6432 réponses à ce sujet

[plfranke]

@Dragon
A few dozens compared to about10 is a very large difference.

[Dragoonlordz]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...


Clearly it is not the right thing to do when time and time again other 'fans' come in and say they think that it would be the wrong thing to do. The fact you keep telling those people to leave suggests to me personally that the only people you want in this thread is the people who agree with you but this is a community forum where fans of all types express and discuss other fans ideas. For some reason you take offense when it is not in agreement. Gen was not flaming, he posed a different opinion on the right thing to do and got ganged up on then told to leave when you or others could not defeat his logic and reasoning. The trying to imply he would be banned or even should be for having a different opinion is a very low route to take by you.

Your opinion.  I never told you to leave, you sent me hatemail and said you were leaving.  I asked Geneaux to either leave or quit trying to be argumentative-and he was being so since his first post was insulting.

I don't mind respectful disagreement and discussion at all, but you have come here and repeatedly called me names-should I then want to talk to you?  Do you do that in real life and still keep friends?  Do you think that's the way to try and actually communicate?  "Gen's" first post called people liars.  That is flaming-I have modded and he would have at least been warned for it on any other board.  How could he get ganged up on if most people don't agree with me?  And he was the one creating posts with quotes from multiple people in them.  If he didn't want to participate in discussion with multiple people, he could easily have responded to one person at a time.  I never implied he'd be banned-I was stating it was not civil to enter a thread in the way he did and I explained what would happen if I did that in other people's threads which is exactly what I don't do.  I discuss the topic.  I read the OP and discuss what it says, not what I think it says or what I want other people to think it says.

I took offense at you calling me names.  I don't mind decent disagreement.  You called me selfish repeatedly.  I am not and you, on the other hand have shown that you indeed are.  You act like I want to shoot your dog or your child when I am asking Bioware to do what I think is the right thing.  I've explained why, partly because I think it might add to their resources and it might bring fans back that would make DLC even more viable and might help them keep creating unique games.  On the other hand, you've told people to leave which actually would take money away from Bioware (if people took your advice) and might mean they'd decide more DLC is not cost effective.

I also explained that even now reviewers that were on BW's side over the ending (and helped you decide that people that don't agree with you deserve to be called all kinds of hateful names) aren't enthusiastic about Leviathan.  Even people that "liked" the endings have said they don't care to buy it and are done with ME3.  Compare that to fans of ME1 and2 who couldn't wait for more DLC and were not done with them even a couple years after release or even now, 5 years after ME1's release.  ME is over for a lot of people-that may mean that creating new content that does not bring back a large segment of ME's core group of fans might doom any DLC and even any further ME or ME-type games.  You are the one telling people to go away and shut up about it-if they take your advice BW itself could be gone.  SWTOR lost at least 400k subscribers partly due to the ME3 debacle and BW had to lay off employees because of it.  So I'm asking for BW to find a way to help me give them my money and you are telling me and others like me to go away.  Good one.

I never sent you a hate mail at all, I said I would leave because of all the baiting going on by others towards me and that it seems a lot of the bickering appears to have been done in here to keep the thread on the first page which was then proven to be the case when the next person who came in and expressed a different opinion to that of yours and few others in return got a sarcastic reply "thanks for the bump". For someone who dislikes being called a liar why then do you resort to such?

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 03 septembre 2012 - 02:23 .

[3DandBeyond]

plfranke wrote...

You know, I've never been to a Synthesis support thread, reason being, I find the idea repulsive. So, I don't understand why these people feel the need to constantly come to your thread if they don't agree with what you're saying. Though, truthfully, less than half of the ones arguing with you even understood what the OP was about.

That's it.  I don't know how you can respond to it if you don't know what it's about.  And if they like the game they got, I don't know what bothers them about it.  It's like we live in two different universes or something.  It's like me going to a bakery and asking the baker to make a chocolate cake because all that's in the case is yellow cake.  Then, some guy walks up and says that the baker should ignore what I want and I should leave if I don't like yellow cake.  And it would be wrong of the baker to be forced to make everyone eat chocolate cake.

