6432 réponses à ce sujet

[BearlyHere]

I'm not naive at all. I'm one of those who is holding the line, and refusing to buy anything unless it makes a satisfactory adjustment to the ending, not just another explanation of what they didn't bother to explain in the first place because they assumed we read minds or would get it all through osmosis. I wasn't part of the blue babies crowd until my third playthrough, and by then, which was around the time of the EC release, I was pretty damned disgusted. That extends to DA3 as well. After two DLCs that I couldn't play completely because of bugs and crashes, I've joined the "no money from me until I see peer reviews" crowd.

[3DandBeyond]

obZen DF wrote...

A quick side note: I love this thread so much. So many interesting things to read

Hey that's great to hear.  I think a lot of people have some really great things to say and the discussions may veer off, but are interesting.

I hope BW sees that, too.

[3DandBeyond]

BearlyHere wrote...

I'm not naive at all. I'm one of those who is holding the line, and refusing to buy anything unless it makes a satisfactory adjustment to the ending, not just another explanation of what they didn't bother to explain in the first place because they assumed we read minds or would get it all through osmosis. I wasn't part of the blue babies crowd until my third playthrough, and by then, which was around the time of the EC release, I was pretty damned disgusted. That extends to DA3 as well. After two DLCs that I couldn't play completely because of bugs and crashes, I've joined the "no money from me until I see peer reviews" crowd.

That's the thing, from the posts I read (more than I could count) and comments, you are not alone in this.  It's really something I think BW should pay attention to.  Not a threat to not buy, but the reality of it.  What has happened here is kind of a disservice that they just don't understand.  Nobody buys a game and wants to see how it ends before they play it-that's one of the great parts of playing a game (because it is about the destination just as much as the danged journey).  The ending is the payoff for what you did.  But no one that disliked the endings is now going to trust games or devs like before and endings for story games will matter as much as the rest of the game.  There will be a lot of people waiting to see how some games end or what the reaction to them is before buying.

There's no way some of the EC stuff could have ever been just known was what was meant, because what the EC showed in some places was a total retcon of what we'd seen in the original endings.  The other stuff was stuff we knew was what they meant.  However, closure, unh unh.  No the EC didn't provide that because closure means just what it sounds like it means.  If head canon was such a good idea, then it should have remained what it was, not speculation from everyone, but a true head canon ending.  What's good for some, should have remained good for all, if the intention was never to apply real closure.  And, I'm so torn here, because I fear that we make suggestions and again it's just the opposite will happen.  But, it's because I'm not naive.  Wishful, wistful, hopeful.  Yep, that's me.  Naive, no way.

[Snypy]

Ozida wrote...

Well, I was surprised to see Shepard breathing after Destroy when Catalyst clearly indicated that Shepard will die. Not all went as planned, lol.

(...)

Actually, the Starchild asked Shep if he could imagine living without his synthetic implants. The Catalyst never said, however, that Shep would die. And its indications are as twisted as its logic. It's kind of hard to believe anything it says.

wymm666 wrote...

You must be naive to believe they still listen to you and not your wallet. Ok, that's a bit cynical, they do, but only when it's backed up by your wallet. Ultimately, what comes out of that studio depends entirely on how much money they're going to make, which depends on EA, which depends on their investors/shareholders, which... have nothing to do with you as a thinking feeling individual.

Best way to leverage them? torrent.

Torrents are the best way to ensure that there won't be any new games.

[SpamBot2000]

Torrents? Best way to exclude yourself from any consideration with game developers. Best way to vacate any moral ground in conversations regarding fraudulent marketing. Best way to encourage intrusive DRM. And so on and so forth.

[Xellith]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Torrents? Best way to exclude yourself from any consideration with game developers. Best way to vacate any moral ground in conversations regarding fraudulent marketing. Best way to encourage intrusive DRM. And so on and so forth.

To be fair... most torrents dont have DRM.

Regardless - the topic should veer away from all things piracy.  Its against the terms of service to discuss it on these boards.  (I should know since I have been temp banned before).

Seriously drop the piracy talk or you may have action taken against your account.

Modifié par Xellith, 23 septembre 2012 - 03:25 .

