510 réponses à ce sujet

[Amioran]

MrMcDoll wrote...

Why do you keep going on about changes based on feedback from consumers not being the same when applied as patches and dlc vs between games?

Because they have different parameters to take in consideration.

MrMcDoll wrote...
So what you're saying if I'm reading your posts correctly is that they can change the design goals to suit feedback for a sequel, but they shouldn't change anything to do with a current game?

Naturally they can if they think it's appropriate, but the decision is usually done, in that case, on some basis, not arbitrary motives as they can be different opinions.

MrMcDoll wrote...
That would be like saying that toyota shouldn't ever make a facelift model of the same chassis coded car. Eg. 1990-1994 SW20 MR-2s vs 1994-1998 SW20 MR-2s. The chassis was the same, they just fixed shortcomings and improved on original designs based on customer demand and prior feedback, they VASTLY improved on the previous model.

Completely unappropriate example. The improved original design could be based on some objective parameters, as technical ones, it was not a matter of only opinion.

Where are the objective parameters here? That the ending is bad? For whom? Those that say so are to be taken more in consideration than others? Why?

Morover a new model is a different product in itself, people having the "old" model will not have the chassis changed. Your example completely contradicts what you are trying to prove.

MrMcDoll wrote...
If they can release a NEW alternative ending because of the massive fan outcry over the endings then i'm sure people who are happy with the ending can just NOT buy/DL it.

This doesn't change the fact that a move as that would imply that Bioware preferred the other point of view both to their own and both to the one of the same product as it was intended to begin with.

Also if you can decide to not use the DLC this fact doesn't change. Bioware changed a product (or released an addicton to change the same) based purely on opinion of some people (that you can't either know if it's really the majority or not, or have other similar non-abritrary parameters to base the decision upon). That's completely arbirtary.

MrMcDoll wrote...
By your logic - that is to say that they'd be modifying a FINISHED product due to a group of customers wishes - then shouldn't they NOT offer any other kind of post sale DLC?
Cos What about those people who don't want ANY DLC? You'd be favouring the fans that wanted extra MP maps, Side quests or what have you, over them!!

Completely different. I understand that you want to have a point, but please, at last think a little more about what you are going to write before posting.

Just a little pondering would have made you understand, without me doing so for you, the difference in the two things.

In a case of a DLC that adds things people would not like to have added, the change can be made in conformity with non-arbirtary parameters as they can be technical ones (or either, in this case yes, popular opinion because you can clearly have a conclusion that more maps are a thing that the majority would like) and in any case that would be a decision made in conformity with what the producer has in mind and probably had in mind from beginning.

In the case of a change to a product already released in a certain way doing a change (not in general terms but in the specific ones we are debating here) would go both against the original product itself (as the authors intended it) and both against the opinons of those that like it as it is. The decision is so based on a completely shifted (on the part of those that want the change) action for an unique point of view, and with all arbitrary parameters behind the same.

If you add a patch, for example, that change some gameplay and you, as an  user, don't like the changes (it can happen) then at last you can come to understand the motivations behind the same change. In this case you cannot because the motivations would be purely arbitrary (in the way you want them to be made).

It just stands, at the end on "we pretend it changed and so it mus be it", and nothing more. You can also not have tolerance of others' opinions (as an user), but to ask the same from Bioware is total folly.

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mai 2012 - 10:44 .

[Il Divo]

Amioran wrote...

That's a different concept. You can base the choice of removing exploration on non-arbitrary motivations, as the fact that they were objectively not well done technically (that's a different thing than having an opinion or the "objective parameters" people pretend are there on why ME ending is bad) and anyway they didn't remove the exploration from the first game, but after.

Which wouldn't make any difference to those who have been alienated. You were the one who introduced the concept of Bioware choosing some fans over others. Conceptually, it's a pointless criticism since Bioware cannot choose fan X without pissing off fan Y. Every choice Bioware makes is with the intention of maintaining a certain level of customer satisfaction.

For another title you can change things without alieanating the audience in the same way as if you change somenthing already existent that you remove/alter. They have two separate repercussions.

