510 réponses à ce sujet

[abaris]

Mass effect 2 forever wrote...

Most simply try to ignore the issues.

Many don't care one way or the other.

They're just in for the action and that's the same with every game.

Truth is, I've yet to find any (international) board where the pro enders would have been vocal. You usually find just a handful.

[SalsaDMA]

MrMcDoll wrote...

It's not just the DEUS EX that's a concern, but the DEUS EX riding on a MC GUFFIN straight out of DEUS EX and DEUS EX HR!!!

Don't forget "Deus Ex 2:Invisible war". I know alot of people try to ignore it existed, by it did...

[Mass effect 2 forever]

abaris wrote...

Mass effect 2 forever wrote...

Most simply try to ignore the issues.

Many don't care one way or the other.

They're just in for the action and that's the same with every game.

Truth is, I've yet to find any (international) board where the pro enders would have been vocal. You usually find just a handful.

True, but i really do think that an AI style ending was the wrong decision to make and struck a lot of casual gamers as WTF. Also, plot holes and lack of an epilogue are immediately obvious. That was my first impression and requires no further thought.

[Tallin Harperson]

The problem I see with the OP is this: it's not going to be the people that like the original ending that cry out (presuming an optional DLC and not a required "patch"), they can just stick with the ending they like. It's the people that still don't like the ending who cry out even louder and longer than the current group, because they have the validation that if they cry loud enough the ending WILL change.

[Kajan451]

[quote]Amioran wrote...

[quote]Kajan451 wrote...
I seriously would like to meet a person that actually loves that ending. Actually i extend it and say i actually want to meet someone that did like it.[/quote]

There are many also in this forums. They usually don't talk (because it is a waste in their opinion) but there are many and in those many there are some that literally love the ending.[/quote]

I haven't seen any that didn't seem like they just wanted to incite people or Trollbait them. And from a purely asthetic point of view, i fail to comprehend how people actually manage to play all 3 games and still say the endings fit the rest of the games.

Its like looking at a drawing by numbers and claiming it to have aestetic value. (I probably skewered that last one, but english isn't my first language and i am to lazy to look it up)



[quote]Amioran wrote...

Technical advancements (and the likeness of doing them or not) are based on non-arbirtary parameters. They are not solely on opinions.[/quote]

Actually it has nothing todo with Technical Advancements. Techology might have advanced but that wasn't forcing Bioware to use "top notch" graphics.

Success by games like StarCraft, World of Warcraft and even Minecraft (odd, i never noticed they all end with craft) already demonstrates that a game doesn't have to be at the pinacle of their Technology to be successful. As such Bioware choose to advance their technology on their opinion. There was nothing that forced them to upgrade. ME1 was a good looking game, still actually is able to stand up to some of the modern games. Personally i don't, although i admit i am not having the eye for it, see much differance between a game like Rage and ME1, except for some Shadows being glitchy in ME1.

There was no reason to upgrade the Specs or the Technology, other than opinion. In this case, the lead designers opinion.


[quote]Amioran wrote...


[quote]Kajan451 wrote...
And yet, they did. They went ahead and decided that some fans (those with high enough system specs) are more preferably than those that didn't make the cut.[/quote]

It is not a matter of opinion. There are some parameters behind this choice (that I'm sure you can understand). It was not something having to do only with opinion of certain people vs. opinon of certain others.[/quote]

You are basically saying nothing here. There are some parameters behind the choice? Well yeah, there are some parameters behind changing the Endings as well.

Are you just hoping to confuse and deflect your discussion partners by putting up a wall of words you hope they won't catch up on?




[quote]Amioran wrote...


[quote]Kajan451 wrote...
Honestly, your hole reasoning is bull.[/quote]

All the examples you provided are NOT based solely on opinion. If you want to prove a point wrong you cannot use an argument that has nothing to do with it do so such.[/quote]

Neither is the decision to change the Ending or not. Changing the ending, or not, is a marketing decision. Not more, not less. Just like it was a marketing decision to change the Game Mechanics and Upgrade the Game Engine.

Changing the ending in order to maintain customers and creating positive PR after receiving negative PR thanks to publicity stunts and such, is also not solely based on opinion.

Nothing they did, is solely opinion and changing the ending isn't solely opinion as well. There have been numberous posts, even whole youtube videos detailing errors in the storytelling, outlining plotholes and outright calling out Bioware on their sales scam.



[quote]Amioran wrote...