[xcomcmdr]

Chardonney wrote...

I fully agree with the OP. Listen BioWare, for once. One voice represents many.

[GarvakD]

But can they actually hear that voice? Do they pay attention to these forums?

[3DandBeyond]

wymm666 wrote...

You must be naive to believe they still listen to you and not your wallet. Ok, that's a bit cynical, they do, but only when it's backed up by your wallet. Ultimately, what comes out of that studio depends entirely on how much money they're going to make, which depends on EA, which depends on their investors/shareholders, which... have nothing to do with you as a thinking feeling individual.

Best way to leverage them? torrent.

This has no place here.

Piracy is never the answer because the property is theirs to do with as they wish.  By this estimation if cars cost too much or I don't like something they've done with them, then I have every right to steal one to get them to do what I want.  This is illegal.  And I would state that for many a car is more of a necessity.  A video game is not.

The course of action you have with any consumer product is to not buy anything further from the company (in the absence of stating what was done wrong this tells the company nothing to help them even consider fixing it), just live with it (ultimately what may well happen), or see if you can make a change (until it is truly impossible to do so).  Stealing means you have no right ever to say they did anything wrong because you've just set the bar so low that nothing is off the table.

Ever wonder why MP was made a part of SP in the original game?  I don't.  Mass Effect 1 had some horrid DRM scheme that was almost impossible to remove from a computer.  If you think MP was just about micro-transactions, I think you're wrong.  I think it was a way to try and make sure just what you've suggested was not taking place.  Now, I don't know whether it worked or not for that, but I think it was an attempt.

This thread is not about this however.  What you suggest fixes nothing-it makes everything far less possible.  Talking may do nothing, but it is about being constructive.  I don't want BW to fail.  I just want ME3 to succeed and I think addressing some of the wishes for it could help that.  I think they may see that.  Perhaps they won't, but it won't be me that destroys ME.  I think if they aren't paying attention to a lot of this (the ending as a choice, synthesis is inevitable and will be used, MMO, and ME as more of a shooter) and just how negatively people react to all of it, they will continue on a destructive path.  They won't make what many of us consider to be the types of games we want to see if others steal them or if they refuse to take another look.  And eventually they may not make games at all.  That's not a threat, not hyperbolic, but is reality. 

I read stuff far more than I talk about it, and I talk a lot.  Real support for the games is needed, but most of what I've read does not support more games or content for many reasons, one being a dislike or just not real love for the endings.  People talk of sequels, prequels, or games concurrent with this cycle's time and as it now stands it's all but impossible to go forward, depressing and pointless to go back, and just not fun to do something that is within the same time period even if it's in another galaxy.  There are relatively few options here.

Prequels lead to doom at the hand of the reapers-been there, done that.
Sequels do need to have canon set-one ending or at the very least one better ending among all of the choices and the non-choice.  People say they could make all endings or no ending canon (same thing).  Well, that would mean 4 separate games, costing 4 times as much in order to make 1 story.  I would rather have 4 times the story, than have 3 extra versions I don't care for so much.  And as it is if there's no fix to the endings so that some more people can have an ending they like, the idea of 4 separate stories based on stuff they didn't like will persuade them to NOT buy.  And even if you like the endings, it really seems counter-intuitive that you'd rather have 4 separate games that force you to play in different ways and not 1 bigger game that you can play again and again in different ways that you choose.
Games set in a time period concurrent to this one would have you wondering what is going on in the Milky Way right now.  You'd be wistful for character types you liked and probably very wistful for certain characters.  Such a new game would seem like an echo and maybe not as fun as it at first seems.

Either way, I do see there is dwindling support for going on with ME as a franchise.  I think they should continue it though.  I can't imagine them creating a new Sci Fi series set in the Milky Way in the future (or past) and not have it be a part of ME.  Could they do it?  Sure.  But they'd have to create new realities from the ground up.  Just look at things that already exist in ME and ask yourself what elements you'd like to see in a new SF series.  Biotics-that't half the fun in combat.  People want fun guns, me I love biotic powers.  Do they then create a new series with something else.  First midichlorians then eezo, then what?  Yes, they could come up with something new.  But should they?  I fear that creating something that is any way similar with a different name would backfire.  Some would think that all they did was change the name of the series and names of things in order to avoid negativity.  A rose by any other name, or rotten eggs by any other name. 

