288 réponses à ce sujet

[Plutar]

_aLucidMind_ wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Festilence wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Nope.
I don't feel I was listened to, I don't feel my concerns were addressed. I feel directly insulted.

Can't please everyone? A minor alteration to rejection, and they would've pleased me and a lot of others, while pleasing the rest with their endings. This notion is false, and BioWare deserve no credit.

What would that alteration to Rejection be?

Being able to beat the Reapers with super-high EMS, if I assume correctly. 

Which is far more narratively coherent than any of the three options presented. 

Lol what?

If organics can defeat the Reapers conventionally, then it should have been done already. And no don't tell me a united galaxy makes a **** of a difference. Unless every ship is equiped with Reaper IFFs, stealth drives, and Thanix Cannons then it simply isn't believable that the united fleets could put a dent on the Reapers.

There should have been a space-battle scene showing just how badly we lost (if low EMS) up to how the Reapers sustained a significant number of losses (if EMS is high), putting in just big enough of a dent for the next cycle to be able to pull it off if. If it is a low EMS, the next cycle winds up having to use the Crucible or it heeds Liara's word and winds up failing because we didn't take enough Reapers down.

Why do people keep claiming that your total EMS should've had an effect on how the Sword and Shield fleets faired in a fight against the Reaper armada?

A huge portion of your EMS is composed of ground forces that have no bearing on a space battle against Reaper ships. Every Krogan shock troop you get Wrex to bring from Tuchanka, every N7 Special Forces unit you promote, those units are all going to the ground fight.

Dreadnoughts are the most effective non-Crucible means we have for destroying Reaper ships (until Cerberus releases a prototype for their "Thresher Maws in Space" bazooka). For all the efforts players can go through to raise their EMS outside of single player, none of those efforts go towards the creation of new war ships.

Yes, you may have OVER 9,000!!!!!! EMS from hundreds of hours spent in multiplayer - hell, you might even reach 100,000 EMS someday - but what percentage of those war assets are allocated to Hammer team? There's only a fixed amount of in-game assets that can be added to the Sword or Shield fleets, and it's definitely not enough to defeat the Sovereign-class ships surrounding Earth, let alone every Reaper ship in the galaxy!

....That being said, a hilarious high-EMS Refusal scene would've been one where a player with said 100,000 war assets has all his N7 multiplayer units appear as a near-invicible fighting force on the ground, only to be entirely instakilled by capital Reaper ships firing from space.  

Modifié par Plutar, 01 juillet 2012 - 05:16 .

[chemiclord]

Mmmm... bitter whiny tears.

So delicious.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Hammer6767 wrote...

Jenonax wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Nope.
I don't feel I was listened to, I don't feel my concerns were addressed. I feel directly insulted.

Can't please everyone? A minor alteration to rejection, and they would've pleased me and a lot of others, while pleasing the rest with their endings. This notion is false, and BioWare deserve no credit.

Not gonna happen, unless you want to change the entire story. Having a different ending for refusal makes for HORRIBLE STORYTELLING. It deviates from the crux of ME3: the Crucible is the ONLY WAY TO STOP THE REAPERS. The evidence is there in the game.

You talk about horrible storytelling then cite a massive Deus Ex Machine as the only way to conclude a storyline as a good thing?  Go learn what actual good storytelling is and then come back.

Good storytelling is rather subjective, so your point is a little off.

However; bad story telling is far less so

[Doom972]

They deserve credit for going out of their way to do something like that. There are many games with rushed endings that the developers never fixed. The only other game I can think of where they fixed the ending is Fallout 3, and people have to play for that DLC.

It's not perfect but it made me happy with the series again. I never expected or wanted them to do more than having the end make sense and include an epilogue.

[Random Geth]

chemiclord wrote...

Mmmm... bitter whiny tears.

So delicious.

Gotta love kids.


As for the thread, I'd say they deserve TONS of credit.  They undid a ton of PR damage without actually changing a damn thing.  All the points that make it stupid and unsatisfying are still present, and yet people love them again.  They deserve credit, sure.

[Balek-Vriege]

I love all this talk about beating the Reapers conventionally. I once believed that was possible and what I wanted for an end to ME3. That was until I saw the huge amount of Reapers at the end of ME2 and thought "There's no way to beat these guys conventionally unless Thanix Cannons are mounted on every ship and are super effective." Well they turned out to be effective, but not that effective. Not to mention the Galaxy didn't mount them on every ship, were totally unprepared and the reality of the situation is that the Reapers pretty much outnumber the fleets and the ground forces of Galaxy anyways.

