6432 réponses à ce sujet

[3DandBeyond]

I think too many people believe erroneously that fans do not determine the content of products. The most successful company in the US and maybe even the world right now would beg to differ. Their whole business is not based on cheap products, nor always even the most innovative. It is and has always been about user friendliness (fan friendly). Apple. No matter what you think of them, they succeed and have fans that would buy iSocks just because Apple makes the product conform to the user. They often are not the first to create a way of doing something, but they are usually the first to get it right and to communicate their desire to do so with their fans. GUI was user friendly in a DOS world. The iPad is a bit more intuitive and user friendly even if not as customizable as a laptop. I'm just saying that fans' wishes are always an integral factor in every product.  Now, Apple does have policies and all I don't agree with, but the point is they cater to fans and enlist fans in helping them make everything a success.  Fans create apps and offer a lot of feedback.

A company that has fans that never provide feedback is not a very good company-companies elicit and ask for feedback because they are not psychic. They aren't going to put a product out and watch it fail and then keep doing that until they hit on a winner without asking for help from consumers.

I know Bioware isn't asking here, but I'm still requesting that they listen. Somewhere around half of all fans/buyers of ME3 are still not great lovers of the endings still-this from polls and reviews from all over the web. More than half are not enthusiastic about them-meaning they consider them to be ok, sufficient, but not something that will encourage them to buy all DLC or to replay it in the way people have replayed ME games all along. This from polls and reviews from all over the web. Leviathan's reviews have been ok, but not enthusiastic. Eventually this will all have an impact and it may mean games like ME will go away. I don't want that. I want them to have the resources to make great DLC and great games of this ilk.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 03 septembre 2012 - 04:01 .

[AresKeith]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Mass consumed art does not exist in a vaccuum-it needs a paying audience to survive.  And human beings need appreciation for their creations.  I want to help BW achieve both.

They have a willing paying audience, a large one. They have a large number of people who appreciate their creations too. They already have both. This does not mean 'everyone' has to be a member of that paying audience and neither does it mean 'everyone' has to appreciate their creations.

Dragoon, we both said nobody should use the "majority, minority" card, and you just used it

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

robertthebard wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...
Yeah, not giving paying customers what they want is a safe bet, supply and demand can go bite a fat one.

You should run your own company.

Tell that to every author in the world. Or movie maker, I suppose.

ME isn't a book or a movie,it is a completely seperate medium that can be altered on a whim. also plenty of authors and directors have changed movies and books based on customer feedback.

Sherlock.

You really don't know much about crafting a video game, do you?  I've seen some of the fan creation mods over the years that were altered on a whim; I wish I hadn't seen some of them.  You cannot unsee what has been seen.  I'm not trying to be dismissive, or judgemental, or to make too many assumptions here, but DLC costs more to make than some of the people here make a year.  .

Trying to make anyone feel bad because "they don't have enough money" is just silly, and wrong, and on a patch is altering a game, and some devs do it monthly.

[Dragoonlordz]

AresKeith wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Mass consumed art does not exist in a vaccuum-it needs a paying audience to survive.  And human beings need appreciation for their creations.  I want to help BW achieve both.

They have a willing paying audience, a large one. They have a large number of people who appreciate their creations too. They already have both. This does not mean 'everyone' has to be a member of that paying audience and neither does it mean 'everyone' has to appreciate their creations.

Dragoon, we both said nobody should use the "majority, minority" card, and you just used it

No I did not. Large does not equal minority or majority, it simply means large. The second part is factually true, a company or business does not need 'everyone' to buy it's products to be successful nor does it need 'everyone' to like what it makes in order to keep producing them. I merely corrected the implication of the other person. Bioware has both elements mentioned already.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 03 septembre 2012 - 04:06 .

[3DandBeyond]

There's also an old or not so old saying, "you have to spend money to make money".  Too many game devs today are hung up on beating other devs release dates, as if that means anything.  CoD has pretty much the same release date window with every "new" iteration.  They don't tend to worry about who might release what near to their date.  I'm not debating quality here, but I am debating fandom-CoD relies on fans that like what they do to carry their sales.  Fans know the quality (it suits them) and they know pretty much that they want it every single time.  If EA released something touted as the next best thing one week before CoD, that is not going to persuade CoD fans to buy it instead of the game they want.