I think ME is a franchise worth saving and worth further exploration.  There are so many things in the codex that sound like a lot of fun if looked at more closely.  But, I don't want a green-eyed future for these people.  I don't want it to be reaperville for them in the future.  I don't want them to have all died and I don't want certain people to be needlessly and arbitrarily killed in order for them to have a future.  I don't want to go 10k into the future and see others living off of the remnants of what this cycle did.  And I don't want to be told that the reapers were just destroyed and people rebuilt and life went on and the geth, EDI, Shepard survived.  I want to see that.  That's why I played ME1 and then 2 and 3.  And it would be the only reason I'd play ME4-if I got to see that.  I mean it could take place as an addition to ME3 now or done in some other way within an ME game.

They could even consider using a prologue or further epilog in order to do this, but I want to see it.

[3DandBeyond]

GarvakD wrote...

But can they actually hear that voice? Do they pay attention to these forums?

Here's the thing.  They may not.

But it's like the proverbial tree falling in the forest, does it make noise. 

Well, one thing is certain.  If the tree never falls it won't make that noise.

So, when something bothers you, you have a couple options.  One is to speak up and hope someone listens and maybe addresses the things that bother you.  The other is to say silent and be sure they never will.

[Snypy]

@Xellith: If they ban somebody, at least we'll know that a BioWare employee read this thread. ^^

Modifié par Snypy, 23 septembre 2012 - 03:41 .

[3DandBeyond]

Snypy wrote...

@Xellith: If they ban somebody, at least we'll know that a BioWare employee read this thread. ^^

Hmm, that's positive thinking.

Actually, I don't know how it works here but I've modded on other forums.  I've modded on dev's forums.  And, on other forums the day to day modding is done by volunteers who get paid nothing-they are just fans like us.  The community managers are employees.  I can't say that's how it works here, but it works that way on a lot of other forums-even on electronic and other product websites.  They enlist the community for help, because no one could really afford to pay people to do this.  Maybe BW and some companies do this differently.

And just to be clear here-nothing I say here is because I love other devs more or other games more.  I am not modding anywhere now and stopped because it is like a full time job with very little thanks from anyone.  Do too much and people hate that, not enough and people hate that.  And, if you act in one thread, but miss something in another one, people think you're playing favorites.  Most mods go into it with the idea that they are not acting for the company, but for the good of the community.  But they are often not seen like that.

The last site I modded was pretty contentious and featured a lot of petitions, hatred for the company, and so on.  Sound familiar.  And the company allowed people to talk, just not to spam, troll, and attack people.  Private user generated web site forums use a different standard since part of what they want to do is maintain good relationships with companies (some may have a concern that companies will hold them responsible for defamation).  So, they are often way more strict than company sites.  Some are not and let you say anything, no matter how vile. 

I have to give BW kudos here and I can only speak for what seems to happen now-I have no idea what happened in the past and don't wish to revisit all of that.  I do think the modding here has been pretty fair.  Sure, nobody can please everybody, but they do allow us to talk and generally have a pretty even hand.  I don't want them bashed here or to have their judgement questioned at all.  And I am not sucking up.  This is what I honestly believe (and they've locked some of my threads).


This is actually one of the main points of this thread.  None of us, not the fans, the disgusted, the angry, the happy, nor the company, the devs, the writers, the mods nor anyone else should become so jaded by all of this that we are not willing to look at the positives and find common ground.  It does exist and if we see it and go for it, good things can happen.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 23 septembre 2012 - 05:28 .

[Ozida]

Back on topic: if you could choose between just a single ending-specific DLC or  achieving “perfect” endings via multiple DLCs (something a Puzzle Theory suggests), what would you prefer? I would just go with a single DLC, because it would target specific audience and less people, who liked original endings, would complain that they are obligated to get it. This would also mean more development time spent on a good quality DLC to address the issues.

