davidshooter wrote...
The Angry One wrote...
Damage control.
Yup,
Specifically, it was an attempt to slow the number of people trading the game in, or uninstalling it by dangling some future bit of content that no one will want to miss.
In other words, marketing BS
Aquilas wrote...
Olaf_de_IJsbeer wrote...
All those who feel Reject was an 'insult' (seriously?) probably think they mean this.
Here’s a great article with links to others:
Letting Go of Mass Effect 3
Note the Rob Munsch quote. BSN fans aren’t the only ones who think Reject is a slap in the face.
Modifié par Olaf_de_IJsbeer, 30 juin 2012 - 01:30 .
dreamgazer wrote...
Damage control or not, it shows that things were in the pipes and that we didn't have all the information. We didn't, obviously. And, in terms of DLC, we still don't.
Forgive my lack of cynicism, but I think something interesting is yet to come, something that'll tweak our perspective.
Femlob wrote...
dreamgazer wrote...
Damage control or not, it shows that things were in the pipes and that we didn't have all the information. We didn't, obviously. And, in terms of DLC, we still don't.
Forgive my lack of cynicism, but I think something interesting is yet to come, something that'll tweak our perspective.
It'll have to be one hell of a tweak, then.
They could start by eating their own words and beefing up the Reject ending.
iggy4566 wrote...
Femlob wrote...
dreamgazer wrote...
Damage control or not, it shows that things were in the pipes and that we didn't have all the information. We didn't, obviously. And, in terms of DLC, we still don't.
Forgive my lack of cynicism, but I think something interesting is yet to come, something that'll tweak our perspective.
It'll have to be one hell of a tweak, then.
They could start by eating their own words and beefing up the Reject ending.
But that would ruin their artistic vision.
iggy4566 wrote...
But that would ruin their artistic vision.
The Smitchens wrote...
iggy4566 wrote...
But that would ruin their artistic vision.
Am I the only one that finds this to be the most tired of all sarcastic replies? I'm not singling you out, just the essence of the response. When I read a book that I don't like I just stop reading it. I don't get on a forum and make a full time job out of snidely lashing out at people for writing something as they wanted. Are people not entitled to do so?
Hyrist wrote...
My thoughts on "If you knew..."
Was immediately "Then tell us!"
The concept of Non Disclosure Agreements is beginning to become a dated one. Blind hype is starting to sour games rather than excite them. We want data, we want actual information. If you've got to change something because of budget concerns, don't sit and be quiet about it and have use be unpleasantly surprised. Tell us! Not only will we, as gamers, understand, but we might be able to help - either with frund raising or pressuring publishers to give less restraints.
Developers - we are no your enemy. We are your fans, and quite possibly your strongest asset. We'll be harsh and strict with you when you stumble and fall, but it's because we want to see you succeed. Be human with us, and we will be so in turn. It's so much easier to support someone or a group that SHOWS they want and lean on that support, than someone who just says it and is all clammed up otherwise.
Involve us, and we'll be yours for the long haul.
Modifié par Tairram, 30 juin 2012 - 01:54 .
Cribbian wrote...
They already ruined their artistic integrity when they retconned Walters "galactic dark age" so that shouldn't be a problem anymore.
anorling wrote...
davidshooter wrote...
The Angry One wrote...
Damage control.
Yup,
Specifically, it was an attempt to slow the number of people trading the game in, or uninstalling it by dangling some future bit of content that no one will want to miss.
In other words, marketing BS
Though I think he said that before the ending debacle started. So I'm not sure it was damage control necessitated by the uproar.
It was probably just standard PR talk. Nothing new really.
The Angry One wrote...
anorling wrote...
davidshooter wrote...
The Angry One wrote...
Damage control.
Yup,
Specifically, it was an attempt to slow the number of people trading the game in, or uninstalling it by dangling some future bit of content that no one will want to miss.
In other words, marketing BS
Though I think he said that before the ending debacle started. So I'm not sure it was damage control necessitated by the uproar.
It was probably just standard PR talk. Nothing new really.
It did, but there were already murmurs on BSN, and he saw the endings already. He had to have known how this would go down.
Maybe nobody expected the backlash to be so severe, but there would be a bad reaction.
Samuel_Valkyrie wrote...
What damage control? Most people are actually quite satisfied with EC. Or rather, of the base here on BSN, the opinion is about evenly devided. And even the media outlets that agreed with Retake ME3, have shifted towards an appreciation of the new endings, in about 75/25 positive/negative (being gallant towards the negative).
So, yeah, at this point, they really don't need to be doing all that much damage control.
However, I do think it's a marketing thing, showing that, while EC is done, there will be stuff coming out for ME3. Trying to keep ME in the talk, so to speak.
jimjamalam22 wrote...
I think it was mainly to keep people interested if so it was quite [puts on sunglasses] a Gamble.
Modifié par Ownedbacon, 30 juin 2012 - 02:07 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