ME has had and partly lost fans like this.  I think we will one day know who is responsible for the seemingly rushed release-people need to tell secrets and stories.  What I am saying is that quality trumps release dates every time.  If a game stinks it doesn't matter to me how quickly they got it out, especially if a quality game is on the way.  And vice versa.

And fan influence was all over the EC, however most of it was used in exactly the wrong way from what people were saying.  Every aspect of control was what fans had theorized and what they hoped would NOT be in the EC.  The Normandy evacuates the teammates thing was theorized by fans to be what happened and what they said made no sense.  Synthesis EC was what people thought BW meant in the original endings, but they hoped it would not be there.  Refuse and shooting the kid were desires, but not as they are now in the game.  It's like everything that went into the EC was written by fans that said they hoped this wouldn't be what the original endings meant.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 03 septembre 2012 - 04:24 .

[Iakus]

[quote]3DandBeyond wrote...

[quote]Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

You really don't know much about crafting a video game, do you?  I've seen some of the fan creation mods over the years that were altered on a whim; I wish I hadn't seen some of them.  You cannot unsee what has been seen.  I'm not trying to be dismissive, or judgemental, or to make too many assumptions here, but DLC costs more to make than some of the people here make a year.  .[/quote]Trying to make anyone feel bad because "they don't have enough money" is just silly, and wrong, and on a patch is altering a game, and some devs do it monthly.
[/quote]

There's also an old or not so old saying, "you have to spend money to make money".  Too many game devs today are hung up on beating other devs release dates, as if that means anything.  CoD has pretty much the same release date window with every "new" iteration.  They don't tend to worry about who might release what near to their date.  I'm not debating quality here, but I am debating fandom-CoD relies on fans that like what they do to carry their sales.  Fans know the quality (it suits them) and they know pretty much that they want it every single time.  If EA released something touted as the next best thing one week before CoD, that is not going to persuade CoD fans to buy it instead of the game they want.

ME has had and partly lost fans like this.  I think we will one day know who is responsible for the seemingly rushed release-people need to tell secrets and stories.  What I am saying is that quality trumps release dates every time.  If a game stinks it doesn't matter to me how quickly they got it out, especially if a quality game is on the way.  And vice versa.

And fan influence was all over the EC, however most of it was used in exactly the wrong way from what people were saying.  Every aspect of control was what fans had theorized and what they hoped would NOT be in the EC.  The Normandy evacuates the teammates thing was theorized by fans to be what happened and what they said made no sense.  Synthesis EC was what people thought BW meant in the original endings, but they hoped it would not be there.  Refuse and shooting the kid were desires, but not as they are now in the game.  It's like everything that went into the EC was written by fans that said they hoped this wouldn't be what the original endings meant.

[/quote]

And yet a confirmed reunion, or even a definitive "Shepard lives" was denied us, for strange (and possibly artistic) reasons.

Modifié par iakus, 03 septembre 2012 - 04:23 .

[IceTrey1987]

this many pages in like four days? The world is nonsense. I found the destroy ending with a high EMS to be completely fine, even on a Paragon playthrough. It makes sense. The other two endings are for crazy people. But on the off chance that Bioware actually does read this thread, I just want the spectre shooting range to be fixed. I can't even go in there any more, it hard crashes my xbox.

[AresKeith]

IceTrey1987 wrote...

this many pages in like four days? The world is nonsense. I found the destroy ending with a high EMS to be completely fine, even on a Paragon playthrough. It makes sense. The other two endings are for crazy people. But on the off chance that Bioware actually does read this thread, I just want the spectre shooting range to be fixed. I can't even go in there any more, it hard crashes my xbox.

did that start happening before or after Leviathan?

[Omega Torsk]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Mass consumed art does not exist in a vaccuum-it needs a paying audience to survive.  And human beings need appreciation for their creations.  I want to help BW achieve both.

They have a willing paying audience, a large one. They have a large number of people who appreciate their creations too. They already have both. This does not mean 'everyone' has to be a member of that paying audience and neither does it mean 'everyone' has to appreciate their creations.

Dragoon, we both said nobody should use the "majority, minority" card, and you just used it

No I did not. Large does not equal minority or majority, it simply means large. The second part is factually true, a company or business does not need 'everyone' to buy it's products to be successful nor does it need 'everyone' to like what it makes in order to keep producing them. I merely corrected the implication of the other person. Bioware has both elements mentioned already.

...

LOLWUT?

