4048 réponses à ce sujet

[MTX99]

i'm not gonna get into very much detail. People will from now on and forever hate every game Bioware makes. People need to let DAII and ME3 go. At the core, they're not bad games. It's one thing to have an opinion. But people treat these games like they're a cancer. I don't even have to be psychic to tell you people, that your gonna hate ME4 or any other ME spin off. The extended cut gave you info and fixed what had to be fixed. There is no movie or game out there in existence, that is 100% plot hole free.

[sdinc009]

3DandBeyond wrote...

BlueStorm83 wrote...

--snipped, but people do need to read your most excellent post.

---  To correct mister Walters' viewpoint, it is very possible for the writing team to tell a story that is not the story they have been telling all along.  That is, apparently, exactly what they've done.

I'd only want to add some things to the great things you said.  Overall, I do tend to think the games, no matter how you play them-renegade or paragon, have overarching themes of resisting control-control that stifles diversity and that stifles self-determination.  A big event in ME2 (one of many but it can get lost) is Miranda's total change.  She wanted to put a control chip in Shepard, but later is glad it never happened.  That control that even TIM can see would change Shepard in even subtle ways might make Shepard do or act in some "wrong" way.  In order to succeed even TIM saw Shepard needed to be an individual-him/herself.  It is amazing that the main control freak in the game admits just what it could do even on such a small scale to just one person even in pursuit of what he saw as a good cause.  Miranda sees that. 

Even so, if you look at every single one of the people in the games - ME1 and 2, they were all under some form of control, internal or external.  In gaining their loyalty in ME2, you see them break free of that control.  Zaeed had for too long been controlled by his desire for revenge-renegade or paragon, Shepard helps him get rid of that which controlled him.  Jack was controlled both internally and externally and had given up her free will.  On the one hand it was taken from her, but then she grew to let her rage take over that control.  This has as its corollary not only the Control option but the option of Synthesis, since they both involve to some degree the subjugation of the individual in deference to the debatable betterment of the many.  I don't see either as anything beneficial and that is also obvious in what the people in ME2 are before and after loyalty.

There are also recurrent themes of attempted synthesis and the wrong-headed effects of such a thing.

Thematically, all 3 games debate and decry Control and Synthesis and then they further help define what it means to be alive, what you sacrifice to protect that life, and what you never give up.  They define the value and meaning of individuality and unity.  This is critical.  The protheans tried to create a forced kind of unity through slavery and totalitarianism-that's again got a parallel with Control and Synthesis.  What the 3 games define is what makes people truly better-what is the best form of unity.  This was abandoned in the end.  Why did the Protheans fail?  They lacked diversity, and they lacked freely offered unity and selfless sacrifice.  There were instances where some Protheans gave up things, much like Saren in the selfish hope they would survive.  Shepard created something far better.

Under Shepard's guidance and with Shepard's example, people learned that no life was truly expendable.  Shepard said that you don't sacrifice one over here to save many over there. 

People learned that they do best when they remain unique and CHOOSE to work together.  Ever heard the phrase that sometimes a problem needs new eyes?  It's like if everyone is alike and looks at how to solve a problem, they all see it the same way so they can't conceive of any new idea to solve it.  So, you need "new" eyes to look at it from a different perspective.  That's what the galaxy had with all these misfits drawn together-cast away people that became respected and whose opinions began to be heard.  No one ever cared what Aria's mercenaries, the Batarians, the Krogan, the Quarians, the Geth, the Rachni, Cerberus defectors, AIs, and so on ever thought before.  The only people that ever mattered were the Council races that had so organized everything as to be almost of like minds on all matters-that's why they couldn't and wouldn't listen to Shepard until they had to.  An unexpected threat broke up their idea of order---ORDER.  Shepard's constant attempts to wake them up first about Saren and then about the Reapers, was chaos.  Eventually, Shepard brought everyone to the table-Volus, Elcor, Batarian, mercenaries, everyone.  New eyes.  Unity through individuality.

ME3 showed that in unity there is also true strength-we are far more together than apart.  It's more than 1+1=2.  2 people that stand together can be worth many that stand apart.  That is the meaning of trying to get all the people from different worlds to agree and even to come together to help take Earth back.  I will say I still found it wrong to pur Earth at the center, but some place needed to be the focal point of all the effort and where everyone would show that they acted as one.

So, all along the themes were:
Anti-Control
Anti-Synthesis
Individuality and uniqueness
Unity
Free Will
Self-determination
What it means to be alive/the soul
Redemption
The rejection of stoic, unthinking, steadfast order
The needs of the one are not overshadowed by the needs of the many (this is a definition of sacrifice that sometimes one life is more important or the loss is more powerful than the destruction of the many).

