733 réponses à ce sujet

[RocketManSR2]

Seryl wrote...

If the industry decides that this is where they want to go, then I have better things to do.

I've said this before, but they make a luxury product. I can easily live without it. If they really irritate me, there are LOTS of other activities I could be doing. This arrogance and entitlement from the major publishers should not be rewarded. If they really want to take the industry in this direction, then another crash is coming.

Taboo, I've had some concerns with some of the news and actions that have been coming out too. I have no connection to any sort of creative process, I'm looking at this from a purely business perspective. I've worked with enough businesses to know that what's been released to the public has some unpleasant undertones and implications. I look forward to your Monday post. I'm curious about whether your concerns mirror my own.

I'm not involved with any business or anything, but I can also see that the current model for the gaming industry is self-destructive. EA's making money now, but for how much longer? How long until players are just sick of it all and find other things to do? That story about EA shutting down free servers was interesting because there wasn't a single comment that I saw at the bottom defending EA. That's a good sign IMO, because it shows that gamers are finally getting fed up with all the bulls***.

[Thorn Harvestar]

indyracing wrote...


The thing about this, for me, is that I will never believe Hudson (or Gamble) again.  They lie.  They said that very specific things categorically wouldn't be there, but were (no A, B or C choice for an end), and said that things would be there that weren't (your decisions matter, etc).

I don't know how it's disputable that these two people have lied about this game (after it went gold, and even a month after release, in the case of Gamble and the free/320 point DLC thing).

Just wanted to say that Gamble did not lie about the free/320 point DLC thing.

There was confusion between 2 things:
Resurgence Pack DLC (the 2 new maps, 5 chars, 3 weapons)
Resurgence Pack (the "reinforcement pack" in the multiplayer store)

The first was ALWAYS FREE and never listed for anything but free.

The second was erroneously listed for 320 pts when it wasnt supposed to be available yet. When it was put on the Store, it was 240 pts I believe. It was this item that Gamble talked about, not the first!

[GuardianAngel470]

I have a particular mindset that has served me pretty well over the past few years. I make an effort to come up with explanations for people's behavior in most cases to avoid getting too upset when they do something I dislike. Veterans of the Ashley thread may remember it as a philosophy called Stoicism (from the Romans).

But I have a personal philosophy that is older and more ingrained than that. It states that respect and trust are earned, not given. From as far back as first grade this was true for me.

I respected Bioware, I trusted them. As a result I went to great lengths to find reasons for their behavior, in some cases excuses for their failings. I defended them, I sang their praises to anyone who would listen.

But they lost that trust and respect when they refused to admit error. It wasn't the ending that bothered me most (though it did bother me). It was the PR spin, the refusal to admit fault, and the refusal to accept all forms of criticism. It was in their best interests to ignore the bombastic terminology used by Retakers and focus instead on the main complaints. It was in their best interest to admit fault early, like a child admitting to breaking a glass plate.

By hiding behind PR and siding with the media, they took the liars way out. And I do not respect that.

As a result I'm simply not willing to spend the extra effort to look at things from their perspective. I don't want to bother coming up with explanations for their behaviors because I simply do not care what their motivations are. I don't respect them enough to do them that courtesy.

[Brian.V3]

I believe the answers are simple...

Why are the endings the way they are? Simple... they want to leave the ending Ambiguous and Left for speculation.

Why did you feel it has to be this way? Simple... read previous answer.

Did you expect us to enjoy whatever came out? Simple... no, this was foreshadowed from a preview interview of the game. Not everyone is going to like the ending quote... Due to peoples reactions... while there is a lot who are dissatisfied or disappointed like I was. There were people who ended up enjoying it.

Did you expect we wouldn't want closure? Nope, we didn't expect a huge demand for it.

Who wrote "x" sections? Mac Walters and Casey Hudson had the final call whether to pull or keep something in (well the last one is due to knowing a bit about game developing; while peer reviews and discussions definitely happened the final call is always left up to the leads).

[mcgreggers99]

Bumpity bump

[sw04ca]

EnvyTB075 wrote...
The thing is one of the benefits of the "online pass" that has been spruiked by EA was specifically to pay for server upkeep. Obviously it has shown its true colours as just another cash grab, not that no one called it before...

Is that how they justified it in PR land?  Because everybody I ever talked to said the whole thing was about getting a cut of used game sales.

[SpiritWolf448]

Yes, in some interviews, EA had "server upkeep" as one of the reasons for the Online Pass.

[sw04ca]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

Personally, the Multiplayer is good, its just that its come at the expense of the singleplayer mode.

Its a sad day when the thing you like most about a Mass Effect title is the multiplayer.