However, as we all know, beggars are not choosers…

3DandBeyond wrote...

I have to give BW kudos here and I can only speak for what seems to  happen now-I have no idea what happened in the past and don't wish to  revisit all of that.  I do think the modding here has been pretty fair. 
Sure, nobody can please everybody, but they do allow us to talk and generally have a pretty even hand.  I don't want them bashed here or to have their judgement questioned at all.  And I am not sucking up.  This
is what I honestly believe (and they've locked some of my threads).

I actually agree. Moderators are quite fair here and they don't just close threads that express some critique (not hating) of ME3. However, a little bit more of communication from the actual devs would be greatly appreciated as well.

Modifié par Ozida, 23 septembre 2012 - 05:39 .

[BearlyHere]

I saw this article, which is full of good advice the devs might consider: http://www.toptenz.n...n=zergnet_30900

Under the "gamers are not all 14 year old boys" section, they praise the ME series for allowing us to have a kick-ass female protagonist, while at the same time they give us Asari strippers and Buns of Steel Lawson. While I'm thankful for a strong female protagonist, it would be nice if her story ended with a bang and not a whimper.

[AresKeith]

Ozida wrote...

Back on topic: if you could choose between just a single ending-specific DLC or  achieving “perfect” endings via multiple DLCs (something a Puzzle Theory suggests), what would you prefer? I would just go with a single DLC, because it would target specific audience and less people, who liked original endings, would complain that they are obligated to get it. This would also mean more development time spent on a good quality DLC to address the issues.

However, as we all know, beggars are not choosers…

3DandBeyond wrote...

I have to give BW kudos here and I can only speak for what seems to  happen now-I have no idea what happened in the past and don't wish to  revisit all of that.  I do think the modding here has been pretty fair. 
Sure, nobody can please everybody, but they do allow us to talk and generally have a pretty even hand.  I don't want them bashed here or to have their judgement questioned at all.  And I am not sucking up.  This
is what I honestly believe (and they've locked some of my threads).

I actually agree. Moderators are quite fair here and they don't just close threads that express some critique (not hating) of ME3. However, a little bit more of communication from the actual devs would be greatly appreciated as well.

something like the Puzzle Theory works better because it appeals to both sides that wants a better ending and those who wants to play more DLCs

[Ozida]

BearlyHere wrote...

I saw this article, which is full of good advice the devs might consider: http://www.toptenz.n...n=zergnet_30900

Under the "gamers are not all 14 year old boys" section, they praise the ME series for allowing us to have a kick-ass female protagonist, while at the same time they give us Asari strippers and Buns of Steel Lawson. While I'm thankful for a strong female protagonist, it would be nice if her story ended with a bang and not a whimper.

How could they possible say that scanning planets was a terrible "minigame" in ME2? Common, this should be so given to fetch quests in ME3 instead!

Other parts of article is good. However, I cannot agree with " But when a character’s single defining
personality trait is how hot they are, then you have a problem. " in context of ME. Miranda was a perfect girl, a geneticly made dream of almost each man alive, and it was explained in her background. No wonder she had dat ass... Jack was a trouble and didn't mind sleeping with couple people at once (remember her story in ME2?). And ss for the stripers: well, they are strippes, they are suppose to be hot!

And yes, a bang would be much more preffered.

AresKeith wrote...

something like the Puzzle Theory works  better because it appeals to both sides that wants a better ending and  those who wants to play more DLCs

But wouldn't it make pro-enders upset, because it would turn out that previous 4 choices did not matter at all, and the "real" ending was hidden in pieces? I mean, I could've understand, if more DLCs added more EMS which would actually affect existing endings to make them better and better... but to affect them equally.

This is why I think a "Disney" ending should be separated from other choices: if they only improve Destroy to be the "perfect", for example, with reunion scene and so on, this would make it even more misbalanced with other 3, wouldn't it? I personally think that improving Refusal can be the best choice, because it was added later and it has more potential to it. But what about people who picked Control? With Puzzle theory they should be affected too, not just those who picked Destroy.

Modifié par Ozida, 23 septembre 2012 - 05:58 .

[3DandBeyond]

BearlyHere wrote...