Not likely. Go see all the fans who were pissed about the removal of exploration of ME2.

A product before being being published is exclusively of the authors in the pure emotional content, when it gets published the thing changes.

See above. The pure emotional state did not stop the developer from realizing that someone was not going to be happy with their current decision. Bioware already made the decision to choose one fan over another, arbitrarily. Whether they did it for financial reasons, personal reasons, etc, is irrelevant.

Modifié par Il Divo, 01 mai 2012 - 10:49 .

[OlympusMons423]

I agree that the flaming part of all this kind of leads nowhere. I get why so many do want to flame out of frustration but it is much better to debate it reasonably in some cases. I won;t go on tooo much here because...well, my brain hurts.

Its mentioned that some people loved this ending. I would be curious to meet who these people are, seriously. I just can not see anyone honestly liking this ending as is, especially if they played this series from ME1 to now.

Changing the as-is ending might upset these 100 or so people (and I think I'm being generous with that number here) who wanted it just as it is, but it would be the right or smart thing to do for the vast..."VAST" majority of people who hate this ending. The rest maybe don't care either way, or were given little choice to care much about the ending either way. Changing the horrendous ending would at most just get us another luke warm response.

Yes, no matter what they did, there would always be someone who would not be pleased, but in general it is the logical, truly artistic, creative things to do....This game still gets played a lot but mostly because of the multiplayer I think. That is rather sad, even though the multi player is kind of fun. This game would not be where it is without the one player game. Lets not forget the soul of the matter here like some executive over at EA might do with some numbers game.

As for there being nothing that can be done.... as a somewhat creative driven person, I don't agree with this. Actually being in hot water as they are its kind of exciting thinking of ways of how to turn it all around. Maybe its not likely to happen, but for sure the ending could be written around and corrected/transformed into something better in future downloads.

The ending was a let down. Again find me these so called people who honestly loved it as it is, and then lets stand them all side by side with the ones who hated or disliked it. I made this point before in another post but.... if you took your favorite song and at some point in it the lead guitarist started playing 2 or 3 bars in such an obvious wrong key.... just what would you walk away with after listening to it? Some might state correctly that 99% of that song was played in the right key, but that is just not how it works. IMO BioWare should not be taking comfort in those who can live with a few bars played in the wrong key...they should take their medicine and listen to the true pulse and do something about it.

I know they are doing the extended cut. My logic tells me not to expect too much, or what I might do if I was lucky enough to work of a wonderful project like this.... but I will wait and see. I even might suggest things that maybe could be done within their rigid framework for it. It is regrettable that the people who did such wonderful things with the Tali/Shepard romance, or Eve's story line, or spent hours and hours on even the costume designs.... had to be stuck with this really poor choice, for and ending direction.

Modifié par OlympusMons423, 01 mai 2012 - 10:58 .

[JBONE27]

Amioran wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...
So your entire argument is basically, "Never ever under any circumstances admit you've made a mistake and try to rectify it."

Mistake based on what? On what you say? And why that should have more importance than those that think otherwise?

The concept is the same.

Because those who think that the ending was a mistake are,
1.  Outspoken,
2. Can point to where there writting is very poor,
3. are for all intents and purposes in the majority according to nearly every poll centering on this game/this game's ending.

That is why.

Modifié par JBONE27, 01 mai 2012 - 11:01 .

[AkiKishi]

Sure they can change it. It's whether or not they can change it, in a satisfactory manner is the question. They have already changed it by working on an EC anyway.

Kind of pointless saying Bioware can't change the ending, when they are already in the process of doing so.

[ToaOrka]

"You're not artistic, and you've got no integrity!"

[OlympusMons423]

Just to add again.... after ME1 fans wanted Garrus and Tali to be romance-able. I'm sure it was someone artistic choice not to have these two avail for this, but BioWare still did it, and rather proudly for the sake of this games fans.

[JBONE27]

OlympusMons423 wrote...

