510 réponses à ce sujet

[CerberusCheerleader]

Amioran wrote...

CerberusCheerleader wrote...
What you are saying is that you couldn't possibly enjoy a SP dlc if its story arc was an alternative ending. Is that what you are saying?

Not exactly. I'm saying that it would the idea of it would not be accepted too well to begin with because it waste times and resources for something you disagree with from the start.

You can either learn to enjoy the story arc when it's done, because anyway they already wasted the time and you cannot do nothing about it anymore, but before it would appear a waste of time better spent for something you don't disagree so much with.

It would still be difficult (to enjoy it) because it would require a complete shift in the narrative at a certain point, and this will mean that those that will try both things will find absolutely no consistency between the two paths. For those that were already against the DLC arc to begin with, then, the prejudice will be strong, no matter what, and we know much too well from these forums how much prejudice can work against a result.

So, the only ones you can be sure will enjoy it and will not oppose it are, again, those that want the ending changed. The others will not like the idea to begin with and they will either probably not enjoy it when it's out. So, you see, we return to the same, primary, problem: on what parameter you can base a decision as this? Surely not solely on opinion.

I say it again with my own words: you would rather have a Retake Omega 4 dlc than an ending dlc, because you feel that you would, say, get 7/10 enjoyment from Omega 4 and only, say, 4/10 from a new ending.

Is that what you are saying? 

You also give some rationale (which I believe to be justifications rather than reasons) but if this is how you feel, than this is how you feel and it's not that this is completly unreasonable or anything.

BUT 
Here is an exercise for you:
1. Take a deep breath 
2. Go back to when you just finished ME3. You probably thought something like "well, that was unexpected and slightly weird, but kinda cool!". Next, you go to your favorite website and read that Bioware just announced a SP dlc, featuring a new alternative ending. What would have been your first reaction? Violent opposition? I don't think so. I think that stems from all the ending hatred you have experienced. Maybe you fear that people would gloat ("see, this is the real ending, what you still believe the other stupid ending, roflol idiot trololol")?

[SalsaDMA]

Amioran wrote...

For this day I've finished.

I will see tomorrow if to continue or not with this torture.

See you later.

You do realize people normally don't tell when they leave the forums to do other stuff, right?
They just do whatever they want to do in their life, and then occasionally, when the mood strikes them, pops over on the forums to see if anything interesting happened. You seem to advertise having... a different.... behaviour...

I am not sure I would even want to try and set myself into the mindset that makes claims and comments like yours.

Best of wishes to you in the future.

[translationninja]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Amioran wrote...

For this day I've finished.

I will see tomorrow if to continue or not with this torture.

See you later.

You do realize people normally don't tell when they leave the forums to do other stuff, right?
They just do whatever they want to do in their life, and then occasionally, when the mood strikes them, pops over on the forums to see if anything interesting happened. You seem to advertise having... a different.... behaviour...

I am not sure I would even want to try and set myself into the mindset that makes claims and comments like yours.

Best of wishes to you in the future.

Bad attention is better than no attention. This "notion" suggests that s/he is actually thinking people care. The nature of his/her posts suggests that they aim at getting a reaction, the nature of the reaction being secondary and getting one at all being the primary goal.


[PSSSST, I suggest attention-seeking behavior] 

[Tirigon]

Amioran wrote...

Ok, let's believe in your sincerity on the matter.

So, for example, if Bioware would decide tomorrow to make a DLC that make it possible to use swordplay as a sort of hack and slash you wil not have problems at all if they invest time on it instead of something you would like more?

So if at the time of DA:O they would have told you they were going to work on a DLC that added the possibility of changing the combat to the same as DA2 (that I know you don't like at all), that would have been perfectly fine for you either if it would have meant not working on something else you would have liked much more to have?

Both are more options. You can decide to not install the DLC and you can either decide to use it or not. I suppose the fact that they will lose time for things you clearly completely disagree with will make no difference for you, isn't it?

Why I cannot really believe this given the way many people reacted on much lesser "evil" things in the past about DLCs?

Lets ignore the example with swordsplay in ME, because I'd like that:D, and go on to the one with DAO:


It depends on how it is done.

IF they would release a patch that automatically makes the change and can not be avoided unless you never log in anymore, then I would be angry about it.

But if it is an optional DLC I can just ignore?
No way I would be angry about it. It doesnt harm me, and it might allow some people who found DAO combat boring to enjoy the awesome story. I couldnt understand their taste in gameplay, but I dont need to. It makes them happy and it doesnt hurt me in the process, so no harm done.


