Aller au contenu

Photo

Why Bioware *cannot* change the ending.


510 réponses à ce sujet

#51
Amioran

Amioran
  • Members
  • 1 416 messages

XTR3M3 wrote...
@ Amioran
you cite "context". That is our problem with casper. he is out of context and doesn't follow the rest of the game context. He is an "out of the blue at the last second" NPC which is the very opposite of context. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree as I don't agree with your opinions and you don't agree with mine. I spoke my piece so I will let you onto your next debate.


I explained this in other threads and I don't want to enter there.

Very shortly: the SC is perfectly consistent with the context because the SC is perfectly consistent with the thematic behind the game, i.e. "chaos vs. order". If you would know the theme you would understand this.

But this thread is about all another thing. Let's leave alone the "bad writing"/"not bad writing" part.

In any case now the context it is the SC (also if you think it was not appropriate) so adding a "branch" would it mean creating another context that would be completely different and this in turn would mean that users that try both will understand what "bad writing" is really all about.

Modifié par Amioran, 30 avril 2012 - 07:31 .


#52
Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*

Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
  • Guests

Mike_Kerr wrote...

Why does everyone hate the ending? I thought it was just awesome.


Some don't like that they didn't have a "happy" ending. Others don't like that the ending is about Shepard and doesn't really feature your squadmates. Others don't like the Starchild's logic. Lots of reasons, some valid, some not. Just like anything, really.

#53
Amioran

Amioran
  • Members
  • 1 416 messages

Mike_Kerr wrote...

Why does everyone hate the ending? I thought it was just awesome.


Not everybody hates it and just for this changing the same would alienate those as you.

Also if I would consider the ending "bad writing" as many does here, I would still be tolerant versus those that like it and not pretend it to be changed (or viceversa, i.e. if the ending would be changed I would not pretend it to be restored, no matter what I can think about it). As an individual, however, this would be my choice and everybody can decide for themselves. An individual is not required to be tolerant vs. others point of views. For a company (as for a State) it is different.

Bioware, as a company, cannot do the same as an individual (i.e. decide on their whim), they HAVE to take care of everybody's opinions on a thing they already published. People are by now attached emotionally to the content (on way or another) so you have to consider of ALL of them.

A change could be done only on some non-arbirtary parameter, and opinion is not.

Modifié par Amioran, 30 avril 2012 - 07:33 .


#54
Amioran

Amioran
  • Members
  • 1 416 messages
Ok, have to go for a while.

Continue debating, I will reply to new questions when I return.

No flame wars, please.

#55
jtrook

jtrook
  • Members
  • 420 messages
The best way (I think) is to make and advertise it as an "alternate" ending. Those that like the current endings will feel no need to buy(download) it to enjoy their experience but if they wish to partake in it, they should be welcome. Also have NO achievements/trophies/whatever the PC to further state this is an alternate and not needed add-on. Kinda like Fable 3 black dye.

#56
MattFini

MattFini
  • Members
  • 3 571 messages
They can do whatever they want.

Because there's no precedent for it doesn't mean they couldn't man up and change their garbage endings.

The problem is they'd be admitting they were wrong, which would be a PR disaster and tank the game's market value.

#57
deatharmonic

deatharmonic
  • Members
  • 464 messages

Amioran wrote...

That's another thing. They did it BEFORE. This would be doing AFTER the product has shipped.

You can try something new before and fail, doing it after would be 100 times worser.

 

before, after, they still did it and its just as bad either side of production. I dont think it would factor into why they're not chaning the ending. The reasons are probably more pragmatic than that. Maybe the cost isn't worth the risk etc.


Amioran wrote... 

And anyway, apart this, it didn't seem to me that it did good to them doing so, isn't it? So you are actually proving my point.


seriously re-read this, it doesn't make sense. No idea what you're getting at there.

#58
xsdob

xsdob
  • Members
  • 8 575 messages
Was going to post until I saw how many people here were talking about artistic integrity, if so many posting here didn't even read the first paragraph than nothing resembling a thought out or meaning full debate or discussion can occur.