[quote]Kajan451 wrote...
I am a writer and i don't know anyone that thinks badly about Doyle. Actually Doyle is rather revered as the creator of Sherlok Holmes...[/quote]

Go in an artistic circle.[/quote]

I am part of my local writing circle and my work leads me in frequent contact with critics. As i said... i don't know anyone. And as far as i am concerned, this is a "lets agree to disagree" thing. Different circles develop different opinions. Just because my circle doesn't eshew Doyle doesn't mean there aren't any circles and critics that do.

After all... there are even people living on this earth who deny Evolution, who am i to judge who is right? Each to their own.

 [quote]Amioran wrote... 

[quote]Kajan451 wrote...
In the Original story O, the female protagonist, seeks permission to kill herself. Her Master grants her said permission because he grew tired of her. This ending was later changed / removed and 15 years after countless inquiries about how the story would end or rather how it shouldn't end that way, they released a new ending / addition, which is the ending you find in todays prints.[/quote]

Excuse me but your point is?

It was not changed for the audience.[/quote]

It was changed on demand by the audience. There weren't no internet forums and such, but the ending was changed due to people asking for it to be changed. Asking for a "happy" ending or at least for one where she doesn't end up killing herself.


Though, by your reply and the ones i have seen you giving since my post, i think one thing becomes clear. You are not interested in a discussion. You invalidate any opinion that doesn't agree with yours and you reject any argument that could endanger your opinion. I don't see much reason to continue it past this point.

[dmonorato]

The entire point of this post is kinda mute, they have stated several times they are NOT changing the endings, just adding sprinkles to the crap we already got. Should they change the endings, I personally think they should, so that we can get what was actually promised.

Because unless the "clarification" DLC they are working on is the second coming explaining the "ending" we were given, all holy hell is gonna break out on these forums once again. Also considering the the huge reputation hits Bioware has taken over ME3 and SWTOR I really don't think they can take another fiasco like that again.

[SalsaDMA]

Atakuma wrote...

Battlepope190 wrote...

They can and they will if they know what's good for business.

Except that they aren't and have repeatedly said that they wont. I'm pretty sure they have a better Idea of their own business than you do.

I'm sure some people thought Bullfrog, Origin and all the other companies EA ate up "had a better idea" too...

[Amioran]

BobSmith101 wrote...
Jist of it is this. The OP feels he has some sort of expertise that makes his opinion more important than anyone elses.

Not for the original post. There's nothing in it that requires expertise to understand. It is just common sense and logic.

Maybe you can think about this when I talk about what many here consider "bad writing" is not really such, but that's another thing.

But maybe I'm just losing time, I know, because people here are so biased that they just want to look at what I write in a certain way and a way only. They many times neither care to read (and I recognize when this happens perfectly).

You are yet another one of those that always like to pretend you are right but you never explain why that's so. And then you hafe either the arrogance of calling me "condescending". I explain everything in detail, point for point. Oh well, what can I do about it? Nothing, so feel free to continue acting this way.

Example: I made you a detailed post about the Faust to reply to one of your points about "plagiarizing". Didn't seem you replied to it and it didn't seem that there was something you could find "false" about it. But I know, it's much easier to just ignore things that prove what you say completely wrong, instead of considering them and admitting that maybe what you say can also not be correct.

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mai 2012 - 05:41 .

[Tallin Harperson]

dmonorato wrote...

The entire point of this post is kinda mute...

It's moot. Moot, moot, moot, moot, MOOT!

Sorry, kind of a pet peeve of mine. Yes, "moot" is actually a word, and it's the one you meant to use. Please don't feel like I'm attacking you personally as it is actually a common mistake and nothing to be ashamed of unless you keep using it even when you know differently. "Mute" is a common word, while "moot" is not.

[Amioran]

CerberusCheerleader wrote...

Out of curiosity: I have difficulties extracting what the OP is getting at from what he is writing (I'm no native speaker). Are there Americans here? Am I the only one finding that difficult?

It means that changing the ending now would be going against the will of a part of the audience for not motive whatsoever, because the motives for doing such are only based on arbitrary parameters (as opinion).

This in very little words.

[Tirigon]

Amioran wrote...
I replied to this already, but I will reply the same from another angle.

I make you an example: if Bioware was going to insert an option you absolutely care nothing about and on the contrary you find completely wrong and stupid in your opinion, it would be fine for you that they would lose time to add it while they could, with that same time, make something completely different and that you like or that at last you could?