[3DandBeyond]

IceTrey1987 wrote...

this many pages in like four days? The world is nonsense. I found the destroy ending with a high EMS to be completely fine, even on a Paragon playthrough. It makes sense. The other two endings are for crazy people. But on the off chance that Bioware actually does read this thread, I just want the spectre shooting range to be fixed. I can't even go in there any more, it hard crashes my xbox.

You are entitled to your opinion-and bugs should be reported in the tech forums.  I can't consider wiping out a whole race of people that are helping me, nor can I consider even trying to look Joker in the eye after killing EDI.  Good thing the torso has no apparent head, right?  I think destroy makes just as little sense as the other choices-please tell me exactly who it is meant to kill.  Reference exactly what the kid says about it.  It targets all synthetics (he doesn't say life) and evey you are partly synthetic (would it have been too difficult to ask what the hell that means here?).  You will suffer losses but no more than have already occurred (what does that mean-EDI dies, the geth dies, synthetics of some sort die-those are more losses).  Please make sense of all that he says and then Hackett's glowing speech where he takes credit for uniting everyone while the one who did is this gasping torso-a hero left in a pile of rubble who knows where.

I am glad you think what you have is fine. What is wrong with that is that you aren't saying you loved it-it makes sense, it's fine, it's ok.  I loved ME1's ending and loved ME2's ending-the suicide mission as a whole (the human reaper was fine, not bad and not fantastic, but it didn't ruin it or detract from it) and the epilog I thought was so very well done.  They made me want to play them over and over again.  I don't see a lot of people that like ME3's ending saying the same thing about it.

I'm not asking you to give up what you have-why can't any of you say that you'd like others to be "happier" too.

[Dragoonlordz]

Omega Torsk wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Mass consumed art does not exist in a vaccuum-it needs a paying audience to survive.  And human beings need appreciation for their creations.  I want to help BW achieve both.

They have a willing paying audience, a large one. They have a large number of people who appreciate their creations too. They already have both. This does not mean 'everyone' has to be a member of that paying audience and neither does it mean 'everyone' has to appreciate their creations.

Dragoon, we both said nobody should use the "majority, minority" card, and you just used it

No I did not. Large does not equal minority or majority, it simply means large. The second part is factually true, a company or business does not need 'everyone' to buy it's products to be successful nor does it need 'everyone' to like what it makes in order to keep producing them. I merely corrected the implication of the other person. Bioware has both elements mentioned already.

...

LOLWUT?

I shouldn't have to explain the english language to you. Large does not make majority anymore than makes minority. There can always be a larger amount than one described, it just means a lot of people or big.

[Omega Torsk]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I shouldn't have to explain the english language to you. Large does not make majority anymore than makes minority. There can always be a larger amount than one described, it just means a lot of people or big.

Semantics.

And you don't have to be rude.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

alleyd wrote...

 Even though I am completely disappointed in the EC and much of the writing of the whole game, not just the last 10 minutes or so. 
 I personally feel that, at this stage (6 months after release), that it would be an extremely bad idea to tack onto, or change the ending structure of the game. It sends out so many wrong messages for me on what is acceptible as a consumer product or how it is marketed.

If I could say "Do the Right Thing" to anyone is try and change the feelings of disappointment on something into a more positive direction. It is far more rewarding, on a personal level, than to allow negativity into your life. Many posts seem like appeals to a lost love or broken relationship, which saddens me that a computer game could have such a long term negative impact on a person.

I would not look to the producers of such a product for help and assistance, I certainly would take a real backward step from a brand that used this emotional attachment in a manipulative way to tie me into a product that was incomplete on release. 

Posting appeals or engaging in 'debates' with people who have taken a different experience from a game is not IMO a positive emotional experience. It could be the exact opposite and, if that's the case, take a couple of weeks out of ME and BSN and chill on something else.

ME will always be video gamings biggest lie, a franchise that was supposed to do so much right that people could forget about graphics and it being an RPG with sparse RPG elements, but in the end it fell flat on its face. In a few years time BioWare will be taken out back, to the fields where EA has ended a great many companies, and it will be put down. No one wanted it, but it's the only way the people at BW who actually love ME can rise back out from the ashes and come back with a new IP and bring us the space opera ME was supposed to be.