#59
abaris

abaris
  • Members
  • 1 860 messages

MattFini wrote...

They can do whatever they want.

Because there's no precedent for it doesn't mean they couldn't man up and change their garbage endings.

The problem is they'd be admitting they were wrong, which would be a PR disaster and tank the game's market value.


There is precedent.

But ultimately market research will determine if there's a significant change to the endings.

Alienating one or the other group ain't worth crap, art falls under the same category unless you consider green pictures of Benjamin Franklin art. Money talks, revenue or lack thereoff is all that matters.

And regardless what anyone says: Market research, based on a lot of data not available to the public is the only hard currency when it comes to corporate decisions.

#60
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 766 messages

Amioran wrote...

As I said, Bioware cannot. That would be like admitting that one part of the audience (those that don't like the ending) have an opinion that matters more than those that like it.
It would be like admitting one part of the audience better than the other. Morover this decision will be based on purely arbritary parameters; if there would be reliable and fool-proof statistics (admitting they would ever exists) of what kind of people like/dislike the ending, either if morally questionable, they could base the decision on some kind of basis (as for example if those that don't like the ending are of a certain kind of demographic, or they have an higher IQ or similar idiocies). It would be still completely inappropriate and bad, but as it is now it's even worse, because the decision would be done on completely arbitrary parameters, i.e. they would have to base who is "better" and who is "right" based only on the kind of opinon they have, a purely arbitrary decision, since opinion is purely subjective.


I'd argue that's exactly what it means. And it's very much true. Numbers matter. When Bioware chooses to listen to criticism that says "We hate exploration" they're ignoring their audience that loves exploration. That Bioware may not have a perfect method to determine whether or not this group is a majority does not change the fact that Bioware's method of decision-making has always resulted in one fan's opinion being ignored and another's favored.

Modifié par Il Divo, 30 avril 2012 - 08:23 .


#61
Pride Demon

Pride Demon
  • Members
  • 1 342 messages

Amioran wrote...

Now that the flaming is a little subsided and maybe we can start debating seriously about things, I decided to post this thread, that explains why Bioware cannot change the ending as it is.

(This post is NOT about "Artistic Integrity", nor it tries to propose another angle from which to see the current ending. It is only about common sense and logic and it goes beyond different opinions, so we can come to a consensus; you are more then welcome to post your replies and discuss what you think about this, and I will try to reply in detail to every concern etc. but please try to be civil and respectful or I will simply ignore you).

Bioware has shipped ME3. The game has been played by many, many people and it will continue to be played (no matter what) by many others to come. Many of these same people have already finished the game and have their opinions on it, whatever it is. Some don't like the ending, some like it, some hate it, some love it. It doesn't matter where the majority stands, there are different opinions on the same, as it's perfectly fine this to happen.

Now while some of you, as individuals, can also not care about the others' opinions and would like the story to end as you prefer, Bioware cannot do the same. You, as individuals, have all the right if you want to complain and either do what in your power to have Bioware listen to your opinion, also if this opinion goes against the one of the others in practice, but Bioware (as a company that has to care for ALL of its fans, and not just some of them) cannot.

As I said, Bioware cannot. That would be like admitting that one part of the audience (those that don't like the ending) have an opinion that matters more than those that like it. It would be like admitting one part of the audience better than the other. Morover this decision will be based on purely arbritary parameters; if there would be reliable and fool-proof statistics (admitting they would ever exists) of what kind of people like/dislike the ending, either if morally questionable, they could base the decision on some kind of basis (as for example if those that don't like the ending are of a certain kind of demographic, or they have an higher IQ or similar idiocies). It would be still completely inappropriate and bad, but as it is now it's even worse, because the decision would be done on completely arbitrary parameters, i.e. they would have to base who is "better" and who is "right" based only on the kind of opinon they have, a purely arbitrary decision, since opinion is purely subjective.

Either if the ending was really "badly written" (questionable, but whatever) this is not, by this point, anymore a plausible parameter (as explained before) on which to base the decision, because also if it is really so, some that now like the ending as it is are tied emotionally to the same, no matter what. Just like if you have a dog from an year and you then discover that it has a genetic disease, a dog breeder cannot propose to change the dog to you just because it has a problem;  you would obviously react not too well to the thing.