And then the one guy that came here basically said he also would like chocolate cake, but it would be wrong to make chocolate because most people would want that.

[Dragoonlordz]

plfranke wrote...

@Dragon
A few dozens compared to about10 is a very large difference.

For BSN or even the ME3 section, not so much. Now if was hundreds in support I might agree but mere few dozen in support does not appear to me to be the level of support an idea would get if was a popular one.

[RenegonSQ]

This thread is huge, someone from Bioware has to respond eventually.

[Warrior Craess]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

plfranke wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

but calling us liars in your first post here is not the most pleasant way to start a discussion and you know it.

I do know that, which is why I didn't call everyone liars.  Like I've said at least twice before, if you didn't lie, then I wasn't referring to you.  For someone who seems to take issue with statements being taken out of context, you're quick to do it yourself.  Furthermore, this thread isn't simply a request for additional content, it's a statement claiming that additional content is the "right" thing to do, which I disagree with, therefore I expressed that.

Your opinion and I expressed mine.  The point was using that term was meant to be argumentative.  I can imagine the crapstorm I'd get if I went into a pro-synthesis thread and said that it would be great if there weren't so many (choose your defamatory term)s who liked synthesis.  Oh, but I could just walk it back and say I wasn't calling all of them that name.  You know what you did and you did it on purpose to incite and inflame.  I've modded forums before for game sites and for game devs, and that kind of stuff happens all the time and is often bannable.

Clearly it is not the right thing to do when time and time again other 'fans' come in and say they think that it would be the wrong thing to do. The fact you keep telling those people to leave suggests to me personally that the only people you want in this thread is the people who agree with you but this is a community forum where fans of all types express and discuss other fans ideas. For some reason you take offense when it is not in agreement. Gen was not flaming, he posed a different opinion on the right thing to do and got ganged up on then told to leave when you or others could not defeat his logic and reasoning. The trying to imply he would be banned or even should be for having a different opinion is a very low route to take by you.

But it's like just you dreman and this gen guy. Then there was that one guy saying the nanites caused synthesis. It's probably less than 10 of you and none of you really have any good arguments. You by far post the best arguments but even much of what you say is questionable.

There has only been like few dozen people who have come in and supported the OP's stance, so about 10 people coming in opposition actually says a lot about how much support this idea has. Most of the thread content is disagreement between those two small groups. People should be free to come in and express a dislike for someone else's idea, give their reasons which to them are valid and Bioware can decide whether or not they agree.

The validity of opinions is based on each individuals bias towards what they do or do not accept as reasonable. To me what I want is reasonable, my arguments are valid. To the OP her or his arguments are reasonable and to them is valid. The reality is what the OP thinks is the right thing to do has been over and over disagreed with by other fans. It might be the right thing for her but it is not the right thing for others.

One of the most annoying things is when I asked about the validity of the very thread title content, that is it or is it not her or his "one last plea"... The fact is the answer was no and that no matter what Bioware says their stance is, it will be ignored or tuned out because said will continue to ask regardless. "One last plea" is an actual lie and "Do the right thing" is subjective as shown in this very thread by me and others.

Considering that a dozen is larger than 10, and that a few is more than a couple (an unknown amount but at least greater by 1) it stands to reason that based on posted support, that people in support of optional DLC is signicantly larger than those opposed. 

Yes the OP request may not be the right thing for you, however it is obviously the right thing for many others. And those many others seem to be significantly more populous than those for whom it isn't the right thing. 

As for the one last plea... It may indeed be the last plea of 3dandbeyond's. That doesn't mean that someone else who supports this topic won't voice a similiar request in the future. Therefor it's not a lie. 