Just to add again.... after ME1 fans wanted Garrus and Tali to be romance-able. I'm sure it was someone artistic choice not to have these two avail for this, but BioWare still did it, and rather proudly for the sake of this games fans.

And that ended up being a good choice considering how people felt about those romance scenes in comparrison to the others... except maybe Jack's, but they are definitely prefered to Miranda's and Jacob's.

[OlympusMons423]

Yeah JBONE27....

I'm playing my fem-Shepard with Kaiden as the love interest, and so far its so flat next to what my male Shep got with Tali. That was true love and deep as hell. I often imagine if Tali were not a romance choice what we would be missing out on here, and in ME2....Brilliant stuff...just brilliant stuff. It still gives me chills (and chokes me up) thinking of those last things they (maybe) say to each other. Yeah don't cave into the fans...its dangerous. God give me some more dangerous please!

[JBONE27]

OlympusMons423 wrote...

Yeah JBONE27....

I'm playing my fem-Shepard with Kaiden as the love interest, and so far its so flat next to what my male Shep got with Tali. That was true love and deep as hell. I often imagine if Tali were not a romance choice what we would be missing out on here, and in ME2....Brilliant stuff...just brilliant stuff. It still gives me chills (and chokes me up) thinking of those last things they (maybe) say to each other. Yeah don't cave into the fans...its dangerous. God give me some more dangerous please!

I'm not about to tell you how to play, but the goodbye if you romanced Garrus is outstanding.  Funny, yet sad and touching.  It's like watching a Chaplin movie.

[CAlNlAC]

BW has in the past modified a finished product. Just look at ME2 and all the post end game DLC it had after release, one of which (Arrival) you could perhaps argue essentially changed the ending for ME2.

Did BW consider the opinions of all the fans who were perfectly happy with the way ME2 ended without the DLC? Did BW consider the opinions of all the fans who did not want DLC period? Or did they just give in to the fans who wanted DLC whatever it may be? So BW ignored part of its fanbase before but now its not okay?
And I realize the situation with ME2 is a bit different than whats going on with ME3 in that it is the fans this time asking for the change rather than BW itself making the change as they see fit.

Anyway I guess I just refuse to believe that its not possible to make some changes to the ending while keeping those that like the original ending happy but then also making those that didn't like the original ending happy.
Anyway time for me to go. Its been a fun debate. Cya later.

[atis]

my head went a bit fuzzy trying to read all that but I think I got the Idea. what youre saying is if thay change the ending then thay will exlude those who like it right?
but shorly if that's the case all thay have to do is not get the new one when its out
bioware saves face by leting the old one stand for those who like it. and the new one for those who dont
it's that simple isnt it?

[abaris]

CAlNlAC wrote...

BW has in the past modified a finished product. Just look at ME2 and all the post end game DLC it had after release, one of which (Arrival) you could perhaps argue essentially changed the ending for ME2.

Point being, you can make everything possible with DLC.

That's why the alienating audience A or B is such outstanding bull. If someone is perfectly happy with things as they are, they simply don't need to dowload/buy something that would introduce change.

But that's all academic, since, as I said before, money does all the talking.

[Pride Demon]

Amioran wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...
I see... Then the problem is player feedback, if the products shouldn't be changed then companies should stop listening to what their buyer wants, because they prompt changes that other buyers may not like, and their product was like that in the first place... For instance a lot of people actually liked the Mako/ Hammerhead/ mining minigame, we know what happened there...

It's different when you do the same for ANOTHER product.

Do you understand the difference? There are totally different parameters invested.

A DLC is a different product from the main game too, so what 's the difference?

Amioran wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...
Also if I don't like something and you don't change it, you are going against my wishes, you can spin it however you want, but that's fact, it's not necessarily a bad fact, but it's fact...

In fact, those are your "wishes". For those that like the product it's not a matter of "wishes" at all. You "wish" for it to change, those that like the product don't wish for it to remain the same because it is already as they like it. So, in turn, they wish nothing.

Bioware to change would mean adhering to "wishes" and not minding at all those that are happy with the product as it is and having no "wishes".

