadly more petty focus on things. The ME games are not perfect - even J R R Tolkien conceded in a letter that the notion that eagles could have simply flown Frodo and the ring to Mt Doom and hey presto - three book staggeringly wonderful story becomes five minute fly by! I cannot presume to know what Tolkien had done had he picked up on this prior to publication - and this was an issue brought to his notice by his readers - but the fact that his scribbled thousands of pages of palimpset (writing on the same page multiple times - paper was not cheap after WW2) show how much he tweaked and altered and changed again and again and again as he wrote the book leads me to believe that he would have done one more (and probably mulitple versions) re-write and fixed it. This is the one thing about this whole ending fiasco that actually does make me angry. Bioware claims a shield of artistic integrity. No it's not. It's a shield that says : 'Product before Art!'.  All I want Bioware to do is to reverse that. Do that and I will galdly accept where-ever they want this baby to go.

Last Tolkien analogy: Rayner Unwin - son of the publishers of both Hobbit and LOR - since he was a kid did reviews of manuscripts for Allen and Unwin. I think he got a shilling for his one page review of the hobbit! When he'd finished reading the manuscript for LOR, he informed his father that it was a great work, but that it would probably loose the company 1000 pounds. That's a LOT of money in early 1950s. His father replied - IF you thing this is great work THEN you may loose 1000 pounds. THIS is the vision Bioware needs.

Sorry - I do try not to get on the horse and rise in the stirrups and flail my cutlass about too often. Epic fail - but happily!

cheers
MikeC

[MikeC99]

Shameless bump! ! Pride = five letter word.

[perezrj]

Wow nice job. Hope it works!

[Gogzilla]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Izithel wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

Isn't 2000 less than 1% of total players?

Almost all Surveys and research samples small amounts of the population.

Imagine asking everysingle person who played the game his opinion, impossible.
Instead they try to get a reasonably sized and diverse group of people to get an idea of what the greater whole is.


2000 might sound small, but I've seen lower samples been used in official statistics.

Small samples are okay so long as they are representative. The forums are unfortunately not representative of the fanbase as a whole.

Feedback from these forums , has helped shapped the series t what it is today.

Making charecters liek Garrus, tali and Wrez more important.
Making lair of the Shadow broker becuase people wanted to see more from Liara.

Stuff like that was only a few things that feedback from these forums was used for.

knowing that these forums are a pretty good representaion of where fans want the series to go

[Balek-Vriege]

This poll is the best anyone could do to study the opinion of those dissatified with the endings and what they actually want. So I have to give kudos to its creator(s).

Unfortunately, it can't be taken seriously as a definitely accurate, or true scientific poll of the entire Mass Effect fanbase, because the sample is heavily biased towards the Social Network (completely understandable because it's pretty much impossible save for Bioware itself doing polling using online/origin features).  If your sample is not reflective of demographics in reality it isn't realistic.  One has to remember that those who visit the Social Network aren't even close to the majority of players, so a 84.3% sample size throws everything out of wack.

Are those visiting the Social Network predesposed to complain and are looking for a place to vent? Do people happy with the endings usually not visit forums since they have no real qualms? Is it possible the Social Network is a different type of player entirely than those who don't visit it? These questions remain unanswered and unknown in this survey.

The same applies to the Social Network poll about how many like/dislike the ending.  Most of those who are going to vote are going to be those who feel strongly about the issue.  Without a sample size based off demographics, it can't be relied upon.

It could be representative of the whole fanbase by chance alone, but very unlikely.

What this survey is though is an accurate reflection of people from very different countries (% not published), during a 9 day period with 84.3% of them coming from the Social Network, who took the time to do the survey. So it is very useful in that regard and within those parameters.

Modifié par Balek-Vriege, 21 avril 2012 - 03:49 .

[MikeC99]

Balek-Vriege wrote...

This poll is the best anyone could do to study the opinion of those dissatified with the endings and what they actually want. So I have to give kudos to its creator(s).

Unfortunately, it can't be taken seriously as a definitely accurate, or true scientific poll of the entire Mass Effect fanbase, because the sample is heavily biased towards the Social Network (completely understandable because it's pretty much impossible save for Bioware itself doing polling using online/origin features).  If your sample is not reflective of demographics in reality it isn't realistic.  One has to remember that those who visit the Social Network aren't even close to the majority of players, so a 84.3% sample size throws everything out of wack.

