823 réponses à ce sujet

[plfranke]

I haven't read the entire thread but I did read the first page and something caught my eye so I want to discuss it a little bit. When I played this game the first time things had a huge impact on me, that feeling can't be artificially created. It only comes from experiencing something the first time.

The first time I heard The Illusive Man's music (my favorite character) I had the biggest smile on my face. When Kai Leng killed Thane I was on the edge of my seat watching the fight. When Vendetta said TIM had warned the Reapers about the Crucible I literally said damn it in sync with Shepard. I'll never get a chance to play this game for the first time again and whenever I do play it, moments I cherrish like the conversation with Rannoch Reaper will be overshadowed by the fact, I know it's going to be ruined in the final 5 minutes of the game. The only foreshadowing we have of who the Catalyst is, is through a dlc that we had to pay for and was only released after the game. I could deal with the day one dlc, but Leviathan clearly should have been in the game to begin with. It is the only content in the entire series that explains the origins of the main antogonists and you were charged 10 dollars extra to get it.

This fan has a legitimate beef and I support his claim.

[Ridwan]

Siran wrote...

M25105 wrote...

There is a big difference between 12 years and 2 years. And Duke Nukem forever is an EXCEPTION of a game that takes way too long to make and turns out like crap. I challenge you out of all the thousands of major games that's been released to find a game like Duke Nukem Forever, and I'm already taking Daikatana away from you cause that's an obvious answer if you're an older gamer.

Why would I need to? But take Alan Wake or Secret World as recent examples, both were financial disasters with long development cycles, with the latter even having to delay content because it had to fire several people since it didn't sell well. They may be good games, but did it help them or their developers?

Good games take time to make, DA: Origins had 5 years on its name before it came out. With the new funds and EA money a good and reasonable time for ME3 would've been 3 years. People constantly give Blizzard the excuse of they can afford, well guess what they weren't super rich back when they released Warcraft 2, but they still delayed it until it was completely ready. Either EA is a ruthless dictator or the top at Bioware is filled with spineless yes men who are too afraid to stand their ground and tell EA "We need more time, you have to trust in what we do. Stop working us so hard and we will deliver you a game that can be milked for a near decade". It's probably a combination of the two.

DA: Origins had a whole world to build from scratch, as did Mass Effect 1. Mass Effect 3 built upon that. The longer the development time, the bigger risk any company takes in developing it, that's a fact. Again - there are certain calculated deadlines that fit into a given budget and forecast, we know neither for ME3. Diablo III did receive quite a backlash as well, even though it took over 10 years of development - it might have been successfull financially, but left quite a few fans very disappointed in it nonetheless (myself included, haven't touched it after finishing it twice). So development time never equals success - be it commercial- or quality-wise

And lol at people defending gamble, if you work in a company you feel loyalty to your coworker, of course he's going to get mad after who knows how many insults he got, but that still doesn't excuse in what Bioware did. Meaning they screwed us.

If you want to imply I'm a co-worker of his, I can assure you I'm not. And I didn't feel screwed by BioWare. Of course I was disappointed with aspects of the ending, but felt they made good on that in the EC.

They didn't sell cause they weren't good games or they competed in a market that was oversaturated. ME 3 didn't have that problem since it's a more unique game. Good polished games takes time, if your game doesn't sell, no matter how long you took for it, it's cause it was crap. But that doesn't excuse a company from releasing something that obviously needed more time. And again, the former is the exception to the rule.

About Diablo 3, first link me an an article or something that shows me that they've been working on Diablo 3 for 10 years, cause otherwise I'm just flatout not going to believe you. Second, it's still being played by millions, it didn't lie about what it was, there was footage and videos dating back to a year if I can remember right.

No, I didn't imply that. What I am saying that people should understand that a person is of course going to get angry when the people that he works with everyday are getting attacked, but despite that, it still doesn't excuse the steaming pile of dung the ending turned out to be and their continued snubbing their noses at us, since they still won't admit they screwed up.

[satunnainen]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Since the release of Mass Effect 3, Bioware and Bioware fans are acting like a divorced couple. Fighting over the same things again and again, trying to prove they're right with every chance that appears and wanting to always have the last word.
I think we need a new couple.

Must be nice living in Biotopia where this is an academic discussion. However, in the real world the situation looks slightly different: I was tricked into buying ME3; I would not have bought it if I had known that interactive storytelling and "choices matter" was nothing more than lies.

There are two ways to fix this: Fix the product, or give me a refund. Neither of those things has happened because I stupidly bought the game from Origin, a mistake I can assure you will not be repeated.
It's really that simple: I am right, and Bioware is wrong. You cannot defend developers lying in interviews about their product. You cannot defend promotional videos using cut content to advertise the game.

A question: For the last.. uh.. atleast 25 years I have been buying computer games I dont think I have ever seen one I could return AFTER I opened the package, installed it and played it through. Only reasons for returns have been broken disk(s) and in some early case I bought the game that did not work in my comp. Same thing with books and records/cd:s/films.

So where in this world is it allowed to return a computer game if you did not like it after you have played it through?

