298 réponses à ce sujet

[Teddie Sage]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

The problem is not in the ending concept. The problem is in your understanding of this concept.

Couldn't have said it better myself, though I don't think it's because they're unable to understand but because they don't WANT to understand.

Again with your nonsense.

Most of us UNDERSTAND the ending, we just HATE it.

Stop assuming that because we HATE them, that we DON'T WANT to understand the endings.

By now I'm 100% convinced that you're just a troll.

I know I said I wouldn't bother answering your messages but you're getting really annoying.

Modifié par Teddie Sage, 03 janvier 2013 - 03:28 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Seival wrote...

Kira Sierra Cyrus wrote...

Basically what it is in the title: does Bioware has some kind of writing quality control? Or people like Mac Walters are free to use whatever nonsense they can come up with?

Yes, I'm partularly talking about the absurdity of endings (Star Child concept). I reinstalled ME3 not a long time ago, hoping that Extended Cut brought something actually new to the table, but it only expanded on the overall failure of original concept.

Spoiler

P.S: EC did have some good things in it though

 

There is no nonsence in ME3.

...But BSN clearly needs some kind of face control already, because it's overflowed by people who are unable understand what the game and its developers tell them.

The problem is not in the ending concept. The problem is in your understanding of this concept.

seival, you are absolutely nuts.

[clarkusdarkus]

Quality and bioware don't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentance after ME2.........the ending is nothing new in sci-fi let alone gaming, they're uber ego's got the better of them....and all this talk of casey being smart proves he isnt when it's a ripoff of another ending and needed the EC to elaborate upon it and still leave us where we were beforehand.

[Kira Sierra Cyrus]

OK, thanks, Teddie Sage and Greylycantrope. It's just that Catalyst's actual voice (when he gets angry at refusal) is basically Harbinger's voice

[Optimus J]

When half of team are relatives of the bosses, they tend to overlook a lot of things.

I mean, who wants to draw attention to the incompetence of someone you slipped inside? Or to draw attention to someone's else relative risking they will do the same to yours?

[GreyLycanTrope]

Teddie Sage wrote...

Kira Sierra Cyrus wrote...

Isn't Star Child basically Harbinger?

By following the Catalyst's logic, every Reapers, Sovereigns, etc are linked to him. And he's also known as Harbinger. They're one mind splitted in thousands and thousands of different bodies.

I wouldn't say one mind, he claims to be the embodibent of their knowlegde bu existed before they did Harbinger and Sovereign seem to have different personalities and even the Rannoch Reaper acknowldges the Harbinger as a seperate entity.

They seem to share a central data storage which house all the knowledge accumilated from the years of reaping organics. Their minds still seem to be seperate, though controled by the Catalyst.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Kira Sierra Cyrus wrote...

OK, thanks, Teddie Sage and Greylycantrope. It's just that Catalyst's actual voice (when he gets angry at refusal) is basically Harbinger's voice

He is the Reaper Overlord, they all seem to have booming voices when they feel like it.

[Teddie Sage]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Teddie Sage wrote...

Kira Sierra Cyrus wrote...

Isn't Star Child basically Harbinger?

By following the Catalyst's logic, every Reapers, Sovereigns, etc are linked to him. And he's also known as Harbinger. They're one mind splitted in thousands and thousands of different bodies.

I wouldn't say one mind, he claims to be the embodibent of their knowlegde bu existed before they did Harbinger and Sovereign seem to have different personalities and even the Rannoch Reaper acknowldges the Harbinger as a seperate entity.

They seem to share a central data storage which house all the knowledge accumilated from the years of reaping organics. Their minds still seem to be seperate, though controled by the Catalyst.

I always assumed that he is Harbinger because if you choose Refusal ending, he takes the voice of Harbinger to say: "So be it." From there I came to the conclusion that the Catalyst and Harbinger are indeed one.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Teddie Sage wrote...
I always assumed that he is Harbinger because if you choose Refusal ending, he takes the voice of Harbinger to say: "So be it." From there I came to the conclusion that the Catalyst and Harbinger are indeed one.