[3DandBeyond]

I can't ask them to rewrite everything I'd like to see changed. I am not asking them to "fix" the whole game and do a do over. I'm asking them to consider additional, optional content that would bring a lot of people back into the ME universe and rehabilitate the game for them. I'm asking them to consider a valid, win type ending that is hard to achieve that may also have an awful loss alternative. I'm just asking that they reconsider this for their good and ours. It's partly about money but it's also partly about good will. You hurt yourself by holding grudges and in part on both sides or all sides there have been plenty of grudges created and embraced. Bioware and those that don't like the endings have dogs in this "fight". Those that like the endings do not-additional, optional content does not hurt you or force you to do anything.

I've heard someone say that the problem with it would be that they could not un-see what they have seen-well, if you didn't get the content, how would you see it? And this is from a person that does not like the endings either and has played through them a few times but prefers to stop well before and head canon an ending. If you have already seen endings you don't like, how then can you un-see those?

Others see this as a problem because it would create a canon ending that too many people would choose. And that's a bad thing? I hate to break the news to you but there's already a lot of canon in the game. At the end you have a lot of canon. To get an ending achievement, you must make a choice and not refuse. Canon. I've been repeatedly told a conventional victory (misused and misunderstood concept) is not possible-that is canon then. A super happy post-synthesis galaxy (unrealistic) is canon for a paragon. In fact, happy epilogs are canon for a paragon for all choices, however unrealistic I believe they are. Canon exists within a limited scope of understanding and "speculation". There is not speculation for all-because my speculation is IMO more in accordance with authentic consequences that are not part of the canon endings that are shown. The galaxy has been screwed by the person trying to save it and by the person whose only task has ever been to destroy the reapers to save the galaxy. Not to murder friends that are helping, not to change people internally to be something that mimics being alive. And not to be their overlord with reapers forced upon them, directing the future. The galaxy should become a reaper-free zone, where reapers do not dictated internally nor externally, the future for all. And the murder of a whole race is not cause for celebration-it sets the stage for suspicion and discontent and truly difficult times. That is my opinion and it goes against canon that is shown in super silly slide shows. I wanted something better-a galaxy that could freely self-determine and that didn't do so on the backs of devalued newly emerging races. That is my canon and one that these games made me feel was attainable, until someone determined that depressing is better.

[katness]

Maybe its the teacher in me who doesn't like to see wasted potential. I think that Bioware had so much potential for making a truly epic multi tiered ending. However, what was delivered was a weak ending with plot holes and errors.

As a teacher with any of my students, I respect them and push them to do greater and fulfill their potential. I cannot give up on them, otherwise I am not living up to my potential as a teacher. In this sense, I feel that I am dealing with a highly gifted Bioware child that has chosen to not challenge themselves with their writing. I'm not demanding an add on, more of pointing out errors in the hopes that they can become the best they can be.

I fail to see how this is selfish....

[Warrior Craess]

EntropicAngel wrote...

plfranke wrote...

@Angel
I think it's a little unfair for you to bring that into the equation right now, in a thread, where the OP is clearly asking for Bioware to re evaluate the endings. This is something entirely different from what was going on immediately after the endings, and many of those people aren't even here anymore.

I brought it up because the OP's talking about Bioware doing "the Right Thing," as if there IS some "right thing" on something that THEY created. There is no "right thing." There is only what they made. Like it, great. Don't, great. But don't turn this into some moral flaw.

ghost9191 wrote...

well that is why i said this thread. i was here for that stuff. 

Same response as this ^^

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...
Yeah, not giving paying customers what they want is a safe bet, supply and demand can go bite a fat one.

You should run your own company.

Tell that to every author in the world. Or movie maker, I suppose.

You do realize what happens to those authors, movie makers, singers etc... who can no longer attract enough business right? 

You do realize that this isn't the 1990's any more? that people have this thing called social media that can, and does influence a large amount of people. Any company failing to take it's reputation into account in the future will be in for a rude awakening, when their sales dry up, becuase even is saying how bad a company they are. 

You do realize that just trotting out a 75 perfect reviews will no longer influence the customers as much when they can see what the actual fan reaction is, especially if it overwhelmingly negative? 

And lastly you do realize that not only has bioware listened to fans in the past but so have many other artists.

[Alez Zinai]

robertthebard wrote...
So we asked Japan's permission to nuke them in WW II?

 
No you used most powerfull and effective weapon to defeat enemy

robertthebard wrote... 
  You see, we don't get the skinny on what's said in peace talks in wars that don't end that way.  We don't know what kinds of compromises are made between leaders when they put down the guns and talk about it.  We don't know what concessions are made.