Given this, it is obvious that by this point Bioware cannot change the ending for purely objective motives. You, as an individual can also not show tolerance versus others, but Bioware has to consider all the users as having the same importance one another.

The only thing they can do to try to please those who don't like the ending is what they are doing, i.e. expand the ending there is already to provide more closure (a thing many are complaining about). Expecting something more would just mean that you pretend something that cannot happen, and not only for technical motivations (as it can be "artistic intergrity" or the fact that the ending has a theme behind that many don't know) but, primarily, just for the sake's and respect of the audience in its totality.

I will add another thing about this: also if this solution can seem the best of both worlds given what I said (and so a move of Bioware has done just for their personal end), this move is, in fact, anyway a gamble because it risks in any case to alienate some users that like the ending exactly as it is (without the full closure). So Bioware it is actually risking this to please a part of the audience, and this is not at all "not listening" because, if you think about it, it's always a risky move from their point of view. They can end up not pleasing nor one nor the other spectrums of the audience. So, please, consider what I say here. You insist they don't care but what they are doing shows the exact contrary.

To finish I want to reply in detail to some of the most used examples of "Changing the work it has been done before so there's nothing wrong with it" to let you see that the things are not exactly as you put them to be:


- Sherlock Holmes, Doyle: I usually laugh inside myself every time people quote this example because they are actually providing proof of the opposite point they are trying to make. Apart the fact that resurrecting a character is not properly the same thing as changing the ending (because the former ending remains the same, you just add to it; it is true that you indirectly change it but it is different than a direct change in the sense that you can decide if to go a route or the other) then Doyle was harshly criticized by critics and fellow artists for the inconsistency and for alienating a part of the audience in doing this. So much, in fact, that even today his name is not considered well by fellow writers just for what he did, and he is quoted many times just for the contrary evidence of what people want to prove it: i.e. of the BAD it happens when you alienate a part of your readers.

- Fallout 3: the ending has NOT changed as people want Bioware to change the ending of ME. It is just a sort of "expansion" as it can be the EC, because the outcomes are exactly the same, you get only to have some more decisions on them. The ending has not changed at all, the same things happens in their context, the difference is only on the execution of the same, nothing more.

- Alan Wake: same thing. While many people called the ending a cliff-hanger it has not changed. The authors just expanded on the same and provided more closure, just this. Nothing different than what's happening with the EC for Bioware.

- Great Expectations, Dickens: he never changed anything at all for the audience. The endings were already decided to be two.

A good post rising interesting points, however I'll point out I personally find the bolded underlined part to be contraddictory: You correctly say there are two lines of thought, one likes the ending, one doesn't, and that BioWare can't cave in to one side.
They can't change the ending because that would be like saying the ones that dislike are more correct than those that like, but you also have to consider that such a thing works both ways: following the same reasoning, keeping the ending as is, even if they explain it, is like saying that those that like are more correct that those that don't.

Given the situation you depicted, for BioWare it's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation...
I frankly hope the EC pays off and everyone can have what they want, but to avoid the situation entirely they probably should have released a optional DLC pack with more varied endings, you like it you keep it as is, you don't you buy the new DLC and get a new spectrum of endings in addition to the old ones...

That's, of course, just my opinion...

Modifié par Pride Demon, 30 avril 2012 - 08:11 .


#62
Eclipse merc

Eclipse merc
  • Members
  • 1 174 messages
Hey, get rid of the starchild and add blue children and i'm good.

#63
Agamoto

Agamoto
  • Members
  • 11 messages

Amioran wrote...

They would alienate it because the change would be based on a purely
arbitrary parameter, i.e. opinion. Either if an opinion has more
popularity than another, it still has no more importance just for this.
The 20% would take the thing as a total insult, because they would feel
their opinion inferior to others on absolutely no basis, because "more
people" it's not a basis for it to mean: "better".



except when you're trying to sell something, then more people are most definitely better. Alienating 20% of your customers is better than alienating 80% of your customers. (fairly obviously).