As for "preferring to make something that makes me happy".

Yea I admit I would prefer that.

But by that reasoning, BioWare should not have made this Warhammer MMO and their Star Wars game, and never have joined EA, and in fact not even have made ME2 and 3 the way they did but keep the gameplay of ME1.
If I could deal with that I sure as hell could deal with them making a DLC I dont like. Hell, most DLCs they made qualify as ones I dont like because I dislike the entire concept of DLC.

[abaris]

translationninja wrote...


Bad attention is better than no attention. This "notion" suggests that s/he is actually thinking people care. The nature of his/her posts suggests that they aim at getting a reaction, the nature of the reaction being secondary and getting one at all being the primary goal.


[PSSSST, I suggest attention-seeking behavior] 

If you outright tell him (I'm sure it's a him living in Europe, since it's bedtime) that you're not interested, he leaves you in peace.

He certainly lives on these boards, since I wouldn't even find the time to post all these walls of text and doesn't hold down a job or goes to school for that matter. Otherwise he couldn't spend a whole day sharing his wisdom.

[Tirigon]

translationninja wrote...

Bad attention is better than no attention. This "notion" suggests that s/he is actually thinking people care. The nature of his/her posts suggests that they aim at getting a reaction, the nature of the reaction being secondary and getting one at all being the primary goal.


[PSSSST, I suggest attention-seeking behavior] 

To be fair, posting on a forum is seeking attention by nature.

If you dont want people to react to your posts, why post at all?


And @ above: You realize there is a holiday right now, at least if Amioran (as you assume) lives in Europe?

1st of May, the "Day of Work", which ironically makes it a day where noone has to work and every politician turns into a commie for a day.

Modifié par Tirigon, 01 mai 2012 - 08:20 .

[Ianamus]

I do not see how changing the ending would alienate any customers. One of the most approved of suggestions was to simply add a final choice if you had a very high amount of readiness: The option to reject what the catalyst says and make your own ending.  This makes both sides happy because if you liked the other endings you can still chose them but if you wanted something more in tone with the rest of the game you had the option to. 

I also find the idea that players who really like the current endings with no closure will feel put off by the new DLC ludicrous. For one, I don't know anybody who actively prefers a complete lack of closure, and while there are probably a few they are likely a very, very small minority, and two- it's a DLC. If they like the endings as they are then they don't download it, there's no problem at all.

Modifié par EJ107, 01 mai 2012 - 08:23 .

[Michale_Jackson]

Any of you college students here if you ever rush a final term paper, just tell your professor that your work signified your artistic integrity.

[abaris]

Tirigon wrote...

1st of May, the "Day of Work", which ironically makes it a day where noone has to work and every politician turns into a commie for a day.

If his posting behaviour was a one off I would agree. But I'm observing his posting compulsion for quite some time now.

There are about three members on these boards I don't even bother to read, interestingly two of them share the same avatars.

And it's a holiday in my parts too, but I still find some other things to do than spending the whole day on these boards.

[NOD-INFORMER37]

EJ107 wrote...

I do not see how changing the ending would alienate any customers. One of the most approved of suggestions was to simply add a final choice if you had a very high amount of readiness: The option to reject what the catalyst says and make your own ending.  This makes both sides happy because if you liked the other endings you can still chose them but if you wanted something more in tone with the rest of the game you had the option to. 

I also find the idea that players who really like the current endings with no closure will feel put off by the new DLC ludicrous. For one, I don't know anybody who actively prefers a complete lack of closure, and while there are probably a few they are likely a very, very small minority, and two- it's a DLC. If they like the endings as they are then they don't download it, there's no problem at all.

I completely agree, if they make a proper ending DLC for what MANY of the fans have been asking for then its not like they're "taking away" from those who already do like the ending. I mean, it was implented with the game. Its not going anywhere lol, besides like you said a new ending would be DLC and completely optional. Unlike the current one. 
 

[TheRealJayDee]

Amioran wrote...

It's so stimulating debating with people of your intelligence, really.

I thought you simply were a pompous, condescending ******, until I read this. You really just want to entertain, do you not?!

I think I like you!

[Tirigon]

abaris wrote...


If his posting behaviour was a one off I would agree. But I'm observing his posting compulsion for quite some time now.

There are about three members on these boards I don't even bother to read, interestingly two of them share the same avatars.

And it's a holiday in my parts too, but I still find some other things to do than spending the whole day on these boards.

