689 réponses à ce sujet

[rekn2]

well i tried, meh

[ref]

Hatchetman77 wrote...

No, I'm pretty sure the ending was poorly-received because it was awful.

[BSpud]

Reading Blueprotoss' "arguments" is a guilty pleasure of mine.

[Iakus]

 What it really boild down to is

WE were promised our chocies would matter
We were told we'd get a wide array of endings based on said chcoie.
We didn't get that.

The Reapers are always defeated at a horrific cost.  Shepard is always a cinder, regardless of EMS (yes, yes, there's one where Shep's still breathing.  How long does it look that the twitching will last?).  EC gives us some slide shows inspired by past decisions which is,...nice...I guess.  But in the end, everything was railroaded. 

Modifié par iakus, 25 octobre 2012 - 05:34 .

[Redbelle]

BeefheartSpud wrote...

Reading Blueprotoss' "arguments" is a guilty pleasure of mine.

If Blueprotoss did not exist, we would have to invent him!

[Blueprotoss]

drayfish wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Dray I'm just gonna come out and say this as much for your own sake as for everyone else here. Don't feed the imbecil - I mean troll.

Honestly, arguing with Blueprotoss is like arguing with a brick.

Infact, I take that back. The brick retains more and may even offer citations to the many lines of bull**** if offered a treat.

Just let it go and he'll leave eventually

@ ld1449:

Sadly, point taken.

Ironically you would hav to be the one to let go since you are trying to start a meaningless measring contest becase you don't want opinion to be wrong.  Plus you shouldn't listen to people that abuse the word "troll" based on how most of them are normally "trolls" based on insults and staying mostly off-topic.

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Are people actually arguing with Blueprotoss? Time and time again the guy has demonstrated that he's either a troll or a moron.

Yet you're here being completely off-topic and inslting someone, which means you aren't practicing what you preach about "trolls" since you are in actuality a "troll" yourself.  I'm no "troll" but when someone pulls the "troll" card then they have already lost the discussion and don't care what emotion gets released.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 25 octobre 2012 - 04:08 .

[Blueprotoss]

Paulomedi wrote...

"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If
you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear
you to pieces."

Words of wisdom...

If those were words of wisdom then you wouldn't be wasting time neither on insults in your previous nor on trying to turn opinion into fact.

Paulomedi wrote...

To be fair, you are using strawmen in here. It's ironic how many logic fallacies this post has.

Aghhh I can't do it. It's too hard being Blueprotoss[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/grin.png[/smilie].

I see you're not interested in logic, being civil in a discussion, or wanting to stay on topic.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 25 octobre 2012 - 04:02 .

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Blueprotoss wrote...

drayfish wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Dray I'm just gonna come out and say this as much for your own sake as for everyone else here. Don't feed the imbecil - I mean troll.

Honestly, arguing with Blueprotoss is like arguing with a brick.

Infact, I take that back. The brick retains more and may even offer citations to the many lines of bull**** if offered a treat.

Just let it go and he'll leave eventually

@ ld1449:

Sadly, point taken.

Ironically you would hav to be the one to let go since you are trying to start a meaningless measring contest becase you don't want opinion to be wrong.  Plus you shouldn't listen to people that abuse the word "troll" based on how most of them are normally "trolls" based on insults and staying mostly off-topic.

lolwut?

[Redbelle]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

drayfish wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Dray I'm just gonna come out and say this as much for your own sake as for everyone else here. Don't feed the imbecil - I mean troll.

Honestly, arguing with Blueprotoss is like arguing with a brick.

Infact, I take that back. The brick retains more and may even offer citations to the many lines of bull**** if offered a treat.

Just let it go and he'll leave eventually

@ ld1449:

Sadly, point taken.

Ironically you would hav to be the one to let go since you are trying to start a meaningless measring contest becase you don't want opinion to be wrong.  Plus you shouldn't listen to people that abuse the word "troll" based on how most of them are normally "trolls" based on insults and staying mostly off-topic.

lolwut?

Seconded........ Wutduh?

[Rafficus III]

Vanilla ending had quite a bit of plotholes. EC helped quite a bit and I'm thankful Bioware made it free and with the expediency they did. However, there's still quite a few plotholes. The feel is a bit different to the story compared to the others, but I think that's from Bioware trying their hardest to please their fans. Hell, they even hired a Garrus fan to pen Garrus in ME3 over Weekes and Walters; they made EDI a squady and gave the fans the Joker/Edi romance; and they inserted fan inside jokes all over the place. In a way, you could say I do hold quite a bit of blame with the fans. Many demanded and petitioned for certain things without clarity as how to improve something and then were dissatisfied with the results. Fans went on a tirade when the original script leaked, then demanded a rewrite of the revised script and even went as far as wanting the original script and/or wondering why the ending felt so rushed. Liara's plot armor, removal of world exploration, attempting to make Leviathan a watery Shadow Broker, all of it reeks of Bioware trying to appease an unruly fanbase on BSN. So yes, I'd agree with you TC: fans did raise their hopes up under the promise the script/ending would be what they predicted and pulled the dissatisfied consumer/betrayed fan cards when the staff's vision didn't align with that of the fans.