Understandable, and far be it from me to say it must work in the way I suggested, it's certianly vague enough to still warrant debate, though AIs are capable of changing their voice so I don't read that much into the voice change aside from the Catalyst showing his true colors.

[Fifmut]

They do. They cut out the good content and leave the rest in.

[GimmeDaGun]

Kira Sierra Cyrus wrote...

Basically what it is in the title: does Bioware has some kind of writing quality control? Or people like Mac Walters are free to use whatever nonsense they can come up with?

Yes, I'm partularly talking about the absurdity of endings (Star Child concept). I reinstalled ME3 not a long time ago, hoping that Extended Cut brought something actually new to the table, but it only expanded on the overall failure of original concept.

Spoiler

P.S: EC did have some good things in it though

 

There's no such thing as "writing quality control". Writing is subjective, therefore you may like the initial result or dislike it. Some love Tolkien books, others dislike his work for example. The only quality control is if you give or present your piece of work to others: fellow writers, film or game makers, friends, colleagues, academics, you name it and ask them to read, watch or play your creation for feedback. Then they will tell their thoughts about it, criticise it for you, pointing out a few things that you might miss noticing or seeing (it's always difficult to be unbiased and criticize your own "baby", something that you put lots of time, effort, blood, sweat and tears and your heart into) but in the end it's up to you to decide what you do with all the feedback and what you do with your story (except if there's a 2nd party - a production company for instance - who has the right to interfere and tell you what direction you shoud take according to the treaty you signed with it - well, it's a ****e thing, but it's their money which is at risk... now inb4: EA gave Bioware complete creative freedom). That's how it works. There were a few examples of showing certain products to test audiances, before finishing up completely, but that's not a common practice (and not a perfect one either).

EC is a special case, just like directors' cuts with films. In this kind of media you can later further edit your story or add to it. The advantage of fast and cheaper digital technology and distribution.

If I want to tell a story about evil mushrooms invading Singapore, I will do that even if my "fans" hate it...  that's how it works. I might take some advice, I might make up my mind and change a few things according to the inspiration taken from feedback (eg. EC), but that's still my decision.

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 03 janvier 2013 - 04:49 .

[angol fear]

GimmeDaGun, there's only one thing I would correct in your post : there's a director's cut because there's a cut to please the audience in theater (choices of the producers or tests) and a director's cut (another vision of the movie from the director). E.C. is not like a director's cut. The original ending would be the director's cut and the E.C. an ending to please in theater.

[Dr_Extrem]

every publisher has editors. those editors do not only find and correct grammar and typos - they also look for plot inconsistancies and errors.

some even criticise the content, if it does not fit ti the publishers policy.


there is off course no real quality control .. but editors and test audiences.

[GimmeDaGun]

angol fear wrote...

GimmeDaGun, there's only one thing I would correct in your post : there's a director's cut because there's a cut to please the audience in theater (choices of the producers or tests) and a director's cut (another vision of the movie from the director). E.C. is not like a director's cut. The original ending would be the director's cut and the E.C. an ending to please in theater.

Yeah, I know about that only I didn't consider it in my post because I was merely refering to the phenomena of being able to edit or manipulate your work and republish it later, which was not that common earlier (it's a relatively new thing which has become common with dvd-s, digital downloads etc.). 

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 03 janvier 2013 - 04:43 .

[GimmeDaGun]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

every publisher has editors. those editors do not only find and correct grammar and typos - they also look for plot inconsistancies and errors.

some even criticise the content, if it does not fit ti the publishers policy.


there is off course no real quality control .. but editors and test audiences.

Yeah, of course editors can point out very obvious mistakes and inconsistences, but they don't have a say in the creative direction or decisions, therefore their job is not to QA the story, the narrative style or the creative decisions behind them.