[robertthebard]

AresKeith wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

the Leviathan DLC suggest he does have something to do with the Crucible, especially since it needed it for Synthesis

It suggests that the Catalyst is looking for something.  This in no way implies that the Catalyst made the Crucible.

It also says that the Galaxy is its experiment and we all know that its Synthesis. Plus the Catalyst knows about the Crucible, and it calls it a power source. For something that doesn't have anything to do with it he sure knows alot about it

I'm going to have to disagree with this statement, with the addendum that it does find Synthesis to be it's ultimate solution, no matter how illogical I may see that to be.  It's experiment is the same as the reason it was created; to find a solution to the singularity everyone talks about.  It says it has tried many things over the course of the millions of years that it has been doing it's thing.  Including Synthesis.

It is an AI.  I'm sure that since EDI is hooked into the Normandy, she knows a lot about the ship too.  If the Geth were to interface with the ship, they would too.  Isn't it funny that when I plug in a new piece of hardware on my computer, my OS knows it needs drivers, and now even where to get them?  I guess it must have built the hardware?  That's essentially what we do with the Crucible, attach a new piece of hardware to the Citadel.  Of course it knows what it is, and what it's capable of doing.

[3DandBeyond]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I never sent you a hate mail at all, I said I would leave because of all the baiting going on by others towards me and that it seems a lot of the bickering appears to have been done in here to keep the thread on the first page which was then proven to be the case when the next person who came in and espressed a different opinion to that of yours and few others in return got a sarcastic reply "thanks for the bump". For someone who dislikes being called a liar why then do you resort to such?

Because you sent me hatemail and then blocked me so I couldn't report you-you know what you did.  It was not mature.  As far as thanking people-that was sincere.  They continuallly were arguing with people creating towers of quotes and I was reminding them that they were doing exactly what they didn't want to have happen.  I never said thanks for the bump.  I thanked them for supporting the thread, which is essentially what it amounted to.  One poster continually kept repeating word for word the exact same thing over and over again.  I asked that he stay on topic and he wouldn't so all he was doing was bumping the thread.  I never asked him to leave or any such thing.

[VettoRyouzou]

Again, I say this for everyone own good, Dragoon Feed off this attention. The best action is to ignore him, let him make the world biggest point he wants, if no one debts him..he leaves.

[3DandBeyond]

Warrior Craess wrote...

Considering that a dozen is larger than 10, and that a few is more than a couple (an unknown amount but at least greater by 1) it stands to reason that based on posted support, that people in support of optional DLC is signicantly larger than those opposed. 

Yes the OP request may not be the right thing for you, however it is obviously the right thing for many others. And those many others seem to be significantly more populous than those for whom it isn't the right thing. 

As for the one last plea... It may indeed be the last plea of 3dandbeyond's. That doesn't mean that someone else who supports this topic won't voice a similiar request in the future. Therefor it's not a lie. 

It's also a fact that there seem to be continuously created threads that are very similar to this-asking for DLC to "fix" what we think is wrong or speculating that BW could do it-started by various people.  We have no idea how many lurk. 

[Iakus]

I have to wonder, would expanding a "Shepard lives" ending, even if it's just the Destroy+ ending, really invalidate endings where Shepard does not survive? Especially if it was an optional DLC?

[3DandBeyond]

VettoRyouzou wrote...

Again, I say this for everyone own good, Dragoon Feed off this attention. The best action is to ignore him, let him make the world biggest point he wants, if no one debts him..he leaves.

Yes, he did do that once and told me he would.  We'll see what happens.  You are right-it's sometimes hard to not try and explain things.

[robertthebard]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

 Shepard and Leviathan did not create the crucible plans. So, who did?

Well it was either the Catalyst or one or more of the trillions of other sentient beings that have existed through time.  Since the Catalyst is stated to have barely known about the thing, pretty safe bet it wasn't him.