[Redbelle]

hornedfrog87 wrote...

Vanilla ending had quite a bit of plotholes. EC helped quite a bit and I'm thankful Bioware made it free and with the expediency they did. However, there's still quite a few plotholes. The feel is a bit different to the story compared to the others, but I think that's from Bioware trying their hardest to please their fans. Hell, they even hired a Garrus fan to pen Garrus in ME3 over Weekes and Walters; they made EDI a squady and gave the fans the Joker/Edi romance; and they inserted fan inside jokes all over the place. In a way, you could say I do hold quite a bit of blame with the fans. Many demanded and petitioned for certain things without clarity as how to improve something and then were dissatisfied with the results. Fans went on a tirade when the original script leaked, then demanded a rewrite of the revised script and even went as far as wanting the original script and/or wondering why the ending felt so rushed. Liara's plot armor, removal of world exploration, attempting to make Leviathan a watery Shadow Broker, all of it reeks of Bioware trying to appease an unruly fanbase on BSN. So yes, I'd agree with you TC: fans did raise their hopes up under the promise the script/ending would be what they predicted and pulled the dissatisfied consumer/betrayed fan cards when the staff's vision didn't align with that of the fans.

It's a good point made. When should you listen and not listen to fans? Maybe a better question is when should you do or not do what fans ask for?

I've got a thread exploring this to a degree. But to sum it up, fans asked for the removal of things like the Mako and the hacking mini games. BW then did not, in ME3, replace the integrated story/game driving sections. They also completely abandoned hacking. Both ME1's timing rings and ME2's memory game hacks.

The removal of these elements, and the, instead, focus on combat meant that we as players were more focused on the running and shooting gameplay mechanic. Fun while it may be, giving players other things to do other than shooting things is I think essential to the ME universe.

The Shepard in ME 1 could hack, skill up hacking, break equipment down into omni gel to brute force his way through a hack. We had options on how to approach problems. Rely on skill or spend finite and hard to come by equipment to generate gel's.

I think BW listened to fans and removed these. But I don't think they did so wisely. If ppl don't like something they'll kick up a fuss. If they do like something they'll keep quiet. BW really needed to investigate fan feedback more closely.

After all, fans who didn't like the Mako got it removed from ME2. But fans who liked the driving sections then kicked up so BW brought the driving sections back in the form of the hammerhead.

I really miss the GTA feel of ME1's driving sections. Hoping they bring it back in ME4 so we don't get just another squad shooter. Mass Effect has a bigger DNA pool than just the cover shooter mechanics that got the front and centre row in ME3.

[Iakus]

Redbelle wrote...

It's a good point made. When should you listen and not listen to fans? Maybe a better question is when should you do or not do what fans ask for?

I've got a thread exploring this to a degree. But to sum it up, fans asked for the removal of things like the Mako and the hacking mini games. BW then did not, in ME3, replace the integrated story/game driving sections. They also completely abandoned hacking. Both ME1's timing rings and ME2's memory game hacks.

The removal of these elements, and the, instead, focus on combat meant that we as players were more focused on the running and shooting gameplay mechanic. Fun while it may be, giving players other things to do other than shooting things is I think essential to the ME universe.

The Shepard in ME 1 could hack, skill up hacking, break equipment down into omni gel to brute force his way through a hack. We had options on how to approach problems. Rely on skill or spend finite and hard to come by equipment to generate gel's.

I think BW listened to fans and removed these. But I don't think they did so wisely. If ppl don't like something they'll kick up a fuss. If they do like something they'll keep quiet. BW really needed to investigate fan feedback more closely.

After all, fans who didn't like the Mako got it removed from ME2. But fans who liked the driving sections then kicked up so BW brought the driving sections back in the form of the hammerhead.

I really miss the GTA feel of ME1's driving sections. Hoping they bring it back in ME4 so we don't get just another squad shooter. Mass Effect has a bigger DNA pool than just the cover shooter mechanics that got the front and centre row in ME3.

Bioware half-listened.  They heard complaints, but failed to ask why people were complaining.  Thus we get superfical patchwork "fixes" while the inherent weaknesses remained.

Bioware should listen to all complaints, but every bit as importantly, they need to understand why people are complaining.  Not just what's being complained about.

[Iakus]

Arcian wrote...

iakus wrote...

Bioware half-listened.  They heard complaints, but failed to ask why people were complaining.  Thus we get superfical patchwork "fixes" while the inherent weaknesses remained.

Mass Effect is BioWare's Titanic. Many claimed it was unsinkable, but a single iceberg sank the entire vessel.

One can take the easy road and blame it on the iceberg (the endings), or one can be realistic and realize that it was the ship (the franchise) that was poorly constructed from the very beginning. If the ship was really unsinkable, it would not have sunk no matter how many icebergs you sent its way.

True.  But by the same token, if it hadn't hit the "iceberg" it could have gotten to port relatively intact, despite its flaws

[Rafficus III]

iakus wrote...

Bioware half-listened.  They heard complaints, but failed to ask why people were complaining.  Thus we get superfical patchwork "fixes" while the inherent weaknesses remained.