Clarifying that those are not MY wishes at all (at least not exactly) and I was just making an hypothetical statement, and still there's more than one person that wants that, saying that those that like the ending do not "wish" for it to remain the same makes no sense, if you didn't wish for it to remain the same you'd have no problem with BioWare changing it...
It's not that the people who like wish nothing, they wish for nothing to change, but that's a wish in and of itself...

It's like those situation where you present a choice of either A or B and the person says "I refuse to make a choice", when you point out that choosing not to chose is a choice in an of itself they get angry... Why? What's the problem with that?

Amioran wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...
A asks to keep the game as is, you change it, you go against what A wants...
B asks to modify an aspect of the game, you don't change it, you go against what B wants...

But in the case of A the product shipped is already done that way. If you go for A you don't have to do absolutely nothing, this in turn doesn't shift the thing more than already is. If you go for B you have to change a product it's already as it is just for the wants of them, that it shifts the thing in their favor totally.

It is actually completely on the favor of B, because you do an action that goes against A for no motivation apart the "wishes" of B. If the product was not yet published it would be different, but in this case you have to do an action that goes against only one of the point of views based on arbitrary motives only.

This means that one should always be in favour of changing as little as possible once the game lauches...
So saying that game devlopers should be unbiased is incorrect, you should write they should always give priority to those that like the game...

Amioran wrote...

Pride Demon wrote...
Saying A is more entitled to his/her request because the game already was like that is biased reasoning, and you specifically said BioWare shouldn't be biased...

It's not biased because they published a product. People have different opinons on that product, as it is to be expected. Doing nothing doesn't take a part at all, it is just the product you published and people having different opinons on it. Changing it, on the contrary, would mean taking the part of those that don't like the product and only those.

Do you understand the difference?

I do, but recieveing critique and deciding to do nothing is by default taking a side, by what you are saying the ones that dislike a product always have the short end of a stick, so again you saying BioWare should be unbiased is incorrect...
The same goes if they decide to change it, mind you. they'll be favouring one side over the other...

And THIS was my whole point: it's "damned if you do, damned if you don't", someone WILL be unhappy...
I was just hoping BioWare might be able to contain the problem with EC, that's all...

[Amioran]

Il Divo wrote...
Which wouldn't make any difference to those who have been alienated. You were the one who introduced the concept of Bioware choosing some fans over others. Conceptually, it's a pointless criticism since Bioware cannot choose fan X without pissing off fan Y. Every choice Bioware makes is with the intention of maintaining a certain level of customer satisfaction.

There's a different between changing a product already published after and changing some things for a product to come. Don't be naive, I'm sure you can understand why for yourself.

And apart this, changing the ending as many would like to would be based on purely arbitrary parameters, and it would either agains the original product as intented by the authors of the same.

A change as the one of the mako, either if you can not like it, it can be anyway understood because the motivations behind the change were based on some non-arbitrary concepts. It is a completely different thing when you ask a change motivated on completely arbitrary parameters as they are opinions. It is unacceptable.

Alienating some users for a motive can be tolerable (either if you can not like it), doing the same without a motive it is not.

Please read the post above, I explained all of this in more detail.

Not likely. Go see all the fans who were pissed about the removal of exploration of ME2.

 
Again, it is different in many thing. You can also be pissed but at last the motivations for doing so can stand on something (either if you dont' agree with them). Another thing is when the motivations have just because some fans require it no minding at all for others' opinions.

Morover there's the fact that a product will always have some choices made in it and those choices will naturally ****** someone. However those are the opinions of the authors of the product and you have to respect them. You can also not like them, naturally, but another completely different thing is asking them to change the product and at the same time to not care about others opinons at all on purely subjective parameters.

If Bioware decides to change the ending for some motive that can be fine. Another completely different thing is if they have to change the ending because a part of the audience requires it. This goes completely against opinions of others and the change will stand on purely arbitrary parameters. Why should one opinon be better than another? Whye should Bioware listen to yours and not to that of others?