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 03 janvier 2013 - 04:45 .

[Dr_Extrem]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

every publisher has editors. those editors do not only find and correct grammar and typos - they also look for plot inconsistancies and errors.

some even criticise the content, if it does not fit ti the publishers policy.


there is off course no real quality control .. but editors and test audiences.

Yeah, of course editors can point out very obvious mistakes and inconsistences, but they don't have a say in the creative direction or decisions. 

no .. they just say, that the publisher will not publish it, in this form.


if i look at the plot of mass effect 3, it seems, that neither editors or control/test groups were involved at all.

[Ironhandjustice]

Teddie Sage wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Nothing wrong with it, you simply don't like it.

Him and thousands of people. You're always praising BioWare while ignoring the movements like Hold the Line, Demand and Retake ME3. It's not only him. A lot of people still consider those endings to be poorly written, even with the EC.

Not only poor written. The similartity between this endings, asimov's and deus ex's are like:

-Peter Griffin
-Homer Simpson
-American dad guy (yep, this last one is the ME3 guy, and no, I don'k know the name).

You know, there is a chapter of the new series where some italian policemen look at fotos and they can see "plagiarism. Plagiarism of plagiarism".
Fun stuff.

[Linkenski]

I think the idea of the child (on earth) was probably Mac Walters, but in the endings i'm placing my bet that it was Casey Hudson's idea, because looking at interviews, he is the one that seemed to have the most "artistic vision"

But i really don't know what happened with that child, and it was bad writing from start to finish to his character.

He was meant to be symbolism but Mac Walters or some other writer went out of this world when they wrote it, because they forgot to think about what it actually is in the reality of the ME world when they introduced the starchild.

Symbolism or artsy things are no cool if they're just weird to be weird. The "art" sides of Mass Effect 3 didn't have any deeper meaning to them, and that's pretty thin to me.

[GimmeDaGun]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

every publisher has editors. those editors do not only find and correct grammar and typos - they also look for plot inconsistancies and errors.

some even criticise the content, if it does not fit ti the publishers policy.


there is off course no real quality control .. but editors and test audiences.

Yeah, of course editors can point out very obvious mistakes and inconsistences, but they don't have a say in the creative direction or decisions. 

no .. they just say, that the publisher will not publish it, in this form.


if i look at the plot of mass effect 3, it seems, that neither editors or control/test groups were involved at all.

That they can do of course.  But that does not make them "story quality control", only they don't want to publish the "shyte"  you wrote under their name. They have all the right to do that, then you take it somewhere else who might publish it for you. Certain publishers only publish according to a certain standard (quality if you like), so a publisher which publishes classics, philoshopic and fine books, won't publish pulp fiction stuff.

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 03 janvier 2013 - 04:56 .

[Dr_Extrem]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

every publisher has editors. those editors do not only find and correct grammar and typos - they also look for plot inconsistancies and errors.

some even criticise the content, if it does not fit ti the publishers policy.


there is off course no real quality control .. but editors and test audiences.

Yeah, of course editors can point out very obvious mistakes and inconsistences, but they don't have a say in the creative direction or decisions. 

no .. they just say, that the publisher will not publish it, in this form.


if i look at the plot of mass effect 3, it seems, that neither editors or control/test groups were involved at all.

That they can do of course.  But that does not make them "story quality controll", only they don't want to give their name to the "shlte" you want them to publish for you. 

off course  there is no official content-police out there. but the writing teams of a game/movie/series are in a different position than novelists.

a novelist writes his/her story and give it to a publisher. the publisher accepts it and if it sells well, they offer the novelist a contract, to write more books of this kind.

the writers of games ect. are contracted, to write a story for a certain setting. if you plan to write a series of stories, lets say a trilogy, you have to write 4 stories. one for the overarching plot and one for each individual part. your main goal is, to write a consistans story, that does not contradict itself every five pages.


biowares writing team was not successful to create an overarching plot, that survives the games. the only shared parts are the reapers (who need to be stopped) and shepard+crew.