Would the other be, by any chance, called The_Razman (or something similar at least)?


And the third is, without a doubt, Chris Priestley:devil:

[Mass effect 2 forever]

Andhaira wrote...

This is why Bioware cannot change the ending:



They would have to redo everything.

I really like that chart.

My personal take is that. Quite simply. Thats correct, the reaper harvest is unneccesary and Bioware wanted to tell you this. Unfortunately, the reapers cannot be disuaded from this: they just aren't built that way and thus cannot think that way. Its like the three laws from I. Robot they're trapped in a circular logic to preserve organic life. Shephard cannot break that, he could have tried; but he would have failed. Even if the reapers think what they're doing is right it clearly is on a cold machine logic that cannot comprehend the complex moral choices made by EDI or the Geth. They see a process of evolution which can only end one way and need to stop it; to restore order to the galaxy. However, by introducing the catalyst they are provided (probably on accident) with a solution. That solution involves merging Shephard with the catalyst and putting his DNA into every org/syn. Remember, ever since ME2 the reapers have acknowledged that Shephard is in some way special and that his influence has allowed many of the resolutions between org/syn. By doing this the reapers get double insurance that they can avoid the risks of a singularity apocalypse. Again, Shephard does not have to agree with this as the renegade dialogue gives you the chance (paragon implies Shephard is tolerant enough to give a fair hearing). So in effect Shephard does convince the reapers to back down, BUT, he has to compromise with them; he can't make the argument which seems so obvious since they would reject it out of cold logic.We thus get an ending which is a tough choice, maybe even unneccesary and is WHY we get destruction/control if we believe synthesis is unneccesary.  .

But, and its a big but; Bioware didn't get this fact across very well. It was portrayed not as a dialogue in which Shephard realises he can't win the reapers around but as the starchild dictating to Shephard what must be done. It thus leads to the impression that the reapers are right. Which is not what Bioware ever wanted to convey; it wanted you to make up for yourself by selecting between control (why change whats not broken) and synthesis (you know what. You guys have a point. Lets try trans-humanism). Bioware wanted to avoid putting a philosophy upon you.

 In no way is this a defence. But just another example of how bioware mishandled the ending.

Modifié par Mass effect 2 forever, 01 mai 2012 - 09:22 .

[Tirigon]

Mass effect 2 forever wrote...

My personal take is that. Quite simply. Thats correct, the reaper harvest is unneccesary and Bioware wanted to tell you this. Unfortunately, the reapers cannot be disuaded from this: they just aren't built that way and thus cannot think that way.

You dont need to dissuade them when you could just blow them up.

[Mass effect 2 forever]

Tirigon wrote...

Mass effect 2 forever wrote...

My personal take is that. Quite simply. Thats correct, the reaper harvest is unneccesary and Bioware wanted to tell you this. Unfortunately, the reapers cannot be disuaded from this: they just aren't built that way and thus cannot think that way.

You dont need to dissuade them when you could just blow them up.

Killing the Geth, EDI and all of your relief fleet on those ships. A pretty grim thing to do. Given that Indoc theory is wrong those consequences do happen and suggest that in that case your shep believes the repaers HAVE to die. On low EMS they represent a grim choice thats your only option.

The real choice is control/synthesis. Do you, as a player believe in the inevitable conflict between organics and synthetics? Of course the reaper solution is wrong IMO and probably in Biowares as well. Notice that control is in blue for paragon which has always represented the more empathatic choice which stresses free will whilst synthesis is white to represent its moral greyness. However, if you take a mechanical view; trans-humanism really can be put forward as a viable thing and evidence can be provided in ME overall. You may have doubts about the Geth/Quarian or even EDI and perhaps think they aren't representative. Bioware wanted the ending to be open. But they mishandled it.

[Tirigon]

Mass effect 2 forever wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

Mass effect 2 forever wrote...

My personal take is that. Quite simply. Thats correct, the reaper harvest is unneccesary and Bioware wanted to tell you this. Unfortunately, the reapers cannot be disuaded from this: they just aren't built that way and thus cannot think that way.

You dont need to dissuade them when you could just blow them up.

Killing the Geth, EDI and all of your relief fleet on those ships. A pretty grim thing to do. Given that Indoc theory is wrong those consequences do happen and suggest that in that case your shep believes the repaers HAVE to die. On low EMS they represent a grim choice thats your only option.