For there to be a conventional victory after all the detailed and realistic plot about the Galactic state of affairs, Reaper logistics and numbers, the sorry state of every economy, no infrastructure left, every Homeworld and area of space lost or in the process of being lost, just wouldn't make sense. By the end of ME3 and especially after the Citadel is lost, it doesn't even look like the Galaxy would be able to put up a fight for another couple weeks, let alone months or 400 years like the Protheans. You have to read the Codex entries and listen carefully to the dialogue in game. If you thought after all of it you could beat the Reapers without the Crucible, you weren't paying attention. The only chance you have is not throwing away your fleets and ground forces against various objectives and grouping them all against the main body of the Reaper Fleet at Earth (which still pretty much outnumbers Galactic forces alone) to activate the Crucible.

For refusal to spell victory with high EMS goes against what we know about the score in the Galactic War. It makes a lot more sense that we're the final cycle to lose, because we put all the puzzles together and past down all we knew about the Crucible, the Catalyst, Reaper Tech, and their tactics to the next Cycle (being the first to execute the plan fully). The only problem was Shepard, but Liara doesn't know that so the next Cylce will never know that Shep refused on Principal (unless the Catalyst told them).

Also for the record the Crucible and the Catalyst are McGuffins (even though the Catalyst is late in the game one). The Catalyst being an AI is a twist. Neither are Deus Ex Machina because the story evolves around them naturally the same way ME1 evolved around the Beacons and the Conduit natually. The pace in which things evolved could be considered fast, but they're still Macguffins, or more officially known as central plot devices.

Deus Ex Machina - A device out of no where (not really a plot device), that appears suddenly to save the day at the very end of a story, without previous reference, warning, steals the function of the Protagonist or MacGuffin and doesn't make any real logical sense in the story. For example it would be like having Zeus or the Devil coming down and saving the day for Shepard, wiping out the Reaper threat. The Catalyst AI gives Shepard choices, revolving around the Crucible and its logic being proven falliable by it. The Catalyst ties back to the main antagonists in the story lore wise. The Catalyst is also a plot device in the game by Priority: Thessia, when the Asari spill the beans about the Prothean VI. Therefore the Catalyst is a Macguffin.

MacGuffin - Again, it's basically a central plot device. The story revolves around these devices and victory or defeat for either the Protagonist or the Antagonist hinges on controlling, using and/or acquiring them. Anyone who says use of a MacGuffin is bad writing has no clue what one is. There's one or many in almost every story, especially plots with adventure, war and conflict. The Beacons, the Conduit, the Citadel, the Relays (kind of when it comes to the Reapers in ME1), Shepard (after his/her death in the story leading up to and during ME2), the Reaper IFF, the Crucible, the Prothean VI and the Catalyst are all major Macguffins of Mass Effect.

Space Magic - It works in Sci-fi. Sometimes it doesn't work, but that has more to do with the setting and lore behind it (for example it doesn't make sense in reality based, 20 minutes in the future settings). Mass Effect is a setting that lends itself to space magic (Biotics is about as space magic as you get without being totally Jedi). If people can't deal with the alien energy of the Crucible then i'm not sure how people missed Biotics or enjoyed other advanced Sci-fi settings like Star Wars...

Bioware does deserve credit and not have people trying to pigeon hole their work by trying to convey negative connotations through improper use and insinuation of terms. Or rewrite the game so it fits their opinions of how the endings should be. Credit doesn't mean you have to like the endings or praise them. It's just offering a bit of respect because they did revisit them, made them better for many and cured a lot of angst that they could have stubbornly ignored (by not making the free EC).

Meh this wasn't supposed to be this long...

Modifié par Balek-Vriege, 01 juillet 2012 - 05:35 .

[chemiclord]

I can't say I particularly loved them. I tolerate the endings now, which is a far cry from loving them.

But at the end of the day, I believe a writer has the right to tell a story however he/she/they sees fit; whether fans like it or not. If this is the narrative Bioware wants to hang their hat on, so be it. I don't have to like it, and I don't have to buy anything from them ever again.

That's the power I have... if I don't like what a company is doing, I don't buy their ****. If enough people agree with me, the company either learns their lesson, or they go out of business.

What ending does ME3 "deserve?" Whatever ending Bioware wants to roll with. That doesn't make it "good" or something I'm interested in.