Bioware should listen to all complaints, but every bit as importantly, they need to understand why people are complaining.  Not just what's being complained about.

Yes, there is truth to what you're saying, but you're asking a lot when you review the fanbase. Most of the complaints I see lodged at x or y, usually is driven by harsh words and what they want rather than solutions. Bioware does need to do better in interpretating fans concerns, yes, but fans need to quit rabbling and express their views/concerns concisely and respectfully; something I have yet to see. Don't like the Mako? Instead of saying "it sux" or how "horrendous" it is, say, "My appreciation of the Mako was limited because of how easy it was to tip, not being able to aim upward, and scaling mountains was difficult for it. Please look into freeing it's aim features and better traction when going up difficult terrains so exploring isn't so labourous."

[Iakus]

hornedfrog87 wrote...

iakus wrote...

Bioware half-listened.  They heard complaints, but failed to ask why people were complaining.  Thus we get superfical patchwork "fixes" while the inherent weaknesses remained.

Bioware should listen to all complaints, but every bit as importantly, they need to understand why people are complaining.  Not just what's being complained about.

Yes, there is truth to what you're saying, but you're asking a lot when you review the fanbase. Most of the complaints I see lodged at x or y, usually is driven by harsh words and what they want rather than solutions. Bioware does need to do better in interpretating fans concerns, yes, but fans need to quit rabbling and express their views/concerns concisely and respectfully; something I have yet to see. Don't like the Mako? Instead of saying "it sux" or how "horrendous" it is, say, "My appreciation of the Mako was limited because of how easy it was to tip, not being able to aim upward, and scaling mountains was difficult for it. Please look into freeing it's aim features and better traction when going up difficult terrains so exploring isn't so labourous."

YEah that would make things a lot easier.  But the simple fact is not everyone can clearly articulate what they want.  That doesn't make their desire less, valid, but it is harder to discover.

But it's not impossible.  Asking clarification question, even if it's as simple as "Why don't you like the Mako?" can steer people into explaining their positions better. 

I heard that devs were puzzled as to why there were people who preferred the elevators in ME1 to loading screens in ME2.  The answer turned out to be because of the banter in the elevators, which was nonexistant in ME2.  How long did it take for the devs to figure that one out because no one asked?

It's important to actively listen to people making requests.  Because even they might not know exactly how to express what they want.  Communication goes both ways.  Don't just post a "we are listening" thread and walk away.  That way leads to EC.

This is why I am somewhat encouraged by ME3, as several developers appear to be active on those threads, talking to people, asking for input  and explaining things to fans.  I may not agree with the direction they're taking certain aspects of the game, but at least I can be reasonably certain they are paying attention.

[silverexile17s]

I think the endings were poorly receved because they were the only endings. If there had been OTHER, brighter endings to COMPLEMENT these endings, and highlight each other, the fan responce would not have been NEARLY as bad. you DON'T have any of those, the overwhelmengly bittersweet endings KILL any desire to replay the game. DA:O had that. with the "Deal" with Morrigen, or letting Alister sacrifice himself in your place. It STUNG, but the OPTION was there. They weren't ALL SOO bittersweet that you never wanted to play more then once.

:Also, as a side note, Blueprotoss and I have been fighting, because he thinks that Star Wars is multiple galaxies linked together, not a single galaxy divided into seperate time periods. He says that Kotor, the Force Unleashed, and Republic Commando all take place in different galaxies.
Could SOMEONE explain this to him? He keeps refernceing this, and it's getting a tad comical how he could have missed such a fundimental point of Star Wars lore as the fact that it's all one Galaxy, not several of them linked together.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 25 octobre 2012 - 07:42 .

[Iakus]

silverexile17s wrote...

I think the endings were poorly receved because they were the only endings. If there had been OTHER, brighter endings to COMPLEMENT these endings, and highlight each other, the fan responce would not have been NEARLY as bad. you DON'T have any of those, the overwhelmengly bittersweet endings KILL any desire to replay the game. DA:O had that. with the "Deal" with Morrigen, or letting Alister sacrifice himself in your place. It STUNG, but the OPTION was there. They weren't ALL SOO bittersweet that you never wanted to play more then once.

QFT

If the players go "Waitaminute that was one of the good endings?"  You screwed up

Modifié par iakus, 25 octobre 2012 - 08:19 .

[silverexile17s]

[quote]iakus wrote...

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...

I think the endings were poorly receved because they were the only endings. If there had been OTHER, brighter endings to COMPLEMENT these endings, and highlight each other, the fan responce would not have been NEARLY as bad. you DON'T have any of those, the overwhelmengly bittersweet endings KILL any desire to replay the game. DA:O had that. with the "Deal" with Morrigen, or letting Alister sacrifice himself in your place. It STUNG, but the OPTION was there. They weren't ALL SOO bittersweet that you never wanted to play more then once.
/quote]

QFT

If the players go "Waitaminute that was one of the good endings?"  You screwed up

[/quote]
Exactally. If the player can't make heads or tails of what happened without some form of extention to it, you KNOW you did something wrong.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

lol with your formatting