Not an answer and not my full explanation as to why no other sentient being could possibly have created the plans.  The Protheans did not know about the kid, so no one before them knew about him either.  And the catalyst did not say he barely knew about it-he said he had been aware of its existence and thought it was gone (to paraphrase).  He didn't actually answer the specific question.  And the catalyst may have created it-you think so, yourself.  That means the choices are questionable at best and not to be trusted.  And, they all are geared to solving the catalyst's goal and not Shepard's.

The goal of 3 games was to destroy the reapers.
The goal at the end of ME3-solve the catalyst's problem, the synthetics vs. organics, killer robots problem.

I still see this as reaching.  If the Catalyst had indeed created the plans, then it wouldn't have tried to destroy them, which is implied by stating that it had thought them destroyed, but Organics were more resourceful than it had given them credit for.  The idea behind building a trap for the Organics is not trying to wipe the plans out of existence, especially since we don't know until it tells us that it tried.  Does the Catalyst have reason to lie?  I suppose it could think it does, but if it were going to lie, don't you think it would do a lie of omission about Destroy?  Again, I didn't see any option that looked remotely like "can I shoot the tube now, please" and I just finished my Levi play through Wednesday or so. 

[Conniving_Eagle]

Same people attacking this thread for the past 70 pages, no address/intervention by BIoware yet.

You guys will single-handedly recreate the "All Were Thematically Revolting." thread lol!

[AresKeith]

robertthebard wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

the Leviathan DLC suggest he does have something to do with the Crucible, especially since it needed it for Synthesis

It suggests that the Catalyst is looking for something.  This in no way implies that the Catalyst made the Crucible.

It also says that the Galaxy is its experiment and we all know that its Synthesis. Plus the Catalyst knows about the Crucible, and it calls it a power source. For something that doesn't have anything to do with it he sure knows alot about it

I'm going to have to disagree with this statement, with the addendum that it does find Synthesis to be it's ultimate solution, no matter how illogical I may see that to be.  It's experiment is the same as the reason it was created; to find a solution to the singularity everyone talks about.  It says it has tried many things over the course of the millions of years that it has been doing it's thing.  Including Synthesis.

It is an AI.  I'm sure that since EDI is hooked into the Normandy, she knows a lot about the ship too.  If the Geth were to interface with the ship, they would too.  Isn't it funny that when I plug in a new piece of hardware on my computer, my OS knows it needs drivers, and now even where to get them?  I guess it must have built the hardware?  That's essentially what we do with the Crucible, attach a new piece of hardware to the Citadel.  Of course it knows what it is, and what it's capable of doing.

I understand where your coming from. Even though the Starbrat may have tried other experiments, the fact that he tries to push Synthesis again and knows the Crucible can give enough power for it, and sorta considers Destroy and Control as "termporary" solutions, that is very suspicious.

[Felis Menari]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Not true, you have said you want conventional victory and want the babies idiology, you have said you very much want to invalidate the catalyst. So where was I wrong in what I said about you wanting those things when you have in fact said you want them and to do that.

Well then I hope, for your sake, BioWare make a sequel where you can play as the Catalyst.

However, since ME3 is Shepard's story. What about their existence being invalidated by the endings?

That's my biggest issue with the endings. That they all pretty much kill Shepard off, just for the sake of killing him/her off (in my mind, anyways), is wholly disatisfying. I don't know about you, but I mostly enjoyed playing the ME games because we were able to help shape Shepard's journey. We weren't simply along for the ride like in other linear experiences. Because of this, it didn't feel like I was making my way through Shepard's story, it felt like I was playing as my character. By having Shepard forcefully offed at the end of it all makes it feel almost entirely pointless in my mind. It's bad taste to only give the player the option to die when they're already invested in their character.

Modifié par Felis Menari, 03 septembre 2012 - 02:39 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Warrior Craess wrote...

Considering that a dozen is larger than 10, and that a few is more than a couple (an unknown amount but at least greater by 1) it stands to reason that based on posted support, that people in support of optional DLC is signicantly larger than those opposed. 