The real choice is control/synthesis. Do you, as a player believe in the inevitable conflict between organics and synthetics? Of course the reaper solution is wrong IMO and probably in Biowares as well. Notice that control is in blue for paragon which has always represented the more empathatic choice which stresses free will whilst synthesis is white to represent its moral greyness. However, if you take a mechanical view; trans-humanism really can be put forward as a viable thing and evidence can be provided in ME overall. You may have doubts about the Geth/Quarian or even EDI and perhaps think they aren't representative. Bioware wanted the ending to be open. But they mishandled it.

No no no, that is not what I meant!

I meant "blow up" as in "put a gun at the starchild's head, pull the trigger, radio Anderson: "yo dawg, Crucible didnt work out, just blow those bastards to pieces with your guns".

[Mass effect 2 forever]

Hes the citadel. If you wanted to do that you'd need the Death Star and thats assuming he doesn't exist in other reapers and that they wouldn't carry on their directive. They didn't even need the citadel trap to invade the galaxy and nearly complete the cycle in ME3.

[Amioran]

abaris wrote...
He certainly lives on these boards, since I wouldn't even find the time to post all these walls of text and doesn't hold down a job or goes to school for that matter. Otherwise he couldn't spend a whole day sharing his wisdom.

Apart that it is holiday today here my job is one that I can do what I want with my time.

I decided to start a thread and reply the most I could and I'm trying to do it.

Naturally you can find some bad in it, as many always do, and pretend that's some psichological motivation or attention-seeking behaviour if you like, I will surely not stop you.

I've seen so many things by now that I'm not impressed by anything more at this point, especially for what it concerns twisting things to make them look as you want them to look.

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mai 2012 - 10:31 .

[Amioran]

abaris wrote...
And it's a holiday in my parts too, but I still find some other things to do than spending the whole day on these boards.

Usually also I do post sparingly, in fact I never did a thing as this before, but when I start a thing I prefer to do it in full or not starting it at all.

I have naturally something better to do, but this doesn't change the fact that in starting this thread I took a responsability and I am trying to keep it.

It all depends now if my initial intention can be kept or not. There are already at last 4 trolls spamming the thread and I have the feeling that everything will degenerate soon, so we will see. It also remains to be seen if my (limited) patience can stand being insulted by people I usually would neither minimally tolerate (given their IQ) in real life.

So it also depends if I get a ban either before the thread gets locked.

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mai 2012 - 10:17 .

[Amioran]

Tirigon wrote...
If I could deal with that I sure as hell could deal with them making a DLC I dont like. Hell, most DLCs they made qualify as ones I dont like because I dislike the entire concept of DLC.

Everybody can live with it, the problem is that you can be sure that a flame war will ensue if you do something a part of the audience think totally unmotivated (from their pow) and without a true motivation behind (as the reason being only following a part of the audience's opinion).

If people can do this for an ending they dislike (and that anyway it is motivated by the "vision" of the authors, no matter if you agree or disagree with it) do you imagine what it would happen for something that changes a product already existent and that you like as it is without no motivation whatsoever if not following an opinion that has the same value as yours and so couldn't be preferred to it?

It will no matter at all if it is "optional" or not. Just the fact that they lose time for a thing as that would make the apocalypse approach in anticipation.

I guess some can be tolerant about this, but seeing the way people behave generally I would not bet on the majority doing the same.

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mai 2012 - 10:18 .

[Dan Dark]

CerberusCheerleader wrote...

Amioran wrote...

CerberusCheerleader wrote...
What you are saying is that you couldn't possibly enjoy a SP dlc if its story arc was an alternative ending. Is that what you are saying?

Not exactly. I'm saying that it would the idea of it would not be accepted too well to begin with because it waste times and resources for something you disagree with from the start.

You can either learn to enjoy the story arc when it's done, because anyway they already wasted the time and you cannot do nothing about it anymore, but before it would appear a waste of time better spent for something you don't disagree so much with.

It would still be difficult (to enjoy it) because it would require a complete shift in the narrative at a certain point, and this will mean that those that will try both things will find absolutely no consistency between the two paths. For those that were already against the DLC arc to begin with, then, the prejudice will be strong, no matter what, and we know much too well from these forums how much prejudice can work against a result.

So, the only ones you can be sure will enjoy it and will not oppose it are, again, those that want the ending changed. The others will not like the idea to begin with and they will either probably not enjoy it when it's out. So, you see, we return to the same, primary, problem: on what parameter you can base a decision as this? Surely not solely on opinion.

