6432 réponses à ce sujet

[3DandBeyond]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

If you plan to continue to assume I fail at economics based on your grasping of thin air, you can't expect me to take what you say seriously anymore.

You mean like the assumption that mass produced = no fan input? Again, collective action is everything. That customers are rarely able to assume that function does not mean that it does not exist.

As someone who has done private beta testing this is a truly funny thing.   Mass produced items are particularly exposed to fan input.  They cost a lot to create and require a lot of fans to make money.

One thing I do know is that video games are extremely expensive to make and their profit margins are very slim.  They truly cannot afford to turn away many paying customers.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 09 septembre 2012 - 06:17 .

[Applepie_Svk]

Dragoonlordz wrote...


I know that for fact they said they are not doing anymore ending DLC.

They said many things ... and lot of them turn to be false. 

[AresKeith]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

you don't know what Bioware is planning within their DLCs as much as we don't

I do know for a fact when ME4 (whether prequel, sequel or spin off) comes out there won't be any ME3 DLC being made at that stage anymore. I know for fact that is how Bioware handles DLC and that there is a time frame limitation between one title and the next they use to create DLC for the previous game.

well until they announce a ME4 or hint at it, they the time they need at the moment. And that doesn't really answer my previous comment

I know that for fact they said they are not doing anymore ending DLC.

and once again because you obvious didn't read past posts a few pages back, we also suggested that they do this by pre-ending DLCs that require us to work harder than everyone else

[3DandBeyond]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...


I know that for fact they said they are not doing anymore ending DLC.

They said many things ... and lot of them turn to be false. 

And people have an intrinsic ability to change their minds when a suitable case is made.  It's a part of character and character growth, to learn and adapt and evolve.

[Dragoonlordz]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

If you plan to continue to assume I fail at economics based on your grasping of thin air, you can't expect me to take what you say seriously anymore.

You mean like the assumption that mass produced = no fan input? Again, collective action is everything. That customers are rarely able to assume that function does not mean that it does not exist.

Putting words in my mouth does not change the reality factually of what I said. Care to point out single time I said they do not listen to fan feedback? Listening does not mean the product is not mass produced to cater to many people with many different expectations and desires for what they like to see content wise. It is a broad paint brush type product to cater to as many as could within one single product which means something things some people like and some things others do not. What you want them to do is create content with a pencil approach meaning very specific to you and your group. Bioware has always taken the broad paint brush approach while you want them to use tiny little pencil.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 09 septembre 2012 - 06:27 .

[Iakus]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...


I know that for fact they said they are not doing anymore ending DLC.

They said many things ... and lot of them turn to be false. 

They also said they have "no plans" to make postending DLC

But that's not the same thing as "definitely not"

[MegaSovereign]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...


I know that for fact they said they are not doing anymore ending DLC.

They said many things ... and lot of them turn to be false. 

And people have an intrinsic ability to change their minds when a suitable case is made.  It's a part of character and character growth, to learn and adapt and evolve.

Usually game developers say they "have no plans" to do something they will not likely do.

When a game developer comes out and makes a concrete "no" statement over and over, it implies that they are committed to a certain content schedule and that they will not change it.

[Dragoonlordz]

3DandBeyond wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

If you plan to continue to assume I fail at economics based on your grasping of thin air, you can't expect me to take what you say seriously anymore.

You mean like the assumption that mass produced = no fan input? Again, collective action is everything. That customers are rarely able to assume that function does not mean that it does not exist.

As someone who has done private beta testing this is a truly funny thing.   Mass produced items are particularly exposed to fan input.  They cost a lot to create and require a lot of fans to make money.

One thing I do know is that video games are extremely expensive to make and their profit margins are very slim.  They truly cannot afford to turn away many paying customers.

If you think that then Bioware should drop Mass Effect and make Mass Warfare FPS, after all more people like FPS so why would they not want more money and more fans from a genre which has more of both? You want them to have more fans and therefore more money but only if they continue to make what you want.

[AresKeith]

MegaSovereign wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...


I know that for fact they said they are not doing anymore ending DLC.

They said many things ... and lot of them turn to be false. 

And people have an intrinsic ability to change their minds when a suitable case is made.  It's a part of character and character growth, to learn and adapt and evolve.

Usually game developers say they "have no plans" to do something they will not likely do.

When a game developer comes out and makes a concrete "no" statement over and over, it implies that they are committed to a certain content schedule and that they will not change it.

yea they said no Ending DLC, but they could do this through pre-ending DLCs like you and I said

[TJBartlemus]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...


I know that for fact they said they are not doing anymore ending DLC.

They said many things ... and lot of them turn to be false. 