I know there's more, but I thnk some of these are main points.  And mostly it doesn't matter if your Shepard was renegade or paragon, these issues were still addressed.

It's amazing how many of them in the ending are either totally ignored or are contradicted or are incorporated into the choices and when chosen do the exact opposite of what was done or desired in 3 games.

Masterfully put!

[Voodoo2015]

MTX99 wrote...

i'm not gonna get into very much detail. People will from now on and forever hate every game Bioware makes. People need to let DAII and ME3 go. At the core, they're not bad games. It's one thing to have an opinion. But people treat these games like they're a cancer. I don't even have to be psychic to tell you people, that your gonna hate ME4 or any other ME spin off. The extended cut gave you info and fixed what had to be fixed. There is no movie or game out there in existence, that is 100% plot hole free.

Sorry still slap in the face.

[BlueStorm83]

Thore2k10 wrote...

BlueStorm83 wrote...


---  At first, I thought that the Indoctrination Theory would be a great way out of the mess.  But I didn't want it; it would make BioWare admit that the product they sold us was incomplete.  They'd need to include something that happens LATER in order to finish the story, we'd still have Reapers to defeat.

Now, I sort of want it again.  They'd need to undo the Extended Cut, or at least explain that they were part of the indoctrination again.  Since they added the Refusal ending, and the EMS changes, they already did kinda admit that their product is incomplete out of the box.  Again, it would be a BS way to end things, and it would have to give us whatever came next COMPLETELY FREE, but dammit.

BioWare MIGHT have been wanting to do this all along.  It could have always been planned as some great piece about the futility of trying.  But that would be a really bad idea.  I mean, if everything's futile, why bother buying videogames?

well, if its a normal DLC, why not?

the way everythings developed, they could easily say that they will do something like IT just for those who want it... charge it with a bit of money and everyones happy...

or am i wrong?

I'd not be happy.  Why should I pay for what should have been the end of the game all along?  More and more videogame companies are making partial games and trying to sell you parts of the main plot separately.  Javik was technically not a part of the main story here, though he is so integrated into the experience that I daresay that he is main game material.  Final Fantasy 13-2 ends with a GD "To be continued" screen, after revealing a new villian or something.  There's a TREMENDOUS difference between wrapping up a story and then having an expansion or a DLC toat introduces a new CONFLICT and content, but truncating an experience and then selling a continuation of that same storyline is, frankly, completely unacceptable.

[BlueStorm83]

MTX99 wrote...

i'm not gonna get into very much detail. People will from now on and forever hate every game Bioware makes. People need to let DAII and ME3 go. At the core, they're not bad games. It's one thing to have an opinion. But people treat these games like they're a cancer. I don't even have to be psychic to tell you people, that your gonna hate ME4 or any other ME spin off. The extended cut gave you info and fixed what had to be fixed. There is no movie or game out there in existence, that is 100% plot hole free.

Go back and read just about any post I've made, then claim that the cavernous problems with the EC don't exist.

[Voodoo2015]

This is an ending that I would feel excited with. BW / EA take notes this is how you make an ending.

For male Shepard: Here 

For female Shepard: Here 

Modifié par Voodoo2015, 10 juillet 2012 - 07:38 .

[babachewie]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

MTX99 wrote...

i'm not gonna get into very much detail. People will from now on and forever hate every game Bioware makes. People need to let DAII and ME3 go. At the core, they're not bad games. It's one thing to have an opinion. But people treat these games like they're a cancer. I don't even have to be psychic to tell you people, that your gonna hate ME4 or any other ME spin off. The extended cut gave you info and fixed what had to be fixed. There is no movie or game out there in existence, that is 100% plot hole free.

Go back and read just about any post I've made, then claim that the cavernous problems with the EC don't exist.

Go back and read any post? hahahaha! Dude you are an obessed psycho. There are probably hundreds of your posts. Look at your profile. This is where you've been. You are on here on this same thread ever day and almost ever hour for a very long time crying and moaning constantly looking for attention like a screaming kid in a grocery store. Have you even been outside lately? I hope you have at least taken a shower once in awhile. Get some oxygen.

[whitefire138]

 I recently completed my play through with the extened cut and I in my own words that was how mass effect 3 should have ended originaly, I can safely say I can easily play the single player a second time through. The extended cut made it easier for me to choise the distroy option, because the distroy option to me with the extended cut, made it feel like my character was giving civilization the right to choise there own path.  Contol to me was sacrificing everything my character did. Synthesis is very tempting but to me it feels like I'm forcing orgainics to accept sysinthetics.  So distroy does work me now. In all in all, the extended cut patches up all the plot holes the original ending did leave. And it make makes it easier for you to choise one of the three or the refusal as well. So BIoware I raise my glass to you and thank you for making in my opinon the best game trilogy I ever bought. 