I say it again with my own words: you would rather have a Retake Omega 4 dlc than an ending dlc, because you feel that you would, say, get 7/10 enjoyment from Omega 4 and only, say, 4/10 from a new ending.

Is that what you are saying? 

You also give some rationale (which I believe to be justifications rather than reasons) but if this is how you feel, than this is how you feel and it's not that this is completly unreasonable or anything.

BUT 
Here is an exercise for you:
1. Take a deep breath 
2. Go back to when you just finished ME3. You probably thought something like "well, that was unexpected and slightly weird, but kinda cool!". Next, you go to your favorite website and read that Bioware just announced a SP dlc, featuring a new alternative ending. What would have been your first reaction? Violent opposition? I don't think so. I think that stems from all the ending hatred you have experienced. Maybe you fear that people would gloat ("see, this is the real ending, what you still believe the other stupid ending, roflol idiot trololol")?

Thank you. I tried to say this this morning, but between getting ready for work, and trying to type on my phone, didn't really have much luck. Back home now, though, and on my PC... So, just throwing my two cents in again. Thank you for bringing this up again. Though I wonder if the OP will bother replying? He didn't have anything constructive to say when I brought this up: his response boiled down to "Since I don't like the idea of it, they should spend their time working on something else." Amusingly, in that same post he said something about being tolerant of others and whatnot... funny he'd have no grasp of the concept of compromise.

But, I digress. OP, suppose you do read this... here's another thought for you. It actually does not matter, at all, if you personally dislike the idea of changing the ending, or adding additional endings... because the content you would want them to work on is already on hold. BioWare is already dedicating time and effort to their so-called "Extended Cut" - everything else will be delayed because of it. Now, in light of that... since you will have to wait anyway, wouldn't it be better if they were to take maybe just a little bit longer, and actually produce a proper DLC, adding additional choices, so that everyone can get the conclusion they want?

[Amioran]

CerberusCheerleader wrote...
Is that what you are saying? 

In your words, yes.

But you are too much soft on it. I think it would happen a total revolt. It is not only about liking/not liking it, other more important things are tied to the thing, things that are already standing on an unstable equilibrium, as the opposite views on the ending.

You can be sure that when a fire exists you don't want to add fuel to it. For now those that like the ending keep quiet because they see no many motives to start a war with others (and they have no real motive to do so), but if something however would happen to make them feel not considered because the dislikers take all the attention (and they get also pleased with the result that those that like the ending get the bad end of the bargain just for this) then total war would ensue.

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mai 2012 - 10:29 .

[Tirigon]

Amioran wrote...


I guess some can be tolerant about this, but seeing the way people behave generally I would not bet on the majority doing the same.

But, considering the vast majority of people who want the ending changed or fixed, that is more a reason to change it rather than to leave it.

[Amioran]

Tirigon wrote...

Amioran wrote...


I guess some can be tolerant about this, but seeing the way people behave generally I would not bet on the majority doing the same.

But, considering the vast majority of people who want the ending changed or fixed, that is more a reason to change it rather than to leave it.

Again, your "majority" is based only on the vocality of the people. It is not said surely that it's really the majority. And also if it is, a minority can become easily a majority (in this unproved sense) if it becomes completely vocal and angry about a thing (as it has happened many times).

One motive why so many people complain about the ending is not only to be foundable on the fact that they dislike the ending in itself, but on the fact that they see others complain about it. This gives them reason to complain themselves. Probably if nobody else would complain many would not start to complain either.

It is human nature. A thing is starting a thing by yourself, another is aggregating to others doing the same.

The thing can happen also for the other point of view of the argument. Now they are silent but if there's a reason to start complaining and someone will do that you cannot anticipate what it will happen, just because you don't know (given that they are silent) how many they are.

They can be none, or very little, but they can be a little that becomes a lot or they can be the majority to start with (and that would be total chaos, then).

[Shadow Shep]

 I don't wan't them to completely change the ending primarily because I've already seen it.  It's already happened.  Sort of a "what has been seen, cannot be unseen" type of attitude.  That's just me personally of course.  

I also fall into (probably) an extreme minority who thought the ending was interesting, but there was not nearly enough explanation.  It was unfinished, but interesting.  

To me changing the ending completely just doesn't seem right.  It'd be like if a girl asked me if I thought she was fat, and I said yes.  She gets upset, so I say "No, no, no, I never said that".
This is all just my own feeling on the issue, I know a lot of people disagree, so it would be nice for them to have the option of a completely different ending altogether. 

Modifié par DJCubed, 01 mai 2012 - 10:55 .