[Simotech]

Mike pls

[SpamBot2000]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I understand them. I try to keep that anger I have about the endings in check, but it just bubbles over when I read something about Bioware, especially when or how they interact with fans.

What can one say? Mistakes have been made by more than one party to this controversy. But these days I only ever see attempts by BW customers to rise above petty recriminations (and no, I can't pride myself on this either), while BW themselves have written off a big part of their fanbase. Yours is the first post by anyone from BW I've seen on here for the longest time. Things cannot really improve if people are left to fight it out among themselves, with the complete absence of anyone who understands how things work at BioWare's end. 

Oh, and I'm certainly in no position to comment on BioWare's interaction with fans regarding the Dragon Age series, so this only goes for Mass Effect as far as I can tell.  

[Siran]

M25105 wrote...

They didn't sell cause they weren't good games or they competed in a market that was oversaturated. ME 3 didn't have that problem since it's a more unique game. Good polished games takes time, if your game doesn't sell, no matter how long you took for it, it's cause it was crap. But that doesn't excuse a company from releasing something that obviously needed more time. And again, the former is the exception to the rule.

I gather, the developers of said games were sure they've made good games. No one develops a game with the intention of it being crap...

About Diablo 3, first link me an an article or something that shows me that they've been working on Diablo 3 for 10 years, cause otherwise I'm just flatout not going to believe you.

Here you go: "Diablo III spent six years in development before being officially announced". And it was announced back in 2008. Took 5sec to google for it...

Second, it's still being played by millions, it didn't lie about what it was, there was footage and videos dating back to a year if I can remember right.

ME3 is still played by quite the amount of people as well, especially the multiplayer. And I'm pretty sure Diablo III isn't played because of it's great story, but because of it's loot and XP-system.

[plfranke]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I understand them. I try to keep that anger I have about the endings in check, but it just bubbles over when I read something about Bioware, especially when or how they interact with fans.

What can one say? Mistakes have been made by more than one party to this controversy. But these days I only ever see attempts by BW customers to rise above petty recriminations (and no, I can't pride myself on this either), while BW themselves have written off a big part of their fanbase. Yours is the first post by anyone from BW I've seen on here for the longest time. Things cannot really improve if people are left to fight it out among themselves, with the complete absence of anyone who understands how things work at BioWare's end. 

Oh, and I'm certainly in no position to comment on BioWare's interaction with fans regarding the Dragon Age series, so this only goes for Mass Effect as far as I can tell.  

This is so true. Take Mike's comment for instance, "Do you have any idea..." No we don't have any idea, because the only thing we've been shown is Leviathan, information that should have been in game from the beginning, and a picture that no one can make out anything of. This is obviously what Bioware intended because Gamble made a comment about speculations. It's ignorant to think you can not communicate with your customers after giving content that many were unsatisfied with, and expect them to be happy with speculating on a picture.

[OmegaXI]

If I was him I would've dropped the f-bomb to people like that a long time ago, seriously they try to interact with fans and a** hats like that still act the way they do. If they are that mad about the game or the way they DLC is distributed then go take their business else were.

And if they are such experts on the workings of the game industry then they should go take their talents to a game studio and make their own game series. Theres a difference between being really passionate about a game series and being a jerk.

Hey they bought a game they didn't like, the sun goes up and the sun goes down, move on with your life.

Modifié par OmegaXI, 16 septembre 2012 - 12:20 .

[KOM_95]

If Mike was going to respond like that he shouldn't have replied to that person.

[chuckles471]

He said ****.... Wow I am soooo offended.

If you are offended by words on the internet. I suggest you grow a pair and stop being an over sensitive ****. That was the c-word. Also Mass effect has swearing in it so you shouldn't be playing it.

[GreyReaver]

N7 Lisbeth wrote...

I know what you're saying, Arppis, but it's hard. It's really hard.

I understand them. I try to keep that anger I have about the endings in check, but it just bubbles over when I read something about Bioware, especially when or how they interact with fans.

They can't spit on their fanbase and then expect their fans to sing them praises. They cannot, should not, expect any more than vitriol at this point. If they want to push the content as a money-making vehicle, hey, I understand. But they can't expect us to love them for it, when they've done nothing but shovel us ... well, you know what I'm saying.

I'm still trying to get a grip on that anger. I'm usually pretty open-minded and non-partisan. <Sighs>

I guess it's impossible to be this angry about something you don't have passion for. I wholeheartedly admit it, I love Mass Effect. But I despise the endings for ME3, and I hate Bioware for their EC and flat out saying no further changes to the endings -- when they haven't changed the endings yet. There I go again. Sorry. :-/

Hear, hear. Oh yah, this is the 21st century.  This.

[OmegaXI]

chuckles471 wrote...

He said ****.... Wow I am soooo offended.

If you are offended by words on the internet. I suggest you grow a pair and stop being an over sensitive ****. That was the c-word. Also Mass effect has swearing in it so you shouldn't be playing it.

Chuckles471 you made me Chuckle, you win an internet cookie

[Dubozz]

munnellyladt wrote...