[3DandBeyond]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

MTX99 wrote...

i'm not gonna get into very much detail. People will from now on and forever hate every game Bioware makes. People need to let DAII and ME3 go. At the core, they're not bad games. It's one thing to have an opinion. But people treat these games like they're a cancer. I don't even have to be psychic to tell you people, that your gonna hate ME4 or any other ME spin off. The extended cut gave you info and fixed what had to be fixed. There is no movie or game out there in existence, that is 100% plot hole free.

Go back and read just about any post I've made, then claim that the cavernous problems with the EC don't exist.

Thing is most of the people that are really ok with the EC endings now won't go into the depth and don't want to that you have.  And that's not because they are dumb people or don't have any right to an opinion.  It's merely that gaming companies have caused us all to expect little.  Endings do generally not satisfy and that's true.  But to say that we must accept that is BS.  How many free passes should companies get before it's ok to say "enough"?  First day DLC that was needed in the game and should have been in the game.  MP needed for SP, done to get you to pay for micro-transactions.  Artificial gametime extenders used in the game to make it seem longer than it is.  Horrible beginning.  Ending that breaks every rule of good storytelling and that basically insults the intelligence of the player.  Demoralizing, non-wins all the way around.  Artificial 3 choice spoke endings, not based on anything players did in 3 games-merely set up to funnel players into one of 3 (or 4) endings, rather than "real" endings based on decisions within the game.  Multiple examples of misleading information dispensed by the devs that were absolutely false.  The use of twitter to explain what is meant in the game and to refute things said in the game.

The EC fixed nothing but used a lot of words and new nonsensical scenes and slideshows to do it.  That's because it didn't and never was meant to address what was really wrong.  And as a consumer I have every right to continue to say "enough".

I'm tired of being told that mediocre is great and that ok is good enough, but that really horrible is normal so "deal with it."  The EC gave info that didn't address what was always wrong, but since it's now ok and cool looking that makes it fit the story better and that makes it some great ending worthy of being a part of ME?  Not in my opinion.

I want people to get a quad and actually act like the money they pay for this stuff matters.  Promises matter.  There is absolutely no possible way to play ME1 through to ME3 and say that the ME3 endings answered all or were worth all the stuff done before or that they fit in with the story thus far, because they don't.  No one has as yet given specific  instances of where anything the kid says has relevance in the games or where even the kid's existence is really foreshadowed in any meaningful way before Shepard "wakes up".  That stupid moment in the game when the kid even says just that, "wake up," is one of the most cringeworthy moments in the game.  Shepard is clearly not asleep.  Wake up-I think the kid should turn to the player and say that.

[The Twilight God]

babachewie wrote...

BlueStorm83 wrote...

MTX99 wrote...

i'm not gonna get into very much detail. People will from now on and forever hate every game Bioware makes. People need to let DAII and ME3 go. At the core, they're not bad games. It's one thing to have an opinion. But people treat these games like they're a cancer. I don't even have to be psychic to tell you people, that your gonna hate ME4 or any other ME spin off. The extended cut gave you info and fixed what had to be fixed. There is no movie or game out there in existence, that is 100% plot hole free.

Go back and read just about any post I've made, then claim that the cavernous problems with the EC don't exist.

Go back and read any post? hahahaha! Dude you are an obessed psycho. There are probably hundreds of your posts. Look at your profile. This is where you've been. You are on here on this same thread ever day and almost ever hour for a very long time crying and moaning constantly looking for attention like a screaming kid in a grocery store. Have you even been outside lately? I hope you have at least taken a shower once in awhile. Get some oxygen.

Ironic given your current childish insults against BlueStorm83.

I take it resorting to personal attacks signifies you know you're wrong, but you are too childish it admit it?

[Jills Toy]

sdinc009 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

BlueStorm83 wrote...

--snipped, but people do need to read your most excellent post.

---  To correct mister Walters' viewpoint, it is very possible for the writing team to tell a story that is not the story they have been telling all along.  That is, apparently, exactly what they've done.

I'd only want to add some things to the great things you said.  Overall, I do tend to think the games, no matter how you play them-renegade or paragon, have overarching themes of resisting control-control that stifles diversity and that stifles self-determination.  A big event in ME2 (one of many but it can get lost) is Miranda's total change.  She wanted to put a control chip in Shepard, but later is glad it never happened.  That control that even TIM can see would change Shepard in even subtle ways might make Shepard do or act in some "wrong" way.  In order to succeed even TIM saw Shepard needed to be an individual-him/herself.  It is amazing that the main control freak in the game admits just what it could do even on such a small scale to just one person even in pursuit of what he saw as a good cause.  Miranda sees that. 