Yes the OP request may not be the right thing for you, however it is obviously the right thing for many others. And those many others seem to be significantly more populous than those for whom it isn't the right thing. 

As for the one last plea... It may indeed be the last plea of 3dandbeyond's. That doesn't mean that someone else who supports this topic won't voice a similiar request in the future. Therefor it's not a lie. 

It is not, she said it was a not last plea when questioned. To take the stance of well she made a thread stating one thing but did not mean it in first place to go on to say maybe it will be the case for someone else... It does not work that way. If I make a thread and call it I like banana's yet I do not, I cannot then turn around and say I did not lie about it just because at some point in the thread someone else might say they like them. When called out on it I also cannot then turn around and complain the fact someone realised I lied and called me on it.

It is not a last plea when admits even if they say no she will ignore that and continue asking regardless. There comes a point when if you refuse to accept the answers the developer gives you then why should they bother talking to you at all in future? It's not like you care what they say or what their stance is if you ignore it and dismiss it until they agree with you and change it. I imagine for Bioware sometimes talking on here to people is like talking to a brick wall in the sense nothing they say will matter because some people just don't care what they say unless say what those people want them too.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 03 septembre 2012 - 02:42 .

[robertthebard]

AresKeith wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

the Leviathan DLC suggest he does have something to do with the Crucible, especially since it needed it for Synthesis

It suggests that the Catalyst is looking for something.  This in no way implies that the Catalyst made the Crucible.

It also says that the Galaxy is its experiment and we all know that its Synthesis. Plus the Catalyst knows about the Crucible, and it calls it a power source. For something that doesn't have anything to do with it he sure knows alot about it

I'm going to have to disagree with this statement, with the addendum that it does find Synthesis to be it's ultimate solution, no matter how illogical I may see that to be.  It's experiment is the same as the reason it was created; to find a solution to the singularity everyone talks about.  It says it has tried many things over the course of the millions of years that it has been doing it's thing.  Including Synthesis.

It is an AI.  I'm sure that since EDI is hooked into the Normandy, she knows a lot about the ship too.  If the Geth were to interface with the ship, they would too.  Isn't it funny that when I plug in a new piece of hardware on my computer, my OS knows it needs drivers, and now even where to get them?  I guess it must have built the hardware?  That's essentially what we do with the Crucible, attach a new piece of hardware to the Citadel.  Of course it knows what it is, and what it's capable of doing.

I understand where your coming from. Even though the Starbrat may have tried other experiments, the fact that he tries to push Synthesis again and knows the Crucible can give enough power for it, and sorta considers Destroy and Control as "termporary" solutions, that is very suspicious.

I don't know if it's suspicious, or fear of losing it's job.  I can totally understand it not pushing Destroy.

[robertthebard]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Same people attacking this thread for the past 70 pages, no address/intervention by BIoware yet.

You guys will single-handedly recreate the "All Were Thematically Revolting." thread lol!

I actually got into some really good conversations in that thread.  Gained some insight, and maybe passed some out.

[AresKeith]

iakus wrote...

I have to wonder, would expanding a "Shepard lives" ending, even if it's just the Destroy+ ending, really invalidate endings where Shepard does not survive? Especially if it was an optional DLC?

I don't think it does, especially when Bioware said there is no canon ending. IMO I don't think any new add-ons will invalidate the endings because everyone can still pick the endings they want

[Dragoonlordz]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I never sent you a hate mail at all, I said I would leave because of all the baiting going on by others towards me and that it seems a lot of the bickering appears to have been done in here to keep the thread on the first page which was then proven to be the case when the next person who came in and espressed a different opinion to that of yours and few others in return got a sarcastic reply "thanks for the bump". For someone who dislikes being called a liar why then do you resort to such?