See, I disagree with your first statement.  What are the two things that people complain about the most in ME3?  The ending and the autodialogue/reduced use of the comm rose, both of which are the product of the writing.  Unless your complaint is that the writers were spending too much time playing multiplayer during development, they're involvement in multiplayer was pretty minimal, and there wasn't a lot of crossover between the SP and MP teams except in obvious ways (since they shared art assets and creature design).  The actual game part of the game has met with a great deal of approval, and justifies all those perfect scores they keep talking about.  It's the other parts that have caused the controversy.

Honestly though, I think it might have been better to release the multi-player game as free or cheap on Origin and Xbox Live Arcade, and then use the money from the packs to provide a revenue stream to justify another year of development time.  Of course, disk space was still an issue, so you'd have to release on 3 DVDs, expand out some of those fetch-quests into N7-style missions, and spend some more time on the cinematics and character interaction.  My poor Ashley didn't really have a lot to say on the Normandy, and I found that irritating.  The ending didn't make me rage, so I won't address that.  Mind you, all this is in hindsight.

[sw04ca]

SpiritWolf448 wrote...
Yes, in some interviews, EA had "server upkeep" as one of the reasons for the Online Pass.

Ah.  I never pay attention to interviews.  I prefer to keep my ear to the ground, to talk with stakeholders and find out how they feel about things.

But I come from out there, and everybody out there knows, everybody lies: devs lie, newspapers lie, PR flack's lyin'. The one thing you can count on - word on the street... yeah, that's solid.

Modifié par sw04ca, 12 mai 2012 - 01:20 .

[AtlasMickey]

I don't feel the need to question artists. Why the rest of you do is beyond me. You judge the merit of a work of art based on how you see it, not on how the artist sees it.

[SpiritWolf448]

AtlasMickey wrote...
You judge the merit of a work of art based on how you see it, not on how the artist sees it.

That's exactly the reason why so many say it's crap, you know? 

[Eain]

AtlasMickey wrote...

I don't feel the need to question artists.

You don't feel the need to discover them either, apparently, because you're looking in the wrong corner.

[AtlasMickey]

SpiritWolf448 wrote...

AtlasMickey wrote...
You judge the merit of a work of art based on how you see it, not on how the artist sees it.

That's exactly the reason why so many say it's crap, you know? 

Yes. Normally that's enough for people, to simply say that a work of art is bad and argue that in the public space. 

Eain wrote...

You don't feel the need to discover them either, apparently, because you're looking in the wrong corner.

WTF does even mean.

[Reorte]

AtlasMickey wrote...

I don't feel the need to question artists. Why the rest of you do is beyond me. You judge the merit of a work of art based on how you see it, not on how the artist sees it.

Don't you? Shame on you. Everything should always be questioned.

[Taboo]

Reorte wrote...

AtlasMickey wrote...

I don't feel the need to question artists. Why the rest of you do is beyond me. You judge the merit of a work of art based on how you see it, not on how the artist sees it.

Don't you? Shame on you. Everything should always be questioned.

To question is human. To ask an artist for what they were going for is also normal. To not receive any answer in the slightest is bizarre.The audience should always come to there own conlusions about things but the artists should always be willing to talk.

Go to a painters gallery and ASK the next time you're there. 

WHY did you paint with said brush? Does it create something for you? What type of paint do you use?Or with a filmmaker? Who were your influences? Why was this shot that way? What does this mean to you? Why is it this way?

An audience always has the right to ask.I see producers saying that all the interpretations are supposed to be the same for the endings and yet they want speculation from the audience.

It doesn't work that way.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 12 mai 2012 - 06:24 .

[Omega Torsk]

Taboo-XX wrote...

To question is human. To ask an artist for what they were going for is also normal. To not receive any answer in the slightest is bizarre.The audience should always come to there own conlusions about things but the artists should always be willing to talk.

Bioware's near-refusal to comment on what they were even trying to do with the ending tells me that they realized it was bad and didn't make sense before the game was released. There seems to be a lack of confidence, here. Maybe they were hoping the backlash wouldn't be this severe?

[Taboo]

Omega Torsk wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

To question is human. To ask an artist for what they were going for is also normal. To not receive any answer in the slightest is bizarre.The audience should always come to there own conlusions about things but the artists should always be willing to talk.

Bioware's near-refusal to comment on what they were even trying to do with the ending tells me that they realized it was bad and didn't make sense before the game was released. There seems to be a lack of confidence, here. Maybe they were hoping the backlash wouldn't be this severe?

I agree with that sentiment. When making a piece of commercial art that you expect an investment in it is always wise to seek out what the audience wants. Bioware did not do that with the ending for most people. At least those who are being vocal.

I'll be talking about this on Monday. Iggy Pop and Bob Dylan will be there to.