Even so, if you look at every single one of the people in the games - ME1 and 2, they were all under some form of control, internal or external.  In gaining their loyalty in ME2, you see them break free of that control.  Zaeed had for too long been controlled by his desire for revenge-renegade or paragon, Shepard helps him get rid of that which controlled him.  Jack was controlled both internally and externally and had given up her free will.  On the one hand it was taken from her, but then she grew to let her rage take over that control.  This has as its corollary not only the Control option but the option of Synthesis, since they both involve to some degree the subjugation of the individual in deference to the debatable betterment of the many.  I don't see either as anything beneficial and that is also obvious in what the people in ME2 are before and after loyalty.

There are also recurrent themes of attempted synthesis and the wrong-headed effects of such a thing.

Thematically, all 3 games debate and decry Control and Synthesis and then they further help define what it means to be alive, what you sacrifice to protect that life, and what you never give up.  They define the value and meaning of individuality and unity.  This is critical.  The protheans tried to create a forced kind of unity through slavery and totalitarianism-that's again got a parallel with Control and Synthesis.  What the 3 games define is what makes people truly better-what is the best form of unity.  This was abandoned in the end.  Why did the Protheans fail?  They lacked diversity, and they lacked freely offered unity and selfless sacrifice.  There were instances where some Protheans gave up things, much like Saren in the selfish hope they would survive.  Shepard created something far better.

Under Shepard's guidance and with Shepard's example, people learned that no life was truly expendable.  Shepard said that you don't sacrifice one over here to save many over there. 

People learned that they do best when they remain unique and CHOOSE to work together.  Ever heard the phrase that sometimes a problem needs new eyes?  It's like if everyone is alike and looks at how to solve a problem, they all see it the same way so they can't conceive of any new idea to solve it.  So, you need "new" eyes to look at it from a different perspective.  That's what the galaxy had with all these misfits drawn together-cast away people that became respected and whose opinions began to be heard.  No one ever cared what Aria's mercenaries, the Batarians, the Krogan, the Quarians, the Geth, the Rachni, Cerberus defectors, AIs, and so on ever thought before.  The only people that ever mattered were the Council races that had so organized everything as to be almost of like minds on all matters-that's why they couldn't and wouldn't listen to Shepard until they had to.  An unexpected threat broke up their idea of order---ORDER.  Shepard's constant attempts to wake them up first about Saren and then about the Reapers, was chaos.  Eventually, Shepard brought everyone to the table-Volus, Elcor, Batarian, mercenaries, everyone.  New eyes.  Unity through individuality.

ME3 showed that in unity there is also true strength-we are far more together than apart.  It's more than 1+1=2.  2 people that stand together can be worth many that stand apart.  That is the meaning of trying to get all the people from different worlds to agree and even to come together to help take Earth back.  I will say I still found it wrong to pur Earth at the center, but some place needed to be the focal point of all the effort and where everyone would show that they acted as one.

So, all along the themes were:
Anti-Control
Anti-Synthesis
Individuality and uniqueness
Unity
Free Will
Self-determination
What it means to be alive/the soul
Redemption
The rejection of stoic, unthinking, steadfast order
The needs of the one are not overshadowed by the needs of the many (this is a definition of sacrifice that sometimes one life is more important or the loss is more powerful than the destruction of the many).

I know there's more, but I thnk some of these are main points.  And mostly it doesn't matter if your Shepard was renegade or paragon, these issues were still addressed.

It's amazing how many of them in the ending are either totally ignored or are contradicted or are incorporated into the choices and when chosen do the exact opposite of what was done or desired in 3 games.

Masterfully put!

Well said...genius

[3DandBeyond]

babachewie wrote...

BlueStorm83 wrote...

MTX99 wrote...

i'm not gonna get into very much detail. People will from now on and forever hate every game Bioware makes. People need to let DAII and ME3 go. At the core, they're not bad games. It's one thing to have an opinion. But people treat these games like they're a cancer. I don't even have to be psychic to tell you people, that your gonna hate ME4 or any other ME spin off. The extended cut gave you info and fixed what had to be fixed. There is no movie or game out there in existence, that is 100% plot hole free.

Go back and read just about any post I've made, then claim that the cavernous problems with the EC don't exist.

Go back and read any post? hahahaha! Dude you are an obessed psycho. There are probably hundreds of your posts. Look at your profile. This is where you've been. You are on here on this same thread ever day and almost ever hour for a very long time crying and moaning constantly looking for attention like a screaming kid in a grocery store. Have you even been outside lately? I hope you have at least taken a shower once in awhile. Get some oxygen.