Because you sent me hatemail and then blocked me so I couldn't report you-you know what you did.  It was not mature.  As far as thanking people-that was sincere.  They continuallly were arguing with people creating towers of quotes and I was reminding them that they were doing exactly what they didn't want to have happen.  I never said thanks for the bump.  I thanked them for supporting the thread, which is essentially what it amounted to.  One poster continually kept repeating word for word the exact same thing over and over again.  I asked that he stay on topic and he wouldn't so all he was doing was bumping the thread.  I never asked him to leave or any such thing.

You have the PM in your inbox, my blocking you has no impact on what you do except not being able to respond to me personally via a PM. You can report me but the real reason you did not is not because I blocked you, but because you know it was not a hate mail.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 03 septembre 2012 - 02:37 .

[Conniving_Eagle]

robertthebard wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Same people attacking this thread for the past 70 pages, no address/intervention by BIoware yet.

You guys will single-handedly recreate the "All Were Thematically Revolting." thread lol!

I actually got into some really good conversations in that thread.  Gained some insight, and maybe passed some out.

Good to know! I did as well!

[AresKeith]

robertthebard wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

the Leviathan DLC suggest he does have something to do with the Crucible, especially since it needed it for Synthesis

It suggests that the Catalyst is looking for something.  This in no way implies that the Catalyst made the Crucible.

It also says that the Galaxy is its experiment and we all know that its Synthesis. Plus the Catalyst knows about the Crucible, and it calls it a power source. For something that doesn't have anything to do with it he sure knows alot about it

I'm going to have to disagree with this statement, with the addendum that it does find Synthesis to be it's ultimate solution, no matter how illogical I may see that to be.  It's experiment is the same as the reason it was created; to find a solution to the singularity everyone talks about.  It says it has tried many things over the course of the millions of years that it has been doing it's thing.  Including Synthesis.

It is an AI.  I'm sure that since EDI is hooked into the Normandy, she knows a lot about the ship too.  If the Geth were to interface with the ship, they would too.  Isn't it funny that when I plug in a new piece of hardware on my computer, my OS knows it needs drivers, and now even where to get them?  I guess it must have built the hardware?  That's essentially what we do with the Crucible, attach a new piece of hardware to the Citadel.  Of course it knows what it is, and what it's capable of doing.

I understand where your coming from. Even though the Starbrat may have tried other experiments, the fact that he tries to push Synthesis again and knows the Crucible can give enough power for it, and sorta considers Destroy and Control as "termporary" solutions, that is very suspicious.

I don't know if it's suspicious, or fear of losing it's job.  I can totally understand it not pushing Destroy.

I was told never to trust Star people who doesn't use there real voice lol  

SO BE IT

and for losing its job, there's nothing to fear if you don't get paid for it

[BearlyHere]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Bioware did the right thing by releasing the Extended Cut. And then they did an awesome thing by releasing Leviathan. The ending is good, and thematically it fits the themes of sacrifice, choice, and victory against impossible odds that occur throughout all three games perfectly. Bioware has done right by their fans every step of the way. This thread does not speak for all fans, as not all fans accept the bull**** anti-ender hyperbole that in most cases outright lies about what happens in the ending. That is all.

Why is it all the Bioware pro-ender cheerleaders assume we're a small minority? So everyone is so happy with the game, and that's why it's down to $19.95 at Gamestop, and the guy at my local says they have many used in stock? We're a small minority? Really? Shake your pom poms all you like, you can't change the truth. And sadly, many like me are to the point where we no longer have hope and no longer believe Bioware cares or will do the right thing. 

[Dragoonlordz]

iakus wrote...

I have to wonder, would expanding a "Shepard lives" ending, even if it's just the Destroy+ ending, really invalidate endings where Shepard does not survive? Especially if it was an optional DLC?

No that specific action would not, however as expressed by the OP she or he actually wants the catalyst invalidated. Even as optional DLC, invalidation of the time and money spent by Bioware on the original endings and EC and hard work of the person who created it is not something reasonable to ask for regardless of whether you like it or not.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 03 septembre 2012 - 02:44 .