Actually I think almost everything they have said won't be in the game ended up being in the game. No ABC ending...we get ABC ending. (Actually now we have a ABCD ending.) Your choices matter...they don't really. The rachni will play a big part...they didn't. Ironic huh? 

[Dragoonlordz]

AresKeith wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

you don't know what Bioware is planning within their DLCs as much as we don't

I do know for a fact when ME4 (whether prequel, sequel or spin off) comes out there won't be any ME3 DLC being made at that stage anymore. I know for fact that is how Bioware handles DLC and that there is a time frame limitation between one title and the next they use to create DLC for the previous game.

well until they announce a ME4 or hint at it, they the time they need at the moment. And that doesn't really answer my previous comment

I know that for fact they said they are not doing anymore ending DLC.

and once again because you obvious didn't read past posts a few pages back, we also suggested that they do this by pre-ending DLCs that require us to work harder than everyone else

And once again you fail to realise the failure of logic in that stance. Even if they make change pre-ending they have to make massive changes to the actual ending whether addition or alteration for those pre-ending changes to have any effect. You can't pretend it is not ending DLC when it has to at some point change the actual ending for your idea to even work.

Anyways I got better things to do than run around in circles with your arguements.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 09 septembre 2012 - 06:40 .

[MegaSovereign]

AresKeith wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...


I know that for fact they said they are not doing anymore ending DLC.

They said many things ... and lot of them turn to be false. 

And people have an intrinsic ability to change their minds when a suitable case is made.  It's a part of character and character growth, to learn and adapt and evolve.

Usually game developers say they "have no plans" to do something they will not likely do.

When a game developer comes out and makes a concrete "no" statement over and over, it implies that they are committed to a certain content schedule and that they will not change it.

yea they said no Ending DLC, but they could do this through pre-ending DLCs like you and I said

That's true. But even then they can't retcon what's already there, only add onto it.

[Iakus]

Get Shepard out of the garbage. That alone would make a lot of people happy

[AresKeith]

MegaSovereign wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Usually game developers say they "have no plans" to do something they will not likely do.

When a game developer comes out and makes a concrete "no" statement over and over, it implies that they are committed to a certain content schedule and that they will not change it.

yea they said no Ending DLC, but they could do this through pre-ending DLCs like you and I said

That's true. But even then they can't retcon what's already there, only add onto it.

yea we know, thats basically what this thread is really suggesting

[AresKeith]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

And once again you fail to realise the failure of logic in that stance. Even if they make change pre-ending they have to make massive changes to the actual ending for those pre-ending changes to have any effect. You can't pretend it is not ending DLC when it has to at some point change the actual ending for your idea to even work.

Anyways I got better things to do than run around in circles with your arguements.

not really since Leviathan basically did this in a small way

riiggghhtt, you said that the last few times and came back on your own

[Atakuma]

iakus wrote...

Get Shepard out of the garbage. That alone would make a lot of people happy

Shepard isn't in any garbage.

[MegaSovereign]

I don't think Omega will impact the endings for obvious reasons.

In the Levi files a potential Citadel/Crucible DLC was revealed. Perhaps that will alter the endings in some way. For example, they could make the fate of Shepard after the breath scene be determined by your C-Sec war assets. It's a stretch but it's possible. It wouldn't modify the EC, only expand on it.

They'd have to debunk the IT indefinitely, though. So that may be a conflict of interest

EDIT: 

They'd also have to add something to the other endings to "balance it out."

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 09 septembre 2012 - 06:46 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Putting words in my mouth does not change the reality factually of what I said. Care to point out single time I said they do not listen to fan feedback?

When you made the distinction between products which are mass-produced and tailor-made. Fan feedback is telling Bioware "we want Shepard to survive", which they are allowed to request. Your statement had no relevance because even mass-produced products are intended to meet a specific market. Collective action influencing mass-production, as per the Extended Cut. That's all this is.

Listening does not mean the product is not mass produced to cater to many people with many different expectations and desires for what they like to see content wise. It is a broad paint brush type product to cater to as many as could within one single product which means something things some people like and some things others do not.

See, this is the key to your misunderstanding. You don't understand the meaning of "collective action". If all three million people expressed a singular demand that Shepard survive ME3 or they would not buy the game, I can guarantee you that Shepard would have survived ME3. The alternative is no profits which means no more Bioware. Collective action occurs when enough people express demand for a specific product that Bioware can capture them in a fairly broad scope. That's why it's collective and not individual.

You're not arguing against collective action. You're arguing against the likelihood of this effort working out, which was never in question. If Bioware does not implement an ending where Shepard survives, it's simply because the collective in this case doesn't have enough influence. But since Bioware depends on funds and the fans are supplying the funds, it is necessarily true that Bioware depends on the fans as a collective whole.