Do you know how to talk decently to other people?  By posting this you have proven that you apparently just love the EC endings (so why care about what others think if you are happy) and it's great you like the EC endings.  In contrast to you Bluestorm83 has given reasoned opinions as to what he does not like about them and has insulted no one in doing so.  He has used real intelligence and isn't relying on some game dev to tell him he's smart because he agrees with them.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 10 juillet 2012 - 08:16 .

[BlueStorm83]

babachewie wrote...

BlueStorm83 wrote...

MTX99 wrote...

i'm not gonna get into very much detail. People will from now on and forever hate every game Bioware makes. People need to let DAII and ME3 go. At the core, they're not bad games. It's one thing to have an opinion. But people treat these games like they're a cancer. I don't even have to be psychic to tell you people, that your gonna hate ME4 or any other ME spin off. The extended cut gave you info and fixed what had to be fixed. There is no movie or game out there in existence, that is 100% plot hole free.

Go back and read just about any post I've made, then claim that the cavernous problems with the EC don't exist.

Go back and read any post? hahahaha! Dude you are an obessed psycho. There are probably hundreds of your posts. Look at your profile. This is where you've been. You are on here on this same thread ever day and almost ever hour for a very long time crying and moaning constantly looking for attention like a screaming kid in a grocery store. Have you even been outside lately? I hope you have at least taken a shower once in awhile. Get some oxygen.

---  I'm discussing a game that I am apparently interested in.

You on the other hand seem to have an obsession with me.  Which you continue after telling me in a previous post that nobody cares what I do or say.  Hmmm...

[Eretikas]

I liked ME1 and ME2 because you had to make difficult choices in the middle of the game, but if you've played hard then you could achieve nearly everything you wanted in the end. Game ending varied from total annihilation to glorious success and I was in full control.

ME3 ending could be summarized as: If you are a GOOD person, then You MUST DIE, because reward of LIFE is only for complete monster, who commits mass genocide on all non-organic life forms and all ascended organic forms in The Galaxy.

BioWare must give work to people who actually knows how give full range of endings (from complete destruction - to complete success) and keep full artistic integrity.

To BioWare: Thank you for that DLC extra middle finger choice with non-literal F*** You at the end. As a Mass Efect fan I appreciate this message from your team. It really confirms that fan's feedback is important to you.  /s

Modifié par Eretikas, 10 juillet 2012 - 08:43 .

[darky00]

I liked the EC, even thought they're still plot holes and that annoying star kid.

Will future DLC actually change a little ? Who knows.. i won't mind Bioware if they don't. I appreciate the effort they actually did for free, few companies do this. Still it's actually hard to replay ME3 cause it feels really different aside of the two others.

We can argue alot about it, but it's pretty sure even if Bioware actually made a great ending to the trilogy, that still a lot of people would have complain, cause there is just too many ways players chose.

To follow some of those who liked this EC, this should have been in the original endng.

[Voodoo2015]

3DandBeyond wrote...

babachewie wrote...

BlueStorm83 wrote...

MTX99 wrote...

i'm not gonna get into very much detail. People will from now on and forever hate every game Bioware makes. People need to let DAII and ME3 go. At the core, they're not bad games. It's one thing to have an opinion. But people treat these games like they're a cancer. I don't even have to be psychic to tell you people, that your gonna hate ME4 or any other ME spin off. The extended cut gave you info and fixed what had to be fixed. There is no movie or game out there in existence, that is 100% plot hole free.

Go back and read just about any post I've made, then claim that the cavernous problems with the EC don't exist.

Go back and read any post? hahahaha! Dude you are an obessed psycho. There are probably hundreds of your posts. Look at your profile. This is where you've been. You are on here on this same thread ever day and almost ever hour for a very long time crying and moaning constantly looking for attention like a screaming kid in a grocery store. Have you even been outside lately? I hope you have at least taken a shower once in awhile. Get some oxygen.

Do you know how to talk decently to other people?  By posting this you have proven that you apparently just love the EC endings (so why care about what others think if you are happy) and it's great you like the EC endings.  In contrast to you Bluestorm83 has given reasoned opinions as to what he does not like about them and has insulted no one in doing so.  He has used real intelligence and isn't relying on some game dev to tell him he's smart because he agrees with them.

Well said. Sadly some people can't handle others opinions.

[BlueStorm83]

Eretikas wrote...

I liked ME1 and ME2 because you had to make difficult choices in the middle of the game, but if you've played hard then you could achieve nearly everything you wanted in the end. Game ending varied from total annihilation to glorious success and I was in full control.