  
In fact all terms of surrender were put on paper to avoid any misunderstanding that can possibly come out later - thats how diplomacy works

robertthebard wrote...    
I chose Destroy.  The Reapers are indeed dead, and the galaxy is now free of that threat to begin rebuilding.  I'm sorry that you see doing what you set out to do as compromise simply because SC decided that part of it's moustache twirling exposition should be explaining the function of the crucible.  I don't see it that way.  Perspective is everything.  In your perspective, the whole idea of the catalyst is flawed, and I agree with you there, but I don't agree that it suddenly becomes the focus of the game, any more than any moustache twirling exposition suddenly makes the bad guy into the hero of the tale.  To me, SC was no different than Sovereign on Virmire, or Harbinger on the asteroid at the end of Arrival.  Just looking for a chance to tell you how insignificant you are.  Congratulations for buying it.  I didn't.

No you agreed to SC (why I always read SC=StarCraft but not Star Child ) that it will take all synthetics and EDI with him to hell If you kill him (possible to fulfill his goal - to delay conflict organics vs. synthetics).  Basically SC tells you how you can end war on his terms: kill him but he takes all synthetics and EDI along, replace him with your copy (you will be dead) or do what he thinks is the best solution. Or you can getta f*ck out of here and die on your terms. He is not surrendering - he is using you to make a new solution to HIS problem. There is no victory for Allies in Mass Effect 3.

[TheRealJayDee]

Zan51 wrote...

You know what? I have just finished a 9 hour day working at another game company, with  a 1 hour commute either way. I am tired.

I am an intelligent woman, been reading since I was 4 and a half, well educated, a teacher, got an A. Sc. in Forensics, like I said, work for a major gaming company as a GM, studied English Literature, and some French and American, learned about the building blocks of language. I am a published SF writer of 20 years now, I read on average between 5-8 books a week, and I could NOT make sense of what the hell ME3 was doing!

The way all that went before that we were told mattered for ME3 got tossed down the drain, that MP suddenly means so much to the SP game, that godawful last 10 minutes of the ending! I anm not by a long chalk lacking in intelligence, reasoning, vocabulary, or understanding of how to parse classical fiction, non-fiction, and all forms of art to glean every morsel of understanding from them, but ME3 has me beat!

I am honestly coming to the conclusion that maybe, just maybe the reason it makes no sense is because - it makes no sense!  Because the professional discipline of sticking to a theme, a concept, and carrying it through to its natural conclusion was actually missing from some point midway through ME3. 

Instead, somewhere, someone allowed the concept to go haring off willy-nilly in any direction those in charge of it at that time wanted! Instead of being disciplined, they indulged themselves in their dreams and fantasies and put those into the game instead of good old fashioned hard work and sticking to the plot! It isn't artistic, it is self-indulgent and nonsensical.

When you have a good, solid buying fan base, and you try to get what you wrongly see as the rest of the buying public interested in your product at the expense of what you know will sell, you fail to please either lot. The FPS lobby wouldn't have been attracted to ME3 in the numbers they wanted because it was also part of an RPG game, and they don't want that. So we got this hybrid that very few folk were happy with, that really does not make sense because it wasn't designed to make sense, because part way through designing it, they raced off in a different direction!

But, as 3D hand others have proved in their dissertations, it CAN be saved. Will it? I hope so. I really, really hope so, because I loved this game till now.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

robertthebard wrote...
 I've built areas in NWN 2.  It took me a week to get one area the way I wanted it to look and feel, and there were going to be 40 areas in the mod I was going to convert from NWN.  After I get the look and feel, I have to start working on populating it, and towns have to have NPC's that aren't static decorations.  I had a script that ran an RNG for 4 random responses, and then skipped which ones had been used, so you couldn't get the same one twice in a row.  It took me 1.5 weeks to get that to work.  NPC's can't look the same, so I have to spend a half hour or so on each one making them look different, or people would complain.  .5 hours x a couple of hundred NPC's, and it's a good thing nobody had to sign my paycheck for that trivial detail work, eh?  However, that's one of those trivial details that a rabid fan will latch on to and call you lazy for not doing, because they have no clue what kind of work is involved in actually doing it.  Don't get me wrong, if I was rich, I might go out and buy a Mercedes on a whim.  But I'm not rich, so I can't.  Developer costs are factored into every decision, and that's why they aren't changed, on a whim.  You don't just push a button and say, there's it's fixed.  Not everyone that wants these changes believe this, but it seems you do.  That's not how it works.