[CerberusCheerleader]

Amioran wrote...

CerberusCheerleader wrote...
Size of the dlc: the last two missions of me3 (Cerberus station and Earth)
Scenario: before you attack the cerberus station Admiral Hacket contacts you and tells you that they found evidence for a Prothean scientist on planet X. You now have a choice: 
a) attack the station ('normal' ending) or
b) fly to planet X and get the scientist (new dlc ending). You would than play planet X and after that e.g. a mission to retake the citadel from the reapers before they can transport it back to earth. You would than use the scientist to implement changes to the Crucible and thus have a different ending of whatever kind.
(I'm obviously no writer, but something to that extend).

I've already replied to this to two different users, but anyway.

1. It is anyway a change in the philosophy of the product as it is. There will be some people who would not like it and since the product was in another way in the start, that would be alienating them for no motive whatsoever.

2. It is too complex to explain it here but it will not work. The context in the two "branches" would be too different. The result would be a mess.

Just to be clear: what would be the problem for you, the new ending or the fact that they had to add it? In other words, would a completly different ending (like mine) have been a problem for you if it had been in the game in the first place?

You really have to consider the medium you are talking about here: non-linear RPG. Such a game is supposed to have different endings, and if the endings are completly different they can very well represent different ideas. This would be by intention and would really be no problem at all. Such a game doesn't have to have "the one" philosophy.

Modifié par CerberusCheerleader, 01 mai 2012 - 11:56 .

[Tirigon]

If you make a mistake, you fix it.

Even if some people say "why, I liked it".

[Amioran]

Pride Demon wrote...
A DLC is a different product from the main game too, so what 's the difference?

We weren't talking about DLC but sequels IIRC.

Pride Demon wrote...
Clarifying that those are not MY wishes at all (at least not exactly) and I was just making an hypothetical statement, and still there's more than one person that wants that, saying that those that like the ending do not "wish" for it to remain the same makes no sense, if you didn't wish for it to remain the same you'd have no problem with BioWare changing it...
It's not that the people who like wish nothing, they wish for nothing to change, but that's a wish in and of itself...

It's not a wish. They just like the product as it is, so how they can "wish" something about it?
But anyway it was a sort of joke using your words, it was not really important.

Pride Demon wrote...
It's like those situation where you present a choice of either A or B and the person says "I refuse to make a choice", when you point out that choosing not to chose is a choice in an of itself they get angry... Why? What's the problem with that?

"Choosing not to chose" is a choice in itself, surely, but it is many times a choice that is not tied to the former proposed choices to begin with, and this is the point.

Not chosing it's different than chosing A or B. It is just "not chosing". Certainly it's a choice, but it's not A nor B, so it doesn't support the point of views behind them (that's the important aspect for what we are talking about).

Pride Demon wrote...
This means that one should always be in favour of changing as little as possible once the game lauches...
So saying that game devlopers should be unbiased is incorrect, you should write they should always give priority to those that like the game...

No, it doesn't support "changing as little as possible". I am not against change. The problem here is that the change proposed is based entirely on arbitrary parameters, as are opinions.

Pride Demon wrote...
I do, but recieveing critique and deciding to do nothing is by default taking a side

?????

No, it's not. They only take the side of their product, and that's obvious, but the important thing here is that doing so doesn't imply that they chose a side in the audience.

Actually deciding to change the ending based purely on what one part of the audience wants would be supporting that part of the audience. Deciding to do nothing is not supporting the other side at all because "supporting" requires an active action on the side of those you do so, and there's nothing of the sort here.

Pride Demon wrote...
by what you are saying the ones that dislike a product always have the short end of a stick, so again you saying BioWare should be unbiased is incorrect...

No, I'm not saying this. It depends everything on what the "dislike" is based upon. If it is based on non-arbitrary parameters then there's nothing wrong with it.

Pride Demon wrote...
The same goes if they decide to change it, mind you. they'll be favouring one side over the other...

It all depends on the motivations behind the change. There would be nothing wrong with changing something per se, it all depends on what basis you do so.