Amioran wrote...

Very shortly: the SC is perfectly consistent with the context because the SC is perfectly consistent with the thematic behind the game, i.e. "chaos vs. order". If you would know the theme you would understand this.


well, that's YOUR 'opinion' of the theme of the game. I never saw it that way.

Amioran wrote...

But this thread is about all another thing. Let's leave alone the "bad writing"/"not bad writing" part.


You can't leave it out. It's central to why people want the ending changed.

#64
XTR3M3

XTR3M3
  • Members
  • 1 066 messages
yea, I never saw the theme as "chaos vs order" just because starkid said it was. I discount almost everything the starkid said as an indoctrination attempt. I think the theme was probably closer to "individualism vs homogenization" or "organics vs machines". One thing that takes the whole starkid out of context is that I save the Geth and prove organics and machines can co-exist in spite of their differences and the game fails to address that at all. My Shep would have gone "BS! Legion, Tali and I proved you wrong!"

I agree with Agamoto that satisfying the most customers possible is very obvious. They won't win everyone back but there is what I believe is a large chunk of us that would be happy with an alternate ending without deus ex. the ending is so bad that buying DLC in the future would be pointless for us.

I also don't see how providing an alternate ending alienates customers that like the ending now. A true Mass Effect fan that is happy with the game as is won't be alienated by added content. They could always choose to not download it if the current ending "is just perfect for them".

Modifié par XTR3M3, 30 avril 2012 - 08:58 .


#65
chengda85

chengda85
  • Members
  • 191 messages
can someone please summarize this **** in 10 words or less

#66
CELL55

CELL55
  • Members
  • 915 messages

FJVP wrote...

My eyes are bleeding.

EDIT: You are ignoring the fact that if they do decide to change the ending it will have to be through DLC, so the people that already like the ending have the choice to simply not download the altered ending and keep the one they liked. It's not like bioware would force them to download the DLC just so they could play the game, so I don't see why people keep bringing up this "issue".


This. There's no reason to only add on to the existing endings and not have alternate or changed endings. If you don't like it, don't download it; you won't be penalized in anyway for not doing so.

#67
BouncyCaitian

BouncyCaitian
  • Members
  • 221 messages
And just what was so bad about the Trilogy premise anyway? Massive Omnicidal from beyond the Galaxy's Horizon come to kill everything and Everyone. Go make Friends and kill they Ass.

What was so hard about this to keep straight?

It has the feel of the Autre trying to get all 'meaningful' and 'thought-provoking', but ending up with a subplot straight out of a 90's Rob Liefeld comic in the level of Logic Involved. And artsy fools have pretty much destroyed science fiction with thier introspective twaddle

#68
luzburg

luzburg
  • Members
  • 949 messages

FJVP wrote...

My eyes are bleeding.

EDIT: You are ignoring the fact that if they do decide to change the ending it will have to be through DLC, so the people that already like the ending have the choice to simply not download the altered ending and keep the one they liked. It's not like bioware would force them to download the DLC just so they could play the game, so I don't see why people keep bringing up this "issue".


i agree and what about the new wicher 2 edition didnt that completly alter the begining and the end

#69
Agamoto

Agamoto
  • Members
  • 11 messages
Amioran appears to believe that opinions are not a valid basis for making decisions.

In his opinion , changing things on the basis of an opinion (even if it's a majority) would be wrong.
However, NOT changing things on the basis of an opinion (even if it's a minority) is the right thing to do.

At least that's what I understood.(Seems like Starchild logic to me, but there you go :innocent:

#70
CerberusCheerleader

CerberusCheerleader
  • Members
  • 59 messages

Amioran wrote...

tl;dr

Bioware cannot change the ending because this would ****** off the people who like the ending as it is, is that what you are saying? If it is than you are absolutly right. They wouldn't do that. Not going to happen.

BUT:
what they could do is to fork the last part of the game and provide a complete alternative to the current ending, so that you would have two endings (the current one and one that would actually make sense) which would be equally valid. I don't see how that would offend anyone (and they wouldn't even have to admitt that the current ending sucks). Everyone would win.