What you want them to do is create content with a pencil approach meaning very specific to you and your group. Bioware has always taken the broad paint brush approach while you want them to use tiny little pencil.

False. This is not "my group". I don't give a crap that Shepard dies. I'm simply employing basic economics. It doesn't matter how broad or specific the demand is. If enough people demand X, Bioware must supply X or potentially suffer financial losses.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 09 septembre 2012 - 06:57 .

[Zan51]

Quick question before leaving for work. If the relays are destroyed as in pre- EC ending, or even only partially, how do the Reapers intend to get to Dark Space where they hibernate IF they are not sorted otyu in this cycle? I mean, they do not know what Shep's decision would be, or even if she/he will make one, So do they plan a leisurely stroll through the galaxy over the next few hundred thousand years, hm? Or is it hundreds of years frantically rebuilding ALL the relays for the next cycle? I sense a plot hole here, because what the Reapers would do afterwards is not taken into account for a normal cycle or a Refuse option. In fact, the decisions seem to show they know what will happen ..

Er done in haste to get to work, please OPs who are good at this take it and rearrange/add to what I am trying to say!

[Dragoonlordz]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

-snipped to prevent massive quote pyramids-

Yet when I say they have seen what demand there is which they have for many months now seen what people want and such and how many are asking for it, they made their choice which is already known and appears as though they think demand based all they have already seen across a larger amount of sources that demand is not high enough for them to do it (even if their choice is not accepted by some). I am the one being told it is irrelevant. Go figure.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 09 septembre 2012 - 07:13 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Zan51 wrote...

Quick question before leaving for work. If the relays are destroyed as in pre- EC ending, or even only partially, how do the Reapers intend to get to Dark Space where they hibernate IF they are not sorted otyu in this cycle? I mean, they do not know what Shep's decision would be, or even if she/he will make one, So do they plan a leisurely stroll through the galaxy over the next few hundred thousand years, hm? Or is it hundreds of years frantically rebuilding ALL the relays for the next cycle? I sense a plot hole here, because what the Reapers would do afterwards is not taken into account for a normal cycle or a Refuse option. In fact, the decisions seem to show they know what will happen ..

Er done in haste to get to work, please OPs who are good at this take it and rearrange/add to what I am trying to say!

It is not a plot hole. It is headcanon but it is a required headcanon. For the same reason they do not create content for every single possible outcome spanning the next millenia. Different levels of closure and elucidation about events. For example Shepard lives is closure, Shepard has children again still closure, Shepards children have children of their own is closure, Shepards great great great grandchildren have children is closure. There is a point in which information is stopped and rest is left for the player to think about.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 09 septembre 2012 - 07:14 .

[3DandBeyond]

MegaSovereign wrote...

I don't think Omega will impact the endings for obvious reasons.

In the Levi files a potential Citadel/Crucible DLC was revealed. Perhaps that will alter the endings in some way. For example, they could make the fate of Shepard after the breath scene be determined by your C-Sec war assets. It's a stretch but it's possible. It wouldn't modify the EC, only expand on it.

They'd have to debunk the IT indefinitely, though. So that may be a conflict of interest

EDIT: 

They'd also have to add something to the other endings to "balance it out."

Yes and anything could happen.  This is very true.  Considering the only choice where the state of the crucible actually seems to mean something is destroy, I continually wonder why this has no impact on the other choices at all.  It is largely intact-this means one thing mainly that stems from 2 possibilities.  It is not complete.  And it could be either because you are missing a key component or it has been damaged.  Many ways to fix that, but why wouldn't it have an effect on the other 2 choices.  It's pretty clear it is missing some sort of target component or some sort of other power or that the beam's "outlet" has been damaged in some way-since in low EMS it's pretty destructive.  But why does it not change the other choices and if more intact make them better?

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Here is what is sad. If you played all three games with all of the DLC and played all of the side missions ME1 took about 60 hrs.; ME2 took about 60 hrs.; ME3 took about 43 hrs. (now with Leviathan included). That adds up to 163 hrs.

So we have a 163 hr series. Imagine a 163 hr series and what is it remembered for? The final 20 minutes because there was such a radical disconnect between that 20 minutes and the previous 162 hrs 40 minutes.

We are talking about 0.2% of the entire series.

Isn't it obvious there is something wrong here?

This is basically a science fantasy series where biotics are in place of magic, and there is such thing as positive and negative current (yeah right), and where starships can use element zero to lower their mass to go travel faster than light giving way to what is known as mass effect. So I can't take everything so seriously about it. What I can take seriously about it is consistency.

