AresKeith wrote...
Dragoonlordz wrote...
3DandBeyond wrote...
Blueprotoss wrote...
AresKeith wrote...
we said it was up to EA/Bioware if they wanna go with it, even though they would gain from both sides of the Fanbase by this
Its a double-edged and for all we know that a bigger uproar appears.
That's why I am attempting to have people see this as a compromise everyone makes, but people that have the endings they want are not being asked to do anything-not to even change what they have at all. And yet, some can't even give on that point as if it would ruin their lives.
As said to you many times, time and money spent making what you want is time and money taken away from creating what others want including what Bioware wants. Add on to this fact what you want or more specifically the method of how you want something even among people who hate the same thing you do, will have a method they prefer or way to handle it that is different to how you want something handled.
Have you been reading the past few comments? We were suggesting that they do this through their planned DLCs, so they don't push back there current DLC schedule and make us work harder for it
Do you not see the flaw? Let say you mean planned DLC such as Omega. Take second part of what I said, even between those who hate the same part of the game all have different ideas on how would like to change or fix it for themselves, the method used. If you add the change you want to a pre-existing scheduled DLC your basically forcing those who want it handled in a different way unable to ever have what they want because your change becomes hardwired into existing broader content DLC.
The problem is you have no actual consensus on how to handle most. If built into pre-planned DLC then it no longer becomes optional either because you will be forced to have someone's method of it being done despite it not being handled the way you wanted. Unlike if was made on it's own those people who bought the DLC for different reason and for the other content are going to be lumbered with your change despite them not asking for it and handled in a way they never wanted.
There are some things I think Bioware could do and some things they cannot.
Harbinger for example as explained somewhere else is possible BUT you still are at risk of not being handled the way some people or groups wanted it done. This example I gave in another thread is the sort of thing that might allow for such DLC but it would have to stick with certain rules as to not anger or annoy those who never asked for such when buying that other pre-planned DLC.
Personally it is possible something will be done with Harbinger in DLC. But it will not be making him a final boss of ME3 and it won't be you killing him. It will not invalidate or be a method of dismissing the catalyst or give you new ending choices. These rules must be followed to not alienate the people who had no interest in Harbinger and actually like the game as it stands. The effect must be limited to the DLC and not effecting the core game.
For example could be in Omega DLC an "additional" confrontation whether dialogue and some combat with him in some form but you won't be allowed to beat him because he is required for plot purpose to appear where he does in ME3 already. He will still be required to live and/or escape so that he can be where you have confrontation with him in the main core game as already is at that point before the beam. The DLC will not be about him aka not a 'Harbinger DLC' but in reality for example 'Omega DLC' of which he merely just present and part of it. It will not change the endings, it will not give you a new ending choice and it won't give you more content in the core game relating to him. You wil not get anything that changes the ending of ME3. This is the only way to not upset those who like the game as it stands yet give something to those who wan't a confrontation with Harbinger.
This whole reunion DLC stuff, there has to be limitations on impact, for example can only be gained through destroy ending. The content limited to either slides or a single clip dependant on which LI you were with. It must not change the endings, destroy is the only one where he breathes so is the only one can get such.
Conventional Victory/Unconventional Victory (symantics), is simply however not realistic, not reasonable and not going to happen because the level of retcon and more. This is the one idea above all others that would never happen. So forget it, just not going to happen. What is potentially possible however is cinematics added onto the current refuse ending that shows that the fleets and your crew give it their all in a one last stand type of sequence. It will result in loss but it will show slow motion and emotional parts of people care about fighting till their last breathe against the Reapers. This would not change the ending choices, they will play out the same way, the slideshows would not require alteration (I think) and it would merely be one additional cutscene. This is a more possible and viable option.
Any new options added to the ending regarding new choices will never happen, not in a million years. You may as well be urinating into the wind on that. There is not enough time or money or even consensus on what people want for this that any idea you have of changing this is moot. They will not create a DLC for each group that want's something, any DLC they create will not change the current choices or the fact the catalyst will remain is it is. Unles you can accept those two remaining the same (choices and catalyst) then what your doing is not compromising at all and will not happen.
Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 09 septembre 2012 - 03:51 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