#71
XTR3M3

XTR3M3
  • Members
  • 1 066 messages

CerberusCheerleader wrote...

Amioran wrote...

tl;dr

Bioware cannot change the ending because this would ****** off the people who like the ending as it is, is that what you are saying? If it is than you are absolutly right. They wouldn't do that. Not going to happen.

BUT:
what they could do is to fork the last part of the game and provide a complete alternative to the current ending, so that you would have two endings (the current one and one that would actually make sense) which would be equally valid. I don't see how that would offend anyone (and they wouldn't even have to admitt that the current ending sucks). Everyone would win.

I said basically the same thing earlier and they went off on some "it would be out of context" tangent.

#72
SalsaDMA

SalsaDMA
  • Members
  • 2 512 messages

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

As is, as long as Bioware lets the game, and thus the entire trilogy, be so marred by the restricting noose of the dollar, I won't be part of their future customers.


abaris wrote...

But it's really simple.

If Bioware expects to lose money now or with future franchises, they will change the ending.
If not, they won't.

That's all there is to it. And I don't need the largest part of a page to get to that conclusion. It's all about corporate life after all. And lofty arguments don't count when it comes to economical expectations.

 

So I guess if Bioware caves and changes things just for the almighty dollar, you definitely won't be playing their games anymore? Interesting.


short term vs long term.

Quantity vs quality

They are trying to profit maximize by degrading the quality. In my case, this leads to me being disgusted by their business ethics, and not purchasing more of their products in the future.

Wether or not that means more or less money for them in the end depends solely on the amount of people willing to buy their products in the future compared to money they save on production by doing lesser quality products, and my personal decision in this regard is but just a small drop in that calculus.

#73
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 633 messages

CerberusCheerleader wrote...
BUT:
what they could do is to fork the last part of the game and provide a complete alternative to the current ending, so that you would have two endings (the current one and one that would actually make sense) which would be equally valid. I don't see how that would offend anyone (and they wouldn't even have to admitt that the current ending sucks). Everyone would win.


That's still inferior to the current plan for someone who isn't philosophically opposed to the current ending. If all you want is more clarity and so forth, then you're better off in this universe than in one where Bio forked the endings. Unless the EC and the forked ending would both exist.

Edit: your scheme still might be Pareto efficient, though.

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 avril 2012 - 10:20 .


#74
SalsaDMA

SalsaDMA
  • Members
  • 2 512 messages

Amioran wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

I disagree.


The point is: you disagree on what? You just replied to all another thing I wrote. Bah...

Person A: I like cheese:
Person B: I disagree; I hate lemons.

SalsaDMA wrote...
Just because there are some people that claim they like what you made, despite you knew it was atrociously bad (and let's be honest, if Bioware doesn't know how bad their ending was, they don't really deserver to be making games anymore, as they would have lost the touch then) then you have no integrity towards yourself. (there's that word.. I know...)


Also if they know the ending is bad, chaning it would still alienate some users that like it. It's totally irrelevant by now if the ending is well done or not on this point. I either written about this point in my post:

Either if the ending was really "badly written" (questionable, but whatever) this is not, by this point, anymore a plausible parameter (as explained before) on which to base the decision, because also if it is really so, some that now like the ending as it is are tied emotionally to the same, no matter what. Just like if you have a dog from an year and you then discover that it has a genetic disease, a dog breeder cannot propose to change the dog to you just because it has a problem; you would obviously react not too well to the thing.

Morover your "badly written" is based on purely subjective paramaters also if you would like the contrary. It has nothing of objective as I've already demonstrated many times proving that many of you simply don't know of what you are talking about in the majority of cases. You want to judge a narrative without having the instruments to do so, as in the fact that you lack completely the context of the same in the case of ME.

But I don't want to enter on this, so I will let this thing die here.


There are youtube videos detailing just why the ending is bad from an objective point of view using the tools of literature. Nothing subjective there.

#75
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 633 messages
Has anyone else had enough of people linking to YouTube videos rather than making their own arguments? Actually, SalsaDMA didn't even bother to do that much.