Trust me I know exactly what you're talking about here. I did this with NWN -- the first one. I did a full blown 13 hr game with it the tool kit. I'm retired. I had the time. It was a very rainy winter. It took 1500 hrs. to do it. NPCs were moving around and had routines at certain times of the day -- those were scripted. Guards had patrols. Then the random encounters had to look like they didn't just pop up in front of you out of nowhere. Ecosystems. It had to be believable. I had to learn the toolset, write conversations for NPCs. If I had to VA everything it would have taken longer. It would have been very expensive to do.

This is why I'm saying this: I know it is very difficult to make a change to what is already in the game, so leave it. -- seeing your assets in action for example -- it's too late for that. They should have done that when they made the game.

However, it is easier to do an add-on. Take that breath scene. It is easier to do an add-on DLC for that. Not everyone wants this change, so those who don't want it don't have to buy it.. So do an optional add-on DLC that gives the rescue, reunion, and ends that way, and charge money for it. I'd pay for it, and it would make the rest of the DLC worth it. It would complete the series for me.

No one is asking something for nothing anymore.

[3DandBeyond]

Alez Zinai wrote...
No you agreed to SC (why I always read SC=StarCraft but not Star Child ) that it will take all synthetics and EDI with him to hell If you kill him (possible to fulfill his goal - to delay conflict organics vs. synthetics).  Basically SC tells you how you can end war on his terms: kill him but he takes all synthetics and EDI along, replace him with your copy (you will be dead) or do what he thinks is the best solution. Or you can getta f*ck out of here and die on your terms. He is not surrendering - he is using you to make a new solution to HIS problem. There is no victory for Allies in Mass Effect 3.

Exactly.  The choices are in service to the glow boy's goals-each one serves it, just some have more "lasting" effects depending upon how you view them.  Even Synthesis does not guarantee the conflict won't return.  These newly understanding synthetics might actually hate things more-they'd know that organics mistrust them and be more uncertain of their place.  They'd also be more aware of their superior capabilities.  They might want peace, but they might not.  Such is autonomy and individuality-what people keep asserting still exists under synthesis.  Neither choice guarantees an end to the conflict the kid must prevent.  And he is supposedly trying to preserve organics?  How exactly does synthesis do that?  It actually gets rid of organics-a hybrid version takes their place.  If the kid is only supposed to preserve organics, how exactly is synthesis achieving that?  It destroys organics. 

Every choice is supposed to prevent killer robots, but neither does.

[3DandBeyond]

Warrior Craess wrote...

You do realize what happens to those authors, movie makers, singers etc... who can no longer attract enough business right? 

You do realize that this isn't the 1990's any more? that people have this thing called social media that can, and does influence a large amount of people. Any company failing to take it's reputation into account in the future will be in for a rude awakening, when their sales dry up, becuase even is saying how bad a company they are. 

You do realize that just trotting out a 75 perfect reviews will no longer influence the customers as much when they can see what the actual fan reaction is, especially if it overwhelmingly negative? 

And lastly you do realize that not only has bioware listened to fans in the past but so have many other artists.

What is happening today is the web is becoming the focus group for products.  Beta testing is going away and games are released in unpolished states so players are becoming beta testers.  The web provides instantaneous feedback and statistics.  Paid review sites with ad money are irrelevant.  Gameplay used to be king-watch youtube see the gameplay and buy it.  Now, more critical things that reviewers do not speak about, will matter.  Endings to story games will matter.  Pre-orders are a thing of the past for a lot of people.  And word of mouth travels like lightning.

[THEE_DEATHMASTER]

I'd like to remain optimistic that this thread will stay alive long enough for Bioware to acknowledge it seriously (seriously enough to do something). All we really have to do is be loud enough and in great enough numbers.

[Fiannawolf]

Ok Ill be blunt....want this kind of emotional reunion for Shepard and whomever the LI is for post breath sequence...

You dont even have to have VO work done to make it emotional either...

[N7 Lisbeth]

I am totally in favour of the original/first post's proposals and would very much like to see the endings added to or otherwise changed to allow for a different variation of the ending. Specifically, a non-Destroy option where Shepard lives and a love interest reunion plays out.

I would buy a DLC for it without a moment's thought or hesitation.