I saw this article, which is full of good advice the devs might consider: http://www.toptenz.n...n=zergnet_30900

Under the "gamers are not all 14 year old boys" section, they praise the ME series for allowing us to have a kick-ass female protagonist, while at the same time they give us Asari strippers and Buns of Steel Lawson. While I'm thankful for a strong female protagonist, it would be nice if her story ended with a bang and not a whimper.

This is a point that recent demographic studies have shed light on and why BW (and fans that believe this is not true) cannot bleed fans.  Recent studies show that the average video game player is no longer the younger male who traditionally was the target audience.  Older audiences and female audiences are the fastest growing sector.  Younger males are also not the ones a lot of console makers are thinking about anymore.  And mobile gaming is growing fast, but not with games like ME and such.

Of course, there's crossover-females do play shooters and older males may as well, but not as much as other types of games.  Console makers have begun to understand this, game devs really seem to be trying to go in the opposite direction.  They seem to want to create exactly what a great many people don't want.  People bought Bioshock 2 because of Bioshock, not for the MP.  I loved Bioshock, but 2 not so much and the MP was fun enough but not worth buying a game for.  I love Uncharted, 1 and 2 were great.  3 was not as good and the MP was fun enough but not worth buying a game for.  And it's like that all down the line.  Couple that with the need to pay to play online on the xbox and you have just wiped out a huge chunk of the gaming public.  If devs keep chasing an ever smaller audience they will go away as devs.  It's funny that a lot of the people on here who fit the newer categories of growth for gaming demographics are mostly those who disliked the kid and the endings.  Funny and not so funny.

[AresKeith]

Ozida wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

something like the Puzzle Theory works  better because it appeals to both sides that wants a better ending and  those who wants to play more DLCs

But wouldn't it make pro-enders upset, because it would turn out that previous 4 choices did not matter at all, and the "real" ending was hidden in pieces? I mean, I could've understand, if more DLCs added more EMS which would actually affect existing endings to make them better and better... but to affect them equally.

This is why I think a "Disney" ending should be separate from other choices: if they only improve Destroy to be the "perfect" ending with reunion scene and so on, this would make it even more misbalanced with other 3, wouldn't it? I personally think that improving Refusal one can be the best choice, because it was added later and it has potential. But what about people who picked Control? With Puzzle theory they should be affected too, not just those who picked Destroy.

it wouldn't really be the "real" ending because Bioware kept calling us that there is no canon ending but most people wanna keep saying there ending is better than the other.

So far Destroy is the unbalanced ending compaired to Control and Synthesis because in Destroy, both the Citadel and Relays are "severely damaged" Post-EC and without the Reapers (who build them) to do repairs and we cause genocide of the Synthetic race, but affecting all the endings would be good too

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

The thing about sci-fi universes is that they are basically the same with different names for things. Jump gates instead of mass relays. Giant space stations instead of the Citadel and Omega. They all have similar races representing similar aspects.

So why wipe the slate clean? Why start over? Sci-fi universes can do fine without a major galactic threat. They usually jump the shark when there is one. Unless they can somehow get back to the normal squabbling among the factions. Unity only lasts so long.

IMO, Synthesis as an ending canon needs to be abandoned as an idea simply because of the ramifications. Any ending canon that leaves the reapers running around needs to be abandoned, IMO. The idea that the galaxy has to be a wasteland has to be abandoned. Omega needs to supply something to focus the Crucible more so that the relays aren't left in such sorry shape -- come on BW you can do this. But honestly, I think it's a bit late for this. It will have to be done as a retcon prior to any future installment, since Mac Walters supposedly doesn't want to write for this series anymore -- I hope.

Bioware needs to hire someone to act as Artistic Director to oversee Casey Hudson's and other's projects and make sure they're not going "out there" like this one did, and are more consistent storywise. You don't write a piece of crap for an ending, THEN decide to write stuff foreshadowing it. An ending was already foreshadowed -- see a post of mine a couple of pages back that involved using the Quarians and the Geth as a parallel.