Reply sincerely. Again, we come to the "tolerance" point. The fact is, many of those that don't like the ending are not tolerant vs. the others that like it, but this is the same also for the other end. An individual cares most, usually, to his/her other end of the bargain. And since those people are not more important than you, they have the same weight for what it concerns the choice of Bioware on the matter.

As a matter of fact, yes I would want them to implement it.

A roleplaying game lives off choices; EVERY choice improves my game, even if I would never take it because I see it as wrong.

An example from the (imo) best BioWare game, Dragon Age Origins, can be found below.

Having more options doesnt hurt me either. By your logic, I could demand that BioWare remove the Renegade path from the game because I think it is wrong and prefer Paragon.
However, you playing Renegade (if you do at all, but that is irrelevant) does not make my Paragon path any less valid. In fact, it even makes my way more distinct because it is an active choice rather than watching a script play out.


And similary, if BioWare were to add another, 4th, option at the end, this would not make those who liked the endings inferior. In fact, it would IMPROVE their games because they could make the choice they think best because they WANT to rather than because they have no other way.

(Warning, DAO spoilers ahead)










In DAO, Loghain took actions that many, me included, saw as treason and we agreed with Alistar  that he deserves to be executed as a traitor for these deeds.
Towards the end of the game, in the Landsmeet, Alistar and Loghain confront, and it falls to us, the player, to decide their fate: We can let Alistar kill the traitor, or we can spare him and make him a warden. If we choose the latter, we may even have Alistar executed to make Anora uncontested ruler.

Personally, I found this a cruel, unnecessary, and wrong thing and thus never did it. However, the mere CHANCE to do so made my own course of action, killing Loghain and instituting listar as king, much more meaningful.

If it had been the only, predetermined, course, it would have not changed my game at all.

HOWEVER, it would still have weakened the impact because it would not have been my choice but those of others.

[abaris]

Tallin Harperson wrote...

dmonorato wrote...

The entire point of this post is kinda mute...

It's moot. Moot, moot, moot, moot, MOOT!

Thanks for clarifying.

I'm not a native speaker and always stop short of that particular word because I never know how to spell it correctly.

[AkiKishi]

Amioran wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Jist of it is this. The OP feels he has some sort of expertise that makes his opinion more important than anyone elses.

Not for the original post. There's nothing in it that requires expertise to understand. It is just common sense and logic.

Maybe you can think about this when I talk about what many here consider "bad writing" is not really such, but that's another thing.

But maybe I'm just losing time, I know, because people here are so biased that they just want to look at what I write in a certain way and a way only. They many times neither care to read (and I recognize when this happens perfectly).

You are yet another one of those that always like to pretend you are right but you never explain why that's so. And then you hafe either the arrogance of calling me "condescending". I explain everything in detail, point for point. Oh well, what can I do about it? Nothing, so feel free to continue acting this way.

Example: I made you a detailed post about the Faust to reply to one of your points about "plagiarizing". Didn't seem you replied to it and it didn't seem that there was something you could find "false" about it. But I know, it's much easier to just ignore things that prove what you say completely wrong, instead of considering them and admitting that maybe what you say can also not be correct.

You obviously feel this place is more important than I do. Opinions are never wrong, this is why they are opinions. One individuals opinion is no more important than anothers.

You want to win ? It's easy just post a wall of text or do multi quoting. I can't be arsed to deal with that stuff, not worth my time.

[translationninja]

I am part of my local writing circle and my work leads me in frequent contact with critics. As i said... i don't know anyone. And as far as i am concerned, this is a "lets agree to disagree" thing. Different circles develop different opinions. Just because my circle doesn't eshew Doyle doesn't mean there aren't any circles and critics that do.

After all... there are even people living on this earth who deny Evolution, who am i to judge who is right? Each to their own.

Are you even aware of how condescending you really are, or is this a language barrier problem maybe?

This is what you are saying:

In my circle, Doyle (the man knighted for his writing and one of the most influential writers in everything crime) is blah, but hey, who am I to judge? Of course others may not detest him, but hey, of course there are also people that deny evolution.

Are you even remotely aware that linguistically, you have just likened literary critics that do not detest Doyle like your precious circle are equal to to bigotted zealots that insist against all scientific evidence that evolution exists?????

Either you have problems with the English language or you are A REAL TROLL man.

[Tallin Harperson]

translationninja wrote...

Are you even remotely aware that linguistically, you have just likened literary critics that do not detest Doyle like your precious circle are equal to to bigotted zealots that insist against all scientific evidence that evolution exists?????

Either you have problems with the English language or you are A REAL TROLL man.