ME3 ending could be summarized as: If you are a GOOD person, then You MUST DIE, because reward of LIFE is only for complete monster who commits mass genocide on all non-organic life forms and all ascended organic forms in The Galaxy.

BioWare must give work to people who actually knows how give full range of endings (from complete destruction - to complete success) and keep full artistic integrity.

---  This problem carries over into all the endings.  No matter what you choose at the end, the Galaxy continues on following the will of someone who has done evil.  Be that Opressor Shreaper, Mutilator Synthesis Shepard, Genocide War Criminal Shepard, or through refusal, through the will of the Reapers and their Cycles.

---  Imagine if this was acceptable in any game- why not?  We're heroes in other games too.  Imagine at the end of Uncharted seeing Nathan Drake shoot Sully in the throat, because if he doesn't he'll never be a famed treasure hunter.  Imagine Kratos just signing and putting his chaos blades down, deciding that fighting for his revenge against the uncaring gods isn't productive, and really, if he joins Zeus he'll get to control all of Olympus.  What about Solid Snake, having fought past and killed so many Genome Soldiers, to then listen to what Liquid Snake has to say and deciding that he'd like to live in this Soldier's Paradise he's trying to create.  How about Mario realizing that he could FINALLY get a rest if that Damn princess stopped being captured, so he just stabs her to death?  Take 99% of everything we're done, toss it out the window, and give us an unsatisfying, horiffic, or otherwise incongruous ending.  Then call it "artistic" and apparently anyone who criticizes you is an entitled moron.

---  Am I saying that a game company shouldn't take risks?  Yes, take risks.  But assess those risks beforehand.  Say to yourself "What am I going to try?  What would that mean?  What would happen if I succeed?  What would happen if I fail?"

Suppose I want to ask out a girl who's quite obviously more attractive than I am.  I'll run it through my risk assessment.

I will try to get her to go to dinner with me.  I am going to talk to her, try to get her to laugh, try to impress her with my other qualities to make my appearance less important.  If I succeed, I can have a relationship with a very attractive woman.  If I fail, I lose nothing but may take a hit to my pride.  To me, this is an acceptable risk.

Now suppose I want to be a daredevil.

I will try to jump 20 busses on a Motorcycle.  I must buy a motorcycle, learn to ride it, construct a ramp, pay to rent 20 busses, construct a second ramp for landing, and successfully travel the distance between them by air.  If I succeed, I make some money and make a few you-tube videos.  If I fail, I can die.  To me, this is an unacceptable risk.

BioWare has taken risks in Mass Effect 3.  Multiplayer was one of them.

We want to break into the Multiplayer Scene.  To do this, we will create a level and item based horde-mode with monthly challenge weekends, where players will work together against various enemies on various maps to gain the ability to add war assets to the single player game.  If we succeeds, Mass Effect 3 will reach a broader audience and make more money.  If we fail, Mass Effect will reach its original audience, and we will lost only the amount of money put into developing multiplayer specific features.  This risk was a mixed success.  There were some failings, but none to outweigh the quality of the experience.  One of the key failures ("best" ending being tied exclusively to multiplayer) was finally fixed.

Another Risk was From Ashes.

We want to have day one DLC.  To do this, we will sell a squad member and mission to our cursomer base.  Data for this character, however, will be contained on the disc already in posession of the customer who bought the un-augmented game.  If we succeed, we add roughly 8% to our profits, projecting 50% of customers purchasing the DLC.  If we fail, the backlash from the consumer base construing this as nickle-and-diming may hurt overall purchases.  This risk was a bit of a failure.  Videos blanketed the internet, calling BioWare and EA out on this.  They lost out on, at the very least, pre-order sales from myself, 3 cousins, one brother, one uncle, and five friends.  I got my copy used, from one friend who did buy it used and then sold it in disgust over the original endings as soon as he beat it.  I, like a fool, shrugged and said, "They can't be THAT bad."

The endings were a fool's risk, in my own opinion.  The payoff was too low; what could they gain?  This is the last game in the series, isn't it?  What can you do besides drum up hype about this very title?  The cost of failure was alienating a large chunk of their fanbase; this seems to have happened.

Some will say, "NOT EVERYONE HAETS TEH ENDING, WHINY BABY!!!"  Yeah, not everyone hates it.  Do 25% hate it?  15%?  Even as small as 10%.  Losing 10% of your sale, or as we call it in business losing 10% of your profits has an effect.  Shareholders get jumpy.  Parent coroprations start calling for layoffs.  10% can't kill a company, can it?