And now I'm getting confused about what we're trying to accomplish. I thought we were trying to get Shepard out of the pile of garbage at the end of the high EMS destroy ending so the we who chose that could have some closure like the rest of you. Yet even this is being met with a lot of resistance like the cost isn't high enough. Okay, I'll tell you what. If I throw in letting everyone in the greater NYC area get turned into reaper marmalade or husks will that be enough to placate the Control and Synthesis people? I think that's about 20 million people in 2186. Can Shepard get out of the pile of garbage now? Is the cost high enough? No? How about if I throw in Shanghai? There's got to be about 30 million in the greater Shanghai area. Is that enough of a sacrifice? Can Shepard get rescued from the garbage now and have the reunion? No? How about Calcutta? another 40 million in the greater area. That should be enough of a blood sacrifice. Shepard should be able to get rescued now and have that reunion with the blessing of the Control and Synthesis and pro-ender gods.

All the controversy was over the 0.2% of the entire series. After the EC was issued, many saw it as a band aid and gave up. That's the fact. I'm helping someone finish up Borderlands and we'll be done with that on the 18th and I'll be onto Borderlands 2 on the 18th this month, but I want to get a few parting shots in (I do intend to check in periodically just in case there's any new developments like ... an ending DLC for closure on the Destroy ending but I won't hold my breath ... pardon the pun). And to check and see when Omega comes out so I can watch that episode as well.

129 pages.....

[3DandBeyond]

Zan51 wrote...

Quick question before leaving for work. If the relays are destroyed as in pre- EC ending, or even only partially, how do the Reapers intend to get to Dark Space where they hibernate IF they are not sorted otyu in this cycle? I mean, they do not know what Shep's decision would be, or even if she/he will make one, So do they plan a leisurely stroll through the galaxy over the next few hundred thousand years, hm? Or is it hundreds of years frantically rebuilding ALL the relays for the next cycle? I sense a plot hole here, because what the Reapers would do afterwards is not taken into account for a normal cycle or a Refuse option. In fact, the decisions seem to show they know what will happen ..

Er done in haste to get to work, please OPs who are good at this take it and rearrange/add to what I am trying to say!

Well, I think this is a plot hole as well as the whole problem of the relays.  Reapers were said to shut them down right away when they entered the galaxy so as to isolate the people of the galaxy.  They don't.  So, it's a case of the relays figuring way too much into every aspect of what they've done here.  The relays are used as tools of destruction, as points of debate (TIM's convo), as examples of so-called good reaper tech with some unknown impact.  For instance, not all relays are online and lead to unknown places.  The problem is more that the relays should almost be just taken for granted and not a big factor, but BW made them so and then seemed to forget about all that.  They focused far too much on how they couldn't be destroyed and then a way they could and then included several things pointing to the result of even partially destroyed relays.  It just always sounds like a work in progress and it's hard to get serious when something that shouldn't matter so much is created and shown to be a central issue and then ignored.

The relays should be like an elevator, easily just taken for granted and we all know how problematic elevators got to be.


I also believe someone does not understand closure at all.  It is not explaining things to the last detail.  It is concluding things to remove ambiguity.  I don't need to see Shepard old and gray and I don't need to see Shepard's children as old people either.  That's not closure.  Closure is being shown ambiguity and removing that ambiguity.  Dead or alive is ambiguity.  Dead is closure.  Alive is closure.  From there everything else is gravy.  Desirable?  Sure, no doubt as many have expressed just such a wish.  Necessary?  No.  The ambiguity surrounds the main character of the game-the one who quite literally speaks for you and is the hero you would want to see in that circumstance.  Leaving said character in rubble is not leaving him/her in garbage, but it is treating that character like garbage.  It is ambiguous because there is no credible explanation for the fate of that character.  The kid's description of what it means is ambiguous.  The location and state of the torso is ambiguous.  The location and response speed of any help for said torso is ambiguous.  Therefore the fate of that torso which is a person is ambiguous.  That's not closure.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 09 septembre 2012 - 07:42 .

[Debi-Tage]

I think we can appeal to BW as much as we want for whatever we desire, and I think they actually DO care what happens to this franchise in the end. It was very apparent, however, even before ME3 hit the shelves that BW was making it standard to push the story (and progression of said story) through the use of multiple platforms (comics, novels, apps, a movie, and mobile games) not to mention MP. Truth is ME3 bears little resemblance to the first two games in this regard, and it shows the standalone SP version. Imagine for one moment having played nothing but the vanilla version of all three games in succession and trying to make sense of the story (meaning no comics, novels, Arrival, Lair of the Shadowbroker, etc.). The fact of the matter is that anything that adds to the vanilla essentially changes the story and everything coming after, either directly or indirectly. My opinion is, as long as things are being added to ME3, whether it be delivered through DLC, MP missions, comics, novels, movies, whatever - the storyline is still evolving. Period.
This is the future of single-player experiences for any studio under the tentacles of EA. Welcome to the 21st Century my friends.