Are those visiting the Social Network predesposed to complain and are looking for a place to vent? Do people happy with the endings usually not visit forums since they have no real qualms? Is it possible the Social Network is a different type of player entirely than those who don't visit it? These questions remain unanswered and unknown in this survey.

The same applies to the Social Network poll about how many like/dislike the ending.  Most of those who are going to vote are going to be those who feel strongly about the issue.  Without a sample size based off demographics, it can't be relied upon.

It could be representative of the whole fanbase by chance alone, but very unlikely.

What this survey is though is an accurate reflection of people from very different countries (% not published), during a 9 day period with 84.3% of them coming from the Social Network, who took the time to do the survey. So it is very useful in that regard and within those parameters.

THANK YOU!   Could not have said it better myself - sincerely!  As I assume from your reply you'd be only too aware, without the backing of a lot of resources, getting a 'representative' sample - either of the whole ME player population, or of the whole BSN population would be ... expensive. I think something like couple hundred dollars an an hour these days for contract survey design, implementation, analyses and write up. We have tried to be clear about the limitations, and about who exactly we thought we were surveying. But it was this - given our resources (= none apart from some 100 plus hours of time) - or nothing at all. If you can only tell a part of the story, show a part of the picture, do you decide not to tell or show any of it? Perfectly valid and much safer option - at least from the point of one type of risk. But the risk - do nothing - is pretty much absolute. Do nothing = nothing happens.

We choose to tell/ show what we could. We tried to set up a framework and report that showed what the people we could get to do the survey - all inherent but (as you correctly point out) unknown biasses not with standing - believed to be the major issues.  The stated purpose is to use this, and the follow up, to convey what the principles might be useful to address the issues. Now as the issues are identified largely on this forum, then presenting this information is - it seems to me - a perfectly reasonable and legitimate thing to do.  So - thanks again for undersatnding and accepting that "within those parameters" it is "very useful".

Can I quote you? That's a joke..... but I guess you knew.
cheers
MikeC

[Balek-Vriege]

MikeC99 wrote...

THANK YOU!   Could not have said it better myself - sincerely!  As I assume from your reply you'd be only too aware, without the backing of a lot of resources, getting a 'representative' sample - either of the whole ME player population, or of the whole BSN population would be ... expensive. I think something like couple hundred dollars an an hour these days for contract survey design, implementation, analyses and write up. We have tried to be clear about the limitations, and about who exactly we thought we were surveying. But it was this - given our resources (= none apart from some 100 plus hours of time) - or nothing at all. If you can only tell a part of the story, show a part of the picture, do you decide not to tell or show any of it? Perfectly valid and much safer option - at least from the point of one type of risk. But the risk - do nothing - is pretty much absolute. Do nothing = nothing happens.

We choose to tell/ show what we could. We tried to set up a framework and report that showed what the people we could get to do the survey - all inherent but (as you correctly point out) unknown biasses not with standing - believed to be the major issues.  The stated purpose is to use this, and the follow up, to convey what the principles might be useful to address the issues. Now as the issues are identified largely on this forum, then presenting this information is - it seems to me - a perfectly reasonable and legitimate thing to do.  So - thanks again for undersatnding and accepting that "within those parameters" it is "very useful".

Can I quote you? That's a joke..... but I guess you knew.
cheers
MikeC

Hehe no problem.  I would also add this survey is also one of the most constructive things someone could put together in regards to this issue.  Like you say nothing changes if you don't try.  The more organized your thoughts, the more likely those on the other side of a issue will take notice.  A true scientific survey is impossible in my opinion (like really even for a professional survey group, how do you poll an international game fanbase?), but that doesn't mean a well thought out unscientifically scientific survey, done to the best humanly/economically possible by fans isn't helpful.

So again I have to give respect where respect is due.  Good job to all those involved.

[Degs29]

viperabyss wrote...

Wow, I'm surprised people actually didn't find the destruction of Mass Relay that bad.