If I were Mike Gamble,you'd see much more then the f word in that tweet.
But seriously give them a break,they do work there asses off and all people do is criticise them about what they've done wrong.
If you don't like it,don't buy it.

QFT

[Allan Schumacher]

This is so true. Take Mike's comment for instance, "Do you have any idea..." No we don't have any idea, because the only thing we've been shown is Leviathan, information that should have been in game from the beginning

I haven't played Leviathan. Do you feel there is information in there that is essential to the plot of the game?

[Siran]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

This is so true. Take Mike's comment for instance, "Do you have any idea..." No we don't have any idea, because the only thing we've been shown is Leviathan, information that should have been in game from the beginning

I haven't played Leviathan. Do you feel there is information in there that is essential to the plot of the game?

Given how there are many differing opinions on that, I think it would be best you played that yourself and state your opinion. I myself don't think so, since many of it is hinted on in the EC and gives more background to the origins of the Reapers, but nothing essential (don't want to spoiler too much here). As in Prometheus is not essential to the Alien series, but sheds some light on the origin of the Aliens.

[Allan Schumacher]

Well, depends. The story makes a lot more sense with it than without it. So, if you don't mind not knowing what the hell is happening and how something as important to the story as the "Catalyst" came about, then no. It's not essential.

I guess the thing is, if Leviathan is written since people are not satisfied, wouldn't it make sense that it explains more?

The thing that always got me about the Javik one is that people felt he was so important and the general vibe I got was that a lot of people hated that it was Day One DLC because they really wanted to experience his content and people felt BioWare nickel and dimed them.

At the same time, shouldn't we make DLC that people really want to experience? Shouldn't we release other DLC to help flesh out the story? Would people be more satisfied if the contents were in a more traditional "expansion pack" or even a sequel?

[Xellith]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

This is so true. Take Mike's comment for instance, "Do you have any idea..." No we don't have any idea, because the only thing we've been shown is Leviathan, information that should have been in game from the beginning

I haven't played Leviathan. Do you feel there is information in there that is essential to the plot of the game?

Yes.  Definitely.  But even then you still dont get to ask the Leviathans the important questions.  A few of which being "Do you know what the catalyst is?", "Do you know where we can find it?", "What can you tell me of the citadel?".

The Bioware staff will make cheap quips about "people complaining about leviathan not being in the original game during release.  Well thats because it wasnt ready yet" or something.  To that I say "you should have held off releasing the damn game until you were able to finish it up and add it to the game then shouldnt you".

Really though Leviathan IS important to ME3.  But its not important enough to purchase for $10 since all you get out of it is some generic combat and 2 lines of dialogue added to the catalyst at the end of the game.  Stuff you can see on youtube.

Allan Schumacher wrote...

At the
same time, shouldn't we make DLC that people really want to experience?
Shouldn't we release other DLC to help flesh out the story? Would
people be more satisfied if the contents were in a more traditional
"expansion pack" or even a sequel?

They can make an expansion pack and chop it up into 10$ chunks - eventually netting them more cash than they would get selling a single expansion pack.  That's Bioware/EAs plan after Awakening.

Modifié par Xellith, 16 septembre 2012 - 12:47 .

[GreyReaver]

plfranke wrote...

I haven't read the entire thread but I did read the first page and something caught my eye so I want to discuss it a little bit. When I played this game the first time things had a huge impact on me, that feeling can't be artificially created. It only comes from experiencing something the first time.

The first time I heard The Illusive Man's music (my favorite character) I had the biggest smile on my face. When Kai Leng killed Thane I was on the edge of my seat watching the fight. When Vendetta said TIM had warned the Reapers about the Crucible I literally said damn it in sync with Shepard. I'll never get a chance to play this game for the first time again and whenever I do play it, moments I cherrish like the conversation with Rannoch Reaper will be overshadowed by the fact, I know it's going to be ruined in the final 5 minutes of the game. The only foreshadowing we have of who the Catalyst is, is through a dlc that we had to pay for and was only released after the game. I could deal with the day one dlc, but Leviathan clearly should have been in the game to begin with. It is the only content in the entire series that explains the origins of the main antogonists and you were charged 10 dollars extra to get it.

This fan has a legitimate beef and I support his claim.

Agreed.  I said essentially the same thing in a different thread.  You only get one FIRST playthrough. So what, am I going to have to start waiting a year or more before playing a video game (the first time) to ensure I have all of the DLC?

[Dominus]

At the same time, shouldn't we make DLC that people really want to experience? Shouldn't we release other DLC to help flesh out the story? Would people be more satisfied if the contents were in a more traditional "expansion pack" or even a sequel?

From a narrative standpoint, it depends. Little side-stories like LotSB, LoD, and the like work on their own... but if you're telling a larger, grandiose tale, you're better off in Expansion land. I couldn't imagine Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne in the form of DLC. It'd be like trying to read Game of Thrones in 100-page packets produced every 6 months.

[Allan Schumacher]

I guess what I'm saying is, "what type of content do you think SHOULD be in the DLC?"