Consider the layoffs that BioWare already suffered due to the exodus of players from The Old Republic.  Consider the loss of pre-orders over the From Ashes incident.  Consider Mass Effect 3 being the end of a trusted series, and ME players may not also be the same group who want to play DA games.

To be blunt, this was the wrong game, at the wrong time.  If they tried this with a new IP, at a time when BioWare wasn't recovering from any other scandals (real or percieved) then the cost of failure would have been nowhere NEAR as staggering.  Every single facet of this proceeding has been bad, for everyone involved.

[3DandBeyond]

darky00 wrote...

I liked the EC, even thought they're still plot holes and that annoying star kid.

Will future DLC actually change a little ? Who knows.. i won't mind Bioware if they don't. I appreciate the effort they actually did for free, few companies do this. Still it's actually hard to replay ME3 cause it feels really different aside of the two others.

We can argue alot about it, but it's pretty sure even if Bioware actually made a great ending to the trilogy, that still a lot of people would have complain, cause there is just too many ways players chose.

To follow some of those who liked this EC, this should have been in the original endng.

Actually I think you are right and wrong there.  I think that yes people do complain about anything sometimes.  I think however that the validity of the complaint and how it's handled determines a lot of how persistent the complaint is-how long it stays around.

If Bioware had made one awesome spectacular fight at the end that was more like the ME2 or ME1 ending, I do think it might not have been totally satisfying for a lot of people, but...it would have been more in line with what the games were and so the complaints wouldn't have been so valid.  If say, doing all the paragon things or getting a lot of war assets meant winning the fight but that not having an asset meant something was lost, people might have found it predictible but sufficient.  I do believe they could have done this and made it epic.  Mess up and Garrus dies in front of you and maybe Shepard dies too but the galaxy is saved.  Do good, but not good enough and Shepard lives but watches as the reapers win and everyone is taken.  Do well in all things and do them fast enough and make further right choices (get asked by Joker if the Normandy should provide you with ground cover or break off and attack reapers headed for Hackett's ship and make the right call to maybe protect Hackett) and maybe just maybe you save everything including Shepard.

I think that creating an ending that made sense, that followed the games, that didn't act like it was intellecual (really if you study the choices and what the kid says, it so is not intellectual), the ending could have been spectacular with you still making choices, fighting alongside friends, and having the feeling you were "in the game".  This would not have had the level of complaint at all even if some people didn't like it.

What the type of ending I describe does is it conforms to the game and keeps it flowing.  The star kid stops the game dead in its tracks and is so disconnected from what the games were about, that I just don't think it could be saved because they had no intention of really fixing it.  There are even ways they could keep the kid and fix it, but as it is and DLC that comes before this ending is meaningless unless it changes the ending (they've said it won't but then they've said a lot of things before) and anything that comes after would mean they would have to say one ending is canon-so that any new game can go forward from that.  They've actually created a bigger mess for themselves than they did for fans.

Consider that a simpler more direct ending that played off of the battle (not just fighting and guns and explosions mind you), could easily incorporate DLC that takes place before the ending and any new game like ME4 that might come after could also easily work off of it as well.  In the future, they could speak of Shepard and his/her death or life and of course since people are alive, the reapers would have had to have been defeated.  If you use the EC and then go into a future game, people would either be controlled by or watched over by reapers, synthesized, saved through the destruction of the reapers with synthetics killed, or would only exist far into the future when someone else defeated them. 

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 10 juillet 2012 - 09:07 .

[klblamble]

HinduCowGirl wrote...

AlexandraK wrote...

HinduCowGirl wrote...

No chance of a happy ending with a reunite with LI, with other words

It was too hard for BW to make this one scene.

ARRRRRRRGH! WHY?! Casy? Mike?! WHY?! Was that really to much?! GOD DAMN IT!

I still say put out an LI ending, maybe a few other options, and I'd be willing to pay for it!!

[darky00]

We can complain about the catalyst, but i didn't expect something like the crucible too. Appears suddenly after two games, that other civilizations started building it to stop Reapers plan, and why the heck the Alliance waited months to actually discover this on Mars ? As Shep and TLM said, it was available the whole effin time.

Find it a bit too easy to build the whole ME3 journey. But i should understand that choices concern, as said by Bioware, was about curing the Genophage ? Peace between Geth and Quarians ?

And how funny Asaris never told about the possession of prothean technologies.

I don't know if I explain it out well, my bad i'm french, prefered the english boards.

[BlueStorm83]

darky00 wrote...

We can complain about the catalyst, but i didn't expect something like the crucible too. Appears suddenly after two games, that other civilizations started building it to stop Reapers plan, and why the heck the Alliance waited months to actually discover this on Mars ? As Shep and TLM said, it was available the whole effin time.