For this case of the ending, simply put, the basis to motivate a change don't exist. It is only a matter of opinion, so chosing a side or the other would be based on preferring one opinion or the other, and this is purely arbitrary and a thing that Bioware naturally cannot do (at last not in this way, as some people would pretend).

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mai 2012 - 12:04 .

[JBONE27]

Tirigon wrote...

If you make a mistake, you fix it.

Even if some people say "why, I liked it".

Amioran doesn't want Bioware to admit they've made a mistake.  I think it's because admiting a mistake is precived as a sign of weakness.

Modifié par JBONE27, 01 mai 2012 - 12:16 .

[Amioran]

Tirigon wrote...

If you make a mistake, you fix it.

Even if some people say "why, I liked it".

Again, mistake of what? Who say it is a mistake? You? On what basis, your opinion? And thos who have a different opinon? They matter less?

When you talk about opinions objectivity it doesn't exist.

You just want to see the ending as a mistake, people who like it doesn't see the ending as a mistake, so we return again to a matter of opinion. Why should be yours more important than that the others?

I could post threads upon threads on why the ending is not objectively "badly written", but if Bioware would change it based on some non-arbitrary parameters I would not start pretending to restore it as it was before just because they did the wrong thing on those objective parameters.

Do you know why? Because either if I could objectively demonstrate this (a thing you cannot either do in this case) I know perfectly that some people could like the ending more that way and that their opinion in this would be different than mine and this doesn't make that opinon "worser" than the one I have.
 
And since I respect others' opinions and I will always do all I can to give those people the liberty to enjoy the fruits of the same, I would never ask something as that, just because I would never pretend my opinion on this thing to have more value than another, no matter if my judgment (that's another thing) can have more value than theirs in objective parameters based on my knowledge.

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mai 2012 - 12:15 .

[JBONE27]

Amioran wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

If you make a mistake, you fix it.

Even if some people say "why, I liked it".

Again, mistake of what? Who say it is a mistake? You? On what basis, your opinion? And who has a different opinon?

When you talk about opinions objectivity it doesn't exist.

You just want to see the ending as a mistake, people who like it doesn't see the ending as a mistake, so we all come again to a matter of opinion. Why should be your be more important than the others?

I could post threads upon threads on why the ending is not objectively "badly written", but if Bioware would change it based on some non-arbitrary parameters I would not start pretending to restore it as it was before just because they did the wrong thing.

Do you know why? Because either if I could objectively demonstrate this (a thing you cannot either do in this case) I know perfectly that some people could like the ending more that way and that their opinion in this would be different than mine and this doesn't make that opinon "worser" than the one I have.
 
And since I respect others' opinions and I will always do all I can to give those people the liberty to enjoy the fruits of the same, I would never ask something as that, just because I would never pretend my opinion on this thing to have more value than another, no matter if my judgment (that's another thing) can have more value than theirs in objective parameters.

Thank you for proving my point.

[atis]

JBONE27 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

If you make a mistake, you fix it.

Even if some people say "why, I liked it".

Amioran doesn't want Bioware to admit they've made a mistake.  I think it's because admiting a mistake is a sign of weakness.

it take's more ball's to admit you screwed up and to try and fix things than to hide behind a fabricated justification and hope the problem disapiers

[JBONE27]

atis wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

If you make a mistake, you fix it.

Even if some people say "why, I liked it".

Amioran doesn't want Bioware to admit they've made a mistake.  I think it's because admiting a mistake is a sign of weakness.

it take's more ball's to admit you screwed up and to try and fix things than to hide behind a fabricated justification and hope the problem disapiers

I completely agree with you, but I'm refering to how it's precived... I should have made that clear.  Let me change it.

[CerberusCheerleader]

Another thought for the OP: could it be that you are unsecure? No, really  Maybe you are afraid that a new ending might have less plot holes and might actually make some sense and if it would make sense you would than have to take that new ending as "the one true ending" even though you might like the old endings philosophy better. Could that be?
In other words: they can't add a new ending because the current one is so bad.