If I recall correctly, that choice was in a category with other important problems.  I remember thinking "I want to rate the relay destruction higher, but these other two options are just so important".  I suppose that was the point of the final question.

[MikeC99]

Degs29 wrote...

viperabyss wrote...

Wow, I'm surprised people actually didn't find the destruction of Mass Relay that bad.

If I recall correctly, that choice was in a category with other important problems.  I remember thinking "I want to rate the relay destruction higher, but these other two options are just so important".  I suppose that was the point of the final question.

Correct. We used the final issue group questions - as an additonal analyses - to weight the other responses. But we are also aware that while the survey did what we wanted it to, in order to achieve - in one survey - the identification of the major issues, then some of the lesser issues would be 'corralled' - my very untechnical term. Basically not much room to move. The correlations also helped understand when this was happening and to what issues.

All of which brings me to: as part of the follow up, we'll be presenting things without the pre-determined groups. We don't want to repeat anything so it will be structured differently - anyway, please have a look when it's up - you will be able to register that issue in the way (hopefully!) you want to.
cheers
MikeC

[MikeC99]

Balek-Vriege wrote...

Hehe no problem.  I would also add this survey is also one of the most constructive things someone could put together in regards to this issue.  Like you say nothing changes if you don't try.  The more organized your thoughts, the more likely those on the other side of a issue will take notice.  A true scientific survey is impossible in my opinion (like really even for a professional survey group, how do you poll an international game fanbase?), but that doesn't mean a well thought out unscientifically scientific survey, done to the best humanly/economically possible by fans isn't helpful.

So again I have to give respect where respect is due.  Good job to all those involved.

Thank you again. And please stay tuned for the follow up - should be surfacing in about a week. Seriously need people who have a handle on the 'niceties' of statitics, samples etc etc to comment - negative or positive. In the end - whatever comes out needs to be as real as we can make it - even if the first seven pages of the report become caveats, riders, disclaimers etc etc!!!
cheers
MikeC

[ioannisdenton]

how about  :
BUMPed up kicks from foster the people?

[ioannisdenton]

courageous bump!!!

[ofish]

*bump*

[MikeC99]

Just keeping this floating back to the top - ego issues notwithstanding!!  Seriously though - we're hoping to get at least the same sort of numbers (great if there were more) to do follow up survey. Just to clarify - results of this survey stand on their own, but will feed into follow up. Final report will incorporate both. Why do it this way? So there's a reasonably transparent path from the collating the issues to determining the strength of the issues and then to principles for how to address those issues. Survey and report 1 (this one) was the collating and determining; the next step is to refine the determining and to get to the principles. We will supply report for this survey with the follow up so that it's clear how we got/stumbled/staggered/ crawled from red to gr... sorry - from A to B to C!
cheers
MikeC

[Murvel88]

Very impressive compilation of statistics, well done. I hope it works, but I fear BioWare will play their usual defence card again. "I choose you, Artistic Integrity!:wizard:". Keep fighting the good fight folks.

[MikeC99]

Murvel88 wrote...

Very impressive compilation of statistics, well done. I hope it works, but I fear BioWare will play their usual defence card again. "I choose you, Artistic Integrity!:wizard:". Keep fighting the good fight folks.

Many thanks - and you may well be right, but hunting buffalo with a kitchen fork is still better than sitting in the cave and starving to death.     .... I think!!
cheers
MIkeC

[MikeC99]

One more bump! At this stage it looks like we might get the follow up sooner than anticipated. Hoping for mid-week now. Sleep? Pah - who needs it! (Just got a 'Thank You!' note from Brazilian government - something about export of coffee beans, national economy, surplus ... can an individual be registered as a Global Consumer Consortium? Gee, who wudda thunk it?)

[Marty McMort]

Someone has a bit too much free time...

[ofish]

*bump*

[kegNeggs]

jeebus this is nicely done. send this in the mail to bioware, they ogtta read this

[DaosX]

You, sir, have way too much free time...

[Norrax]

good one OP

[Torxen]

Intensely long original post breaks my already screen-seared eyeballs... Agony ensues...

[Sazzle]

This is fab!

[Shawn Pickett]

Outstanding work, I hope it has an effect...