It wasn't necessarily the most imaginative ending, but it would have at least worked within the story without Starboy, and would have left the ME universe in much better shape for a sequel. We wouldn't be having this thread right now begging for BW to do something.

IMO there were at most 50,000 reapers total -- capital ships, destroyers, transports. Blackening the sky of every world meant, blackening it via isolation of the systems, NOT simultaneously across the galaxy. They did take losses in each cycle.

Say if they do make Destroy High EMS canon, which I think is about the only thing that can save the franchise, with the Citadel in such a mess, the relays non-functional for decades and the entire network non-functional for centuries or millenia.

At this point, I think all we can hope for in a sequel is a retcon where the relays suffered only minor damage that was easily repaired by work crews in a few months across the entire network. And that they don't go for synthesis. And one last one -- Mac Walters and Casey Hudson have nothing to do with it. Or at least they bring in someone who to oversee what they are doing and keep them from going off the rails and pulling the crap they did in ME3. Artistic minds do need to be focused at times.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

3DandBeyond wrote...

BearlyHere wrote...

I saw this article, which is full of good advice the devs might consider: http://www.toptenz.n...n=zergnet_30900

Under the "gamers are not all 14 year old boys" section, they praise the ME series for allowing us to have a kick-ass female protagonist, while at the same time they give us Asari strippers and Buns of Steel Lawson. While I'm thankful for a strong female protagonist, it would be nice if her story ended with a bang and not a whimper.

This is a point that recent demographic studies have shed light on and why BW (and fans that believe this is not true) cannot bleed fans.  Recent studies show that the average video game player is no longer the younger male who traditionally was the target audience.  Older audiences and female audiences are the fastest growing sector.  Younger males are also not the ones a lot of console makers are thinking about anymore.  And mobile gaming is growing fast, but not with games like ME and such.

Of course, there's crossover-females do play shooters and older males may as well, but not as much as other types of games.  Console makers have begun to understand this, game devs really seem to be trying to go in the opposite direction.  They seem to want to create exactly what a great many people don't want.  People bought Bioshock 2 because of Bioshock, not for the MP.  I loved Bioshock, but 2 not so much and the MP was fun enough but not worth buying a game for.  I love Uncharted, 1 and 2 were great.  3 was not as good and the MP was fun enough but not worth buying a game for.  And it's like that all down the line.  Couple that with the need to pay to play online on the xbox and you have just wiped out a huge chunk of the gaming public.  If devs keep chasing an ever smaller audience they will go away as devs.  It's funny that a lot of the people on here who fit the newer categories of growth for gaming demographics are mostly those who disliked the kid and the endings.  Funny and not so funny.

The Asari: The "blue space babe" was a staple of the 1960s Star Trek, and other sci-fi series. In "Aliens" Hudson talks about "getting some Arcturian ****", and Hicks says something like "but your's was male", "but it don't matter if it's Arcturian." And then "Farscape" had Zhaan, the blue female plant, but they had male counterparts.

The Asari got the "spending their maiden years stripping and running in merc bands" but the focus seemed to be on the stripping. <_< Okay, I can get that a species might evolve to be mono-gendered or bi-gendered whatever. They're alien. But they're supposed to be the most advanced civilization in the galaxy with a focus on all this art and culture, and what art and culture do we see? Stripping.... <_< Thanks, BioWare. Real imaginative. No wonder they kept throwing Liara at us. She had to counter all of the focus on stripping. I really would have liked to have seen some of the culture and art that they kept mentioning. Or was downtown Armali a series of stripper bars? I seriously doubt it.

And "dat ass" Lawson with the focus on "dat ass." The perfect one... with the buck teeth.

Enough said, I'm glad they gave us a kick-ass female protagonist, too. I'm just pissed she's still in a pile of rubble. "I'm Commander Shepard and this is my favorite pile of rubble on the Citadel!"

I know the game was supposed to have the 80s and 90s cheese in it, and that's why I forgave the Asari strippers, and "dat ass", and focused on the fun and action hero stuff. I just cringe at times.

But the ending was foreshadowed by the Mad Prophet in ME2. "The end times will come, my friends. Not with a bang, but with a sigh."