Hmm... do you know that the people who believed in a geocentric universe had calculations which explained most -- if not all -- of the observations made about the extraplanetary phenomena? Just because something is seemingly explained doesn't mean there are not alternate explanations that work better. If there are people that want to look at alternatives to evolution I'm fine with that, and I'll listen if they have a good explanation that is better than our current conception. If you dismiss them all as "bigotted zealots" then you are no better than they are. Personally, I don't work under the assumption that we have the best explanation for everything, and doing so only leads to stagnation...

Modifié par Tallin Harperson, 01 mai 2012 - 06:02 .

[translationninja]

Tallin Harperson wrote...

translationninja wrote...

Are you even remotely aware that linguistically, you have just likened literary critics that do not detest Doyle like your precious circle are equal to to bigotted zealots that insist against all scientific evidence that evolution exists?????

Either you have problems with the English language or you are A REAL TROLL man.

Hmm... do you know that the people who believed in a geocentric universe had calculations which explained most -- if not all -- of the observations made about the extraplanetary phenomena? Just because something is seemingly explained doesn't mean there are not alternate explanations that work better. If there are people that want to look at alternatives to evolution I'm fine with that, and I'll listen if they have a good explanation that is better than our current conception. If you dismiss them all as "bigotted zealots" then you are no better than they are. Personally, I don't work under the assumption that we have the best explanation for everything, and doing so only leads to stagnation...

Good point, however, I very strongly doubt  that this is the type of possibility OP was trying to point out with his post, donchu think? Pretty sure he meant those other guys.

As for evolution, based on your insinuation I'd strongly suggest Richard Dawkins - The Blind Watchmaker.

Lets not derail the derailed thread though

[MDT1]

Amioran wrote...

CerberusCheerleader wrote...

Out of curiosity: I have difficulties extracting what the OP is getting at from what he is writing (I'm no native speaker). Are there Americans here? Am I the only one finding that difficult?

It means that changing the ending now would be going against the will of a part of the audience for not motive whatsoever, because the motives for doing such are only based on arbitrary parameters (as opinion).

This in very little words.

I just don't see any arguments in you post.

First it makes no sense to decline a change just because a part of the affected people is against it, as you will with any decision find affected people that don't like it. There might be good reasons to decline something, but "I found someone who doesn't like the change" never was one.

And of course they have motives. They will chose the option that will promise the most expected revenue for the timeframe the executive board optimizes their revenues for (short term, long term etc.) based on the data they actually have (Sales numbers the data origin and the game itself collects and others). 
With the data they collected for the first 3 (?) weeks after release they came to the decission that EC would be sufficiant. They already change the ending they wanted to present. Sure, its the stame plot hole infested story but they add parts to it they didn't deem neccessary in their original "artistic vision" because its just about making money after all.

[HiddenKING]

BobSmith101 wrote...

HiddenKING wrote...

Reason why they can't change the endin, is that the endin provides the backdrop for whatever comes next in the Mass Effect Universe.

The endin provides an effective reset of the Universe, it also sets a new story based around exploration and colonization. It also removes itself from Shepard and the rest of the Normandy Crew. Add to that the now fragile state of Galactic Civilization.

No.

If they want to continue ME now, they will have no choice but to pick a canon ending, which makes the whole multiple endings pointless anyway.

Irrelevant. 

Regardless of which ending you get. The Mass Relays are destroyed, Normandy and it's crew land on a unknown planet (a new eden if you believe the stories), and to that the fact that the Batarians are now refugees, Turians and Asari lost their worlds.

Reconstruction will be first priority, gather the brightest minds in the galaxy, say everyone that worked in the Crucible project. This means new technology. 

Some worlds are now devastated. Which means they will need to explore, discover, and colonize new planets and systems.

[Tirigon]

Tallin Harperson wrote...


Hmm... do you know that the people who believed in a geocentric universe had calculations which explained most -- if not all -- of the observations made about the extraplanetary phenomena? Just because something is seemingly explained doesn't mean there are not alternate explanations that work better. If there are people that want to look at alternatives to evolution I'm fine with that, and I'll listen if they have a good explanation that is better than our current conception. If you dismiss them all as "bigotted zealots" then you are no better than they are. Personally, I don't work under the assumption that we have the best explanation for everything, and doing so only leads to stagnation...

Do you know that I have a calculation that proves that women are evil?

And another that proves that 1 = 0?


Yea that's how much I give for faulty calculations.

[Doctor Uburian]

Amioran wrote...

CerberusCheerleader wrote...