[Southerndoom]

I wanted to share a couple ideas i had about why the ending happened the way it did,my initial reaction etc.
IThey might be way off or you might find them interesting.
Hopefully Taboo and a couple others can check this out and reply.Im not going to hate on the ending or talk about whats wrong with it cause that has been done a million times.Its more about why or what were they trying to do.

Up until Priortiy earth i was fine with me3.Then Priorty Earth and ending sequence happened and left me in total confusion/frustration.Priorty Earth felt like something major had been cut from the gameplay.Dont know exactly what but something was taken out and you could tell big time.Almost like you were supposed to have either
cut scenes put in of the war around you or you we're supposed to be talking to other squad mates/war assets or something.While i thought it was weird i kept playing along.Then the beam hits me,i enter some strange dream
like sequence and all of a sudden its over without hardly anything really explained.

So here are a couple things i thought of after this happened.
1-They had  started a few different ideas going into the ending and how it was going to play out.Either they
could not decide which to use or maybe they couldnt get them to play out how they wanted.So they ended up
leaving strands of ideas in and shoe horned in their ending ideas as choices.Biggest example being
IT was supposed to happen but got cut so they just left in that part,Also earth suicide mission style etc.
Control/Destory/Synthesis was always choices just they could not get the execution right.

2-Tied to 1.They were working till the 11th hour could not get things right so they did what they could and
hoped for the best.Maybe they were hoping to patch it later but just deadlines are deadlins.

3-And this is honestly something i kinda believe.They wanted to try something different for the ending.
Cliffhanger the ending leaving nothing but questions,having all the players in suspense of what happens
next.Then follow that up with either ME4 trailer or a huge DLC ending package.
I was waiting post credits to see something like that pop up.While i was not thinking IT at the time i was
thinking that shepard was unconisous dreaming right after the beam hit him or he was captured
by reaper forces and wakes up from the ending nightmare and boom DLC/ME4 starts.
And honestly i dont think they were doing this for a money point of view,more from a trying to make the
ending memorable and orignial.

4-They wanted a truely ambigious ending Ala the black hole(1970s scifi film,lots of similaties to ME3 might
post about that later).Maybe it was artistic or them wanting something very hard scifi or it was ambigious
so they lots of leeway into ME4.

Anyway those were some ideas i had feel free to comment.Personally i believed in 3 for a long time,now i dont know.

[Taboo]

The problem isn't malice. It was a head in the clouds mistake though. One that was disseminated and caused this ruckus.

There is a distinct tonal shift as soon as Shepard goes up on that elevator. I do not see the people who wrote Tuchanka and Rannoch in the ending at all. That sense of humanism is gone and replaced by a random attempt at being inspiring and uplifting. I don't believe that in it's current form the ending achieved anything close to that.

[Taboo]

 I have some notes written down and will share some with you here as people keeping sending me messages. Mind you this is still an outline. This is a general idea of what you can expect in a structural stanpoint and said themes involved.

1. The cementation of an idea

A: Hudson and Walters

B: The Producers

2: Implementation and (in)consitency.

A: Implementation of an isolated idea

B: What I said and what you heard

3: Tonal Shifts: What you usually expect and what you see

A: David Bowie

B: Theodoros Angelopoulos (I'll probably replace this director with something more people are familiar with)

That's about as far as I got. I'll finish writing the rest tomorrow and will finalize will piece together something a bit more appropriate:

I've spent of few hours writing and rewriting so you can expect a few shifts here and there.

Is this too vague? 

[Oni Changas]

To quote Lee Chaolan/Mr. Burns: excellent!

[Taboo]

Damn. Now that I think about I have no reason to use Angelopoulos. I had to import his films from the UK because I couldn't buy them here.

Someone give me a director that has a recognizable style. I probably won't be able to give you one that everyone will like.

Sorry about that.

[delta_vee]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Damn. Now that I think about I have no reason to use Angelopoulos. I had to import his films from the UK because I couldn't buy them here.

Someone give me a director that has a recognizable style. I probably won't be able to give you one that everyone will like.

Sorry about that.

Refn?

[Reptilian Rob]

I'm banking all my money on the EC being "Extended Crap" and not an "Extended Cut."

They have said time and time again this is just clarification to the current crap ending. So basically they are giving us more crap with the crap we already have in the hopes it will make sense of all the crap they crapped out.

So to Mr. Hudson, Walters, Gamble and Priestly, keep on trollin' your fanbase. I hear it's great for business.

[Sublyminal]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Damn. Now that I think about I have no reason to use Angelopoulos. I had to import his films from the UK because I couldn't buy them here.

Someone give me a director that has a recognizable style. I probably won't be able to give you one that everyone will like.

Sorry about that.

I can give you one that everyone dislikes.... Michael Bay... it's alwatys explosions and bigger explosions with him.