[Killdren88]

Yeah for the most part they just look for grammar issues. But what I wanna to know is why didn't the player testers say anything? I mean did the not have any concerns that this ending would be a problem?

[string3r]

Yep just not for the ending it seems.

[angol fear]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

every publisher has editors. those editors do not only find and correct grammar and typos - they also look for plot inconsistancies and errors.

some even criticise the content, if it does not fit ti the publishers policy.


there is off course no real quality control .. but editors and test audiences.

Yeah, of course editors can point out very obvious mistakes and inconsistences, but they don't have a say in the creative direction or decisions. 

no .. they just say, that the publisher will not publish it, in this form.


if i look at the plot of mass effect 3, it seems, that neither editors or control/test groups were involved at all.

That they can do of course.  But that does not make them "story quality controll", only they don't want to give their name to the "shlte" you want them to publish for you. 

off course  there is no official content-police out there. but the writing teams of a game/movie/series are in a different position than novelists.

a novelist writes his/her story and give it to a publisher. the publisher accepts it and if it sells well, they offer the novelist a contract, to write more books of this kind.

the writers of games ect. are contracted, to write a story for a certain setting. if you plan to write a series of stories, lets say a trilogy, you have to write 4 stories. one for the overarching plot and one for each individual part. your main goal is, to write a consistans story, that does not contradict itself every five pages.


biowares writing team was not successful to create an overarching plot, that survives the games. the only shared parts are the reapers (who need to be stopped) and shepard+crew.

 

 No, you don't know how it works. Working for video game is like working for movies. There's a "director", someone who decide how it will be (the others can give their ideas but they do not decide if it will be like this). If everyone would work like you said no video game would be playable. 

[Femlob]

Killdren88 wrote...

Yeah for the most part they just look for grammar issues. But what I wanna to know is why didn't the player testers say anything? I mean did the not have any concerns that this ending would be a problem?

I'm assuming they were happy enough to still have a job in these trying times.

[Dr_Extrem]

angol fear wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

every publisher has editors. those editors do not only find and correct grammar and typos - they also look for plot inconsistancies and errors.

some even criticise the content, if it does not fit ti the publishers policy.


there is off course no real quality control .. but editors and test audiences.

Yeah, of course editors can point out very obvious mistakes and inconsistences, but they don't have a say in the creative direction or decisions. 

no .. they just say, that the publisher will not publish it, in this form.


if i look at the plot of mass effect 3, it seems, that neither editors or control/test groups were involved at all.

That they can do of course.  But that does not make them "story quality controll", only they don't want to give their name to the "shlte" you want them to publish for you. 

off course  there is no official content-police out there. but the writing teams of a game/movie/series are in a different position than novelists.

a novelist writes his/her story and give it to a publisher. the publisher accepts it and if it sells well, they offer the novelist a contract, to write more books of this kind.

the writers of games ect. are contracted, to write a story for a certain setting. if you plan to write a series of stories, lets say a trilogy, you have to write 4 stories. one for the overarching plot and one for each individual part. your main goal is, to write a consistans story, that does not contradict itself every five pages.


biowares writing team was not successful to create an overarching plot, that survives the games. the only shared parts are the reapers (who need to be stopped) and shepard+crew.

 

 No, you don't know how it works. Working for video game is like working for movies. There's a "director", someone who decide how it will be (the others can give their ideas but they do not decide if it will be like this). If everyone would work like you said no video game would be playable. 

the directors job is the presentation of the story - not the story. the director can go to the writer and tell him, that his scrips is bad or that he cant present it. if the writer rewrites the passages, he does so, to make it presentable.

in fact, the producer has the final word. he gives the money.

Modifié par Dr_Extrem, 03 janvier 2013 - 05:15 .