[Zero132132]

People are missing the entire goddamned point. It doesn't matter whether you're happy or not. Who gives a **** about YOUR happiness, or mine?

The point is that Bioware responded to the fan outcry when they didn't have to. They did so in a way that costed a fair amount of money for them for voice actors, artists, programmers, and their writers, and they released it for free. So you didn't like it. Big ****ing deal. As a company, it's still a praiseworthy action, whether you personally feel satisfied or not.

[Geneaux486]

crimzontearz wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...did we get ANY sort of explanation about BS space magic? no

Actually we did get a lot of that.

uh...no....we really did not. It still makes no goddamn sense

It makes a lot more sense now, and it was expanded upon.  The simple fact is that we're given information on synthesis in the EC that was not present in the original release.  As for how space magical it is, it's not any more "magical" than dragon's teeth, the Reapers themselves, or the "cutting edge" technology that brought Shepard back from the dead.  It's not like every single peice of technology was completely explained before now, and the term "space magic" is basically just a strawman at this point because people are holding synthesis to a different standard than the rest of the tech in the game in terms of realism or how detailed the explanation of it is.  I mean, we find out in Mass Effect 2 that the Reapers can somehow upload organic minds into new Reapers by melting people down.  Does that make a lick of sense?  Hell no, but who cares, it's a thrilling plot twist.  A good story can be good regardless of whether or not it's grounded in reality, and Mass Effect sure as **** is not grounded in reality.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 01 juillet 2012 - 06:29 .

[Yalision]

I was very pleased with Bioware's work with the Extended Cut. I even bought a couple of cool Mass Effect prints now that the universe hasn't been obliterated. Looking forward to more DLC. Would like a complete trilogy with all DLC set released too so I can have that.

[Slayer299]

No, Bioware does not get credit for EC. The endings as we saw originally were worse than crap, if anything, what was the "EC" should have been the endings to begin with, not some bonus 'we're doing you fans a favor' or 'we're listening and we care' nonsense I've been seeing.

The EC didn't make the endings better, just clarified the epilogue and the choices for the 4 so they weren't *as* bad.

[Seta Souji]

That they spend money fixing they previous mistake it's beyond the point.

The point is, if it not ready don't release it, I could have waited until ****ing 2015 for a Mass Effect 3 astonishing Campaign and Ending, I wished Bioware could stand and told EA, "ME is no Battlefield you can't and we won't release one each year!"
If u can't release a compelling and complete SP campaign don't **** wasting your time doing a MP game, if i wanted to play a fun MP i would play Team Fortress 2 that is fun and free or even Killzone that is free now.

and specially don't put Mac Walters as a lead writer. Also Iol'ed with Banefire comment

"If you go back over the big hits of Bioware you will see Drew’s name credited alot of the time and without him they are only going to fall, especially with someone like Mac Walters who cant write a story to save his life, was there really no one else Bioware?? Seriously?! Or was that a EA decision to have him as lead, because he has no talent at all, surely you can see that."

[Wesker1984]

BioWare Deserves Credit For 'Mass Effect 3' Extended Cut

Absolutely, after the Extended cut was released i've regained faith in Bioware and i'm looking forward for their new porducts and DLC to comes.

Also i agree with every words Plutar and Balek-Vriege said.

Modifié par Wesker1984, 01 juillet 2012 - 06:14 .

[Plutar]

Wesker1984 wrote...

BioWare Deserves Credit For 'Mass Effect 3' Extended Cut

Absolutely, after the Extended cut was released i've regained faith in Bioware and i'm looking forward for their new porducts and DLC to comes.

Also i agree with every words Plutar and Balek-Vriege said.

Appreciated, sir

[Gibb_Shepard]

Hammer6767 wrote...

Why do people hate "Deus Ex Machina?"

Who gives a sh*t? Really.

Is it really that hard to fathom why? Think about it. Say there was a movie, and it's entire conflict was that of of how far man could go outside of his moral compass to save his family. Then in the last scene Jesus descends from God's holy anus and kills the antagonising factor, leaving the man to live happily ever after with his family.

But i think you already know why it's disliked in writing, and you were just being an attention ****. Good job, you got my attention.