PS: Interesting article about the top 10 flaws -- I turned off the QTE for TW2. They were a pain in the arse. And I hate the checkpoint systems in games. I like to save when I want to save, but I know there are third party programs that by pass checkpoint saving on PCs but PC games drop content on PCs that interfere with my audio programs I use for my creative activities, which is why I game on the 360.

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 23 septembre 2012 - 07:19 .

[Ozida]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...
 "I'm Commander Shepard and this is my favorite pile of rubble on the Citadel!"

Good one, a really good one.

[AresKeith]

I would have loved to see Thessia as a Hub World and Sur'Kesh

[Snypy]

Ozida wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

something like the Puzzle Theory works  better because it appeals to both sides that wants a better ending and  those who wants to play more DLCs

But wouldn't it make pro-enders upset, because it would turn out that previous 4 choices did not matter at all, and the "real" ending was hidden in pieces? I mean, I could've understand, if more DLCs added more EMS which would actually affect existing endings to make them better and better... but to affect them equally.

This is why I think a "Disney" ending should be separated from other choices: if they only improve Destroy to be the "perfect", for example, with reunion scene and so on, this would make it even more misbalanced with other 3, wouldn't it? I personally think that improving Refusal can be the best choice, because it was added later and it has more potential to it. But what about people who picked Control? With Puzzle theory they should be affected too, not just those who picked Destroy.

I kind of gave up the hope that BioWare will touch the ending again. At least the EC provides enough pieces to imagine a bright future for the characters and the galaxy after Destroy. Except that EDI and the Geth won't be around anymore. But I guess that's a fair price to pay, for me at least...

Modifié par Snypy, 23 septembre 2012 - 07:35 .

[GarvakD]

3DandBeyond wrote...

GarvakD wrote...

But can they actually hear that voice? Do they pay attention to these forums?

Here's the thing.  They may not.

But it's like the proverbial tree falling in the forest, does it make noise. 

Well, one thing is certain.  If the tree never falls it won't make that noise.

So, when something bothers you, you have a couple options.  One is to speak up and hope someone listens and maybe addresses the things that bother you.  The other is to say silent and be sure they never will.

Don't get me wrong.  I'm in full support and will be one of the many keeping this thread going.  

[Ozida]

Snypy wrote...

I kind of gave up the hope that BioWare will touch the ending again. At least the EC provides enough pieces to imagine a bright future for the characters and the galaxy after Destroy. Except that EDI and the Geth won't be around anymore. But I guess that's a fair price to pay, for me at least...

Yeah, unfortunately, I don't put my hopes high either. But as stated before, it is better to at least try and raise the voice rather than give up right away. You never know...

I was never a supporter of choices at the end anyway, so the concept is just... meh for me. However, I am all open to variety of options. Make one very sad (and maybe the right one, if they wish to push the dark tone), make one absolutely selfishly happy, and make one somewhat in-between. Here, everyone is happy and they keep their “artistic integrity”.

In my opinion, ME3 writers wanted to go to a tough route that would make players think hard after they finish the game. However, BW did not realise that a regular person can really think about one thing at a time. Synthesis is really a corner-stone in this case. Control and Destroy are perfect Paragon-Renegade options, and, honestly, should we be presented with just those two, it would've been indeed some fun choices. Keep the Geths, but keep the Reapers too? Kill the Geths, but save the galaxy from the thread?.. Even Shepard’s fate wouldn’t be such a problem in such case.

But by adding Synthesis, writers went over their own heads. The concept is so hard to understand within 10 minutes only, that it should’ve taken a full game to prepare players for it. Slowly building up an idea that it is the right solution and explaining how it works. Instead, they through at us a really big concept and just expect to swallow it right away and discuss how “unique” and “special” it is. Without going in any further critiques of Synthesis, I just wanted to state that if BioWare really wanted to make ME3 some piece of art that philosophers would debate about, it should’ve been done much more differently.

Instead we got neither a real piece of conceptual art, neither an epic-cheezy game. We got some fan-fiction by Hudson and Walter of how they fantasise within ME universe margins, which has nothing to do with the
rest of players.

Modifié par Ozida, 23 septembre 2012 - 08:14 .