Find it a bit too easy to build the whole ME3 journey. But i should understand that choices concern, as said by Bioware, was about curing the Genophage ? Peace between Geth and Quarians ?

And how funny Asaris never told about the possession of prothean technologies.

I don't know if I explain it out well, my bad i'm french, prefered the english boards.

---  As semi-stupid as sudden discovery the Crucible is, it's not without precedent.  Remember, the entirety of the Mass Effect Universe hinges on "Holy ****, Pluto's moon is actually a piece of ancient alien technology called a Mass Relay!"  And then as life goes on, suddenly, "Holy ****, Giant Space Cuttlefish are ancient LIVING alien technology!"  So suddenly finding someting old that can be good/bad/useful/dangerous/powerful isn't beyond the realm of possibility in the Mass Effect universe.

What bothers me about the Crucible is everything AFTER its discovery.

"LOLOLOL we builded it but we don't know what it does LOL!!!11"  Or maybe "Damn, the crucible!  I tried to stop this ting, but you built it and hooked it up to me!  Now you can use it to 1) do what I've always wanted to do, 2) allow my horrible death machines to rule the universe, 3) do the OTHER thing I've always wanted to do, or 4) I can just turn it off now go die in the corner and **** you."  Oh, or the absolute best  "It's SO precise that it can alter all DNA in the GALAXY without causing horrible death-inducing mutations!  Oh, but if you want to use it to kill GIGANTIC ****ING SPACE ROBOTS SQUIDS then it's too stupid to tell them apart from the small, man shaped, good robots.  Aaaand maybe it's also a remote control.  Whatever, **** you."

"Hey, guys, we have this huge, universe ruining MacGuffin, but I'm afraid it won't do the job, and I'll make so much money from Mass Effect 3 that I'll have to fall asleep every night atop TWO piles of gold and supermodels!"
"I've got it!  We'll make a Deus Ex Machina live inside the completed Crucible!  WAIT, he'll ALSO be the guy you've been trying to kill all along!  But he'll ALSO be the biggest good guy in the universe!"
"Great idea!  And THEN we should make everyone lose their minds, become complete morons, and do horrible things!  I'll never have to worry about an overabundance of money again!!!"

[Eretikas]

BlueStorm83 wrote...
...BioWare has taken risks in Mass Effect 3.

Well written post. Problem is that BioWare acted like arrogant pricks and decided to ignore “Supply and demand” economic model when it came to fan requests. BioWare had a chance to FIX game by adding extra endings (Sheppard lives, relays stays, etc) depending on acquired total score. These extra (Steven Spielberg and James Cameron success guaranteed) choices would make 90% of community happy and won't impact players who still could pick “artistic”, full of plot holes, doom endings. Somebody in BioWare ruined this game and they are refusing to admit that they have a problem. According to pools, BioWare is so arrogant that they are saying 90% of Mass Effect fans are wrong. I'm wondering for how long they are going to sell games with that attitude.

Modifié par Eretikas, 10 juillet 2012 - 10:04 .

[Voodoo2015]

The Catalyst gives you four choices okay!

Choice One: Control you will be the new catalyst you become an god.

Choice Two: Synthetic there you create new life, a hybrid between organic and synthetic life. Without asking what everyone else in the galaxy think.

Choice Three: Destroy you will destroy all synthetic life becaurce the crusible doesn't discriminate.

Choice Four: Refusial Basically, you tell the catalyst to take his choices and shove it where the sun do not shine. And everyone dies.

How are they going to do a ME4 and why? Who will be the bad guys? Snake people? No. I know maybe the Village People. Maybe the game will be taking place in the near future, where you play the Joker trying to go back to Earth. Okay maybe a little childish but I can not see in front of me what a ME4 would be about.

From the very beginning everything was about a trilogy and not a quadruplet.

So maybe a spin-off, but why? I see no point. Shall we play as Freddie Prince Jr oh sorry Vega. ( I really do not like that guy ) Or maybe as Liara who are rebuilding her home planet.

No, let ME series, be completed. Tidy it with new DLC's, sneak in new endings, and save your faces. We fans are not as stupid as you think BW / EA.

Modifié par Voodoo2015, 10 juillet 2012 - 10:04 .

[Eretikas]

Voodoo2015 wrote...
Choice One: Control you will be the new catalyst you become an god.

This choice have some benefits - you can pick a reaper as your new girlfriend.

[Voodoo2015]

Eretikas wrote...

Voodoo2015 wrote...
Choice One: Control you will be the new catalyst you become an god.

This choice have some benefits - you can pick a reaper as your new girlfriend.

Funny