[AmstradHero]

And herein is the quote (which Forbes quote from Rock, Paper, Shotgun) that underlies the flaws of the ending:

{The Reapers} firmly believe that what they do is for the good of the galaxy, and
that they’re preserving these races in Reaper form, but they do not see
how evil their actions have become. They’re wrong. But they’re wrong
from a position of enormous power, and it’s a power that not only
dominates the worlds of Mass Effect, but also the player.

This demonstrates the writers and designers making one of the most egregious and unforgivable errors of a video game:
The antagonist should never dominate a video game.

The antagonist isn't supposed to win. To do so invalidates every single action of the player within the game. The player is supposed to be given agency, not have it stripped from them.

This is game design 101, and is not something that a AAA title should be getting wrong.

[Gogzilla]

Ice Eyes wrote...

Bioware deserves credit. I hope ME3 makes GOTY.

I hope they don't
As much as i like it
And as much as they must be proud of it

I hold the bar much higher than that.

Technically speaking ME3 has numerous deficencies.

[EnvyTB075]

lol no.

You wanna talk "listening to the fans"? Take a page out of Bohemias Interactive's book, far more "listening" than BioWare will ever do.

Modifié par EnvyTB075, 01 juillet 2012 - 08:08 .

[Pantegana]

savionen wrote...

ME3 may as well be a different franchise, that just happens to have the same characters as Mass Effect.

Definitely this.

[Applepie_Svk]

Beliar86 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Nope.
I don't feel I was listened to, I don't feel my concerns were addressed. I feel directly insulted.

Can't please everyone? A minor alteration to rejection, and they would've pleased me and a lot of others, while pleasing the rest with their endings. This notion is false, and BioWare deserve no credit.

Entirely too serious and whiny about not getting your way in a video game

They said that they are not planning to add or recreate endings because it would destroy their artistic whatever... but we have recieved 4th options as an aswer to our supposed feedback.... and I am not taking fixing old plotholes with new or dumb explanations as answer to fans concerns... 

[Torrible]

The Angry One wrote...

Nope.
I don't feel I was listened to, I don't feel my concerns were addressed. I feel directly insulted.

Can't please everyone? A minor alteration to rejection, and they would've pleased me and a lot of others, while pleasing the rest with their endings. This notion is false, and BioWare deserve no credit.

http://en.wikipedia....olution_fallacy 

The perfect solution fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when an argument assumes that a perfect solution exists and/or that a solution should be rejected because some part of the problem would still exist after it were implemented. This is a classic example of black and white thinking, in which a person fails to see the complex interplay between multiple component elements of a situation or problem, and as a result, reduces complex problems to a pair of binary extremes.

[Torrible]

Erik Kain deserves credit, just like Jeremy Jahns and AngryJoe for changing their stance once the situation has changed. The 3 of them were extremely critical of the original ending. Hope this gives a clue to people who are still hating that they are not seeing the big picture.

[Anthropophobic]

Torrible wrote...

Erik Kain deserves credit, just like Jeremy Jahns and AngryJoe for changing their stance once the situation has changed. The 3 of them were extremely critical of the original ending. Hope this gives a clue to people who are still hating that they are not seeing the big picture.

They didn't really change their stance. They were like, "This is the best we're gonna get, and it's an 
improvement, so thanks Bioware." A little insulting to say that anyone who is still dissatisfied with the ending isn't "seeing the big picture" just because Kain, Jahns, and Joe like the ending more now.

[Torrible]

Anthropophobic wrote...

Torrible wrote...

Erik Kain deserves credit, just like Jeremy Jahns and AngryJoe for changing their stance once the situation has changed. The 3 of them were extremely critical of the original ending. Hope this gives a clue to people who are still hating that they are not seeing the big picture.

They didn't really change their stance. They were like, "This is the best we're gonna get, and it's an 
improvement, so thanks Bioware." A little insulting to say that anyone who is still dissatisfied with the ending isn't "seeing the big picture" just because Kain, Jahns, and Joe like the ending more now.

They did change their stance, from "Bioware has failed its fans" to "Bioware deserves credit". You know it's not just the 3 of them. I'm just using them as a more vivd example. Human beings are notoriously stubborn in their views. It takes a lot for someone with an extreme negative view to switch to a more moderate or positive one. This strongly implies that Bioware has done more than just made a bad ending longer. They have actually fixed many of the major gripes about the original ending.

[Raging_Pulse]

felipejiraya wrote...

Yes, they deserve credit because other companies in the same situation would simply tell us to go to hell.

But the endings are still flawed and for this they don't deserve any credit.

Agreed.