Out of curiosity: I have difficulties extracting what the OP is getting at from what he is writing (I'm no native speaker). Are there Americans here? Am I the only one finding that difficult?

It means that changing the ending now would be going against the will of a part of the audience for not motive whatsoever, because the motives for doing such are only based on arbitrary parameters (as opinion).

This in very little words.

The actual endings went against the will of a masive number of fans when they where created. They broken lots of promises and REAL artistic integrity on the process, and now they should not change them to what they should have really been?

[AkiKishi]

HiddenKING wrote...
Irrelevant. 

Regardless of which ending you get. The Mass Relays are destroyed, Normandy and it's crew land on a unknown planet (a new eden if you believe the stories), and to that the fact that the Batarians are now refugees, Turians and Asari lost their worlds.

Reconstruction will be first priority, gather the brightest minds in the galaxy, say everyone that worked in the Crucible project. This means new technology. 

Some worlds are now devastated. Which means they will need to explore, discover, and colonize new planets and systems.

And which ending you got will change all of those things.

[Amioran]

Kajan451 wrote...
There was no reason to upgrade the Specs or the Technology, other than opinion. In this case, the lead designers opinion.

There's a reason, it is called progress. You saw no reason on chaning ME1 graphically, but there was. If they didn't now we would have a 2012 game with the graphic of one of 2007. Actually Bioware get always criticized because they are not very advanced from the graphical standpoint, so I find it kind of amusing to see one that complains for the exact contrary.

Kajan451 wrote...
You are basically saying nothing here. There are some parameters behind the choice? Well yeah, there are some parameters behind changing the Endings as well.

Which ones? Opinion? Sorry but that's an arbirtary parameter that's a differnt thing.

Kajan451 wrote...
Are you just hoping to confuse and deflect your discussion partners by putting up a wall of words you hope they won't catch up on?

OMG, either another one that accuse me of doing something he is doing himself. You don't mind at all to read what I write (as in the case of ARBITRARY MOTIVATION vs. NON-ARBITRARY MOTIVATON) and then you say I want to deflect the discussion. Bah.

Kajan451 wrote...
Neither is the decision to change the Ending or not. Changing the ending, or not, is a marketing decision. Not more, not less. Just like it was a marketing decision to change the Game Mechanics and Upgrade the Game Engine.

You cannot make a marketing decision based on parameters that are not known. In this case nobody can know what is the perecentual of people that like and dislike the ending.

The only thing that remains is basing the decision on the opinion of some in confront to others.

Kajan451 wrote...
Nothing they did, is solely opinion and changing the ending isn't solely opinion as well. There have been numberous posts, even whole youtube videos detailing errors in the storytelling, outlining plotholes and outright calling out Bioware on their sales scam.

Apart that YouTube videos prove nothing at all (as I said, they are made by people that know nothing of the context of the narrative, but whatever) a narrative (as whatever other form of art) is made not only by objective parameters but also by subejctive ones.

You cannot say to someone: "you are wrong to like that thing" if that thing has also subjective parameters in it.

Kajan451 wrote...
I am part of my local writing circle and my work leads me in frequent contact with critics. As i said... i don't know anyone. And as far as i am concerned, this is a "lets agree to disagree" thing. Different circles develop different opinions. Just because my circle doesn't eshew Doyle doesn't mean there aren't any circles and critics that do.

Then you can do a research on Doyle and see if what I say is wrong or not. You will see that it is as I say. He was harshly criticized at the time and he is not considered academically as well as many other.

Kajan451 wrote...
It was changed on demand by the audience. There weren't no internet forums and such, but the ending was changed due to people asking for it to be changed. Asking for a "happy" ending or at least for one where she doesn't end up killing herself.

I never heard a thing as this. I will inform myself better. It seems very strange to me that DeSade changed something for the audience. And if he did there's something more to it surely.

Kajan451 wrote...
Though, by your reply and the ones i have seen you giving since my post, i think one thing becomes clear. You are not interested in a discussion. You invalidate any opinion that doesn't agree with yours and you reject any argument that could endanger your opinion. I don't see much reason to continue it past this point.

I reject the arguments that are based on nothing. If you propone something of concrete (as in the case of the above Emmanuelle) I have no problems on being interested in them.

What would you like me to do, that I would say to you that you are right when you are obviously not just to make you happy?

Now at last you have a point in your favor, but before you completely disregarded the difference between abritrary and non abitrary and made senseless examples. I should bow to you just for nothing?

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mai 2012 - 06:13 .