599 réponses à ce sujet

[Jadebaby]

Ninja Stan wrote...

I know I won't get a complete answer right now, but if the next Mass Effect game does what the marketing claims, is as good as the hype says it is, receives many top marks, and is said by fans to be pretty darn good, would that be enough to change your mind and restore that trust you once had? Would ME3 (and maybe DA2, if you lean that way) then be seen as statistical anomalies in BioWare's gameography, or has the trust been well and truly severed and each good, worthy game becomes but a stepping stone to restoring that faith?

Honestly, even if that were the case. The thing I would find hard to do would be (not trusting them with my money but) trusting them with my emotions. Now before you think BioWare are a just corporation and have no right to please us because it's a corporation/consumer relationship. Which I understand, at the same time BioWare games are very emotional and they play on the heart strings very well. Combine this with my favourite thing in any game being immersion, I would still find it hard to get myself immersed in their games whilst Shepard's best result s/he can get from the previous trilogy is lying charred and half dead in a pile of rubble with no immediate rescue nearby.

Or is that my fault for getting too heavily involved in Mass Effect and by extention, a character I had no real control over?

So I guess my bottom line would be for ME4 to have Shepard. Or for some ME3 dlc to contain sufficient closure for the character so I can feel good about moving on to a new trilogy.

[txgoldrush]

Meltemph wrote...

You mean characters used as talking codex entries disconnected from the main plot,

1) What characters are you talking about?

reliance on black and white morality,

2) What game of Biowares was/is black and white? Because since BG there has always been tons of gray to choose from.

the reuse of the same formula for the plot

3) Huh? BG series, NWN main story, NWN expansions, Jade Empire, KOTOR, Dragon Age, have VERY little in common storywise.

and characters over and over again, the lack of character development, etc.

4) The only thing I can assume is you think that little chart that gets thrown around that tries to simplify and remove all context of everything story related as your only thing you have to go on.

Bioware has had their best stories with established settings where they must pay homage and are forced to fully respect the "lore/setting" to it at all times. The DA setting, I hope is a step back into the perspective.

1) Any party character thats not the deuteragonist or tritagonist....a minor character could have a small role, but most of the cast is disconnected from the main plots.

This was improved with DA2 and ME3 where almost everybody plays a role in the plot, and if they don't, they fit thematically in the narrative.

To really see what I am talking about compare the first KOTOR to the fully restored KOTOR II. In KOTOR I, only Bastila and Carth truly matter. In KOTOR II, the entire cast do, with even parts where party members become the PC, like HK47 and the Droid Factory, where he determines the games ending.

2) Not compared to say The Witcher games or even KOTOR II. To be fair, black and white was big last decade, but the genre has moved past this and evolved to where not everything is black and white. DA2 and ME3 are the most morally grey games Bioware has done, and in ME3...Paragon and Renegade truly take a back seat.

3) Still follow the same formula...you and your way of life is suddenly attacked and then you learn that you are in a special order or you join one. You then go to four different quest worlds to resolve the situation and then at the end, make a big choice that determines the ending. When DAO arrived, it was clear that Bioware kept using the same formula.

4) Yes, things can be used in a different context, but that doesn't mean it doesn't follow the same formula.This is true for the Final Fantasy series. I have noticed that most of the games use the same formula FFVI does more or less, including FFVII.

No, Bioware does well when they are fresh and new...such as settings. KOTOR was successful partially because of a new take on Star Wars, Jade Empire was successful because partly or mostly the wuxia setting. MASS Effect created a new sci fi universe that can stand on its own. However, they need to stay on the path they are doing...grey morality and tough decisions, character development shown instead of just told, the cast playing a bigger role in th eplot, and more mature storytelling that incorporates real world issues and life issues (which I give Jade Empire credit for doing).

[Ghaleon]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

Mass Effect 3 completed the process that Mass Effect 2 began, I'm very unlikely to ever buy a Bioware product again.

This kinda leads to another question that I'm reticent to ask, but it's related:

This kind of sentiment is brought up quite a bit, and more power to you for doing so. But for people who claim to be huge fans who had faith in the company and trusted them to release product that you wouldn't be disappointed in, sometimes all it takes is one bad product to make you change your mind.

I know I won't get a complete answer right now, but if the next Mass Effect game does what the marketing claims, is as good as the hype says it is, receives many top marks, and is said by fans to be pretty darn good, would that be enough to change your mind and restore that trust you once had? Would ME3 (and maybe DA2, if you lean that way) then be seen as statistical anomalies in BioWare's gameography, or has the trust been well and truly severed and each good, worthy game becomes but a stepping stone to restoring that faith?

That's hard to say it's not just how much i dislike ME3,  a huge portion of it is how Bioware reacted to fans not liking the ending.

It would of went a long way if they'd of just been understanding instead of being defensive about it and actually talked to the  fans instead we got silence. The  EC really  didn't fix it either in my opinion, i just really think Bioware or the ME3 team is missing the point of what some of the fans are upset about.

But they do not wish to take the time and talk with those who disliked me3 it would seem.

Modifié par Ghaleon80, 04 janvier 2013 - 07:33 .

[o Ventus]

txgoldrush wrote...

Or maybe because its a fact.

Which is proven by what?

[txgoldrush]

o Ventus wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Or maybe because its a fact.

Which is proven by what?

Proven by sales, acclaim, and awards.

[o Ventus]

txgoldrush wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Or maybe because its a fact.

Which is proven by what?

Proven by sales, acclaim, and awards.

And how do these prove anything?

[DukeOfNukes]

ME2 broke my trust. Up until that point, I would have bought any BioWare game, sight unseen. After that, I didn't trust them anymore...I still bought their games, but I didn't have that unwavering faith.

Mass Effect was a franchise based on lore and story first, gameplay second. In ME2, they did gameplay first, story second, and lore can go screw itself.

My faith was ruined years ago. I'm not saying I wont buy any more of their games, just that I don't have that devotion that I once did.

[txgoldrush]

Archonsg wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

I may regret this, but can I ask:

What kind of "trust" did you have in BioWare before ME3?

Stan, I have been a Bioware customer since Shattered Steel. 
I can still remember why I bought it since I was a Mechwarrior fan but Mech games were far and few in between and the only other released at the time were from Sierra Online, Earthsiege 2, but Shattered Steel had that *something extra* that drew me into the world and kept me there.

This is one Bioware's greatests strength.
You guys make games that draw people in, get them involved and invested and we enjoyed every moment of it.

From that point on, *every* Bioware game I have bought from MDK2 (which made be look for MDK, a case of a latter game encouraging me to buy a previous one) till today, including Mass Effect 3 for the most part, that is *true*

So my "trust" in Bioware has always been that based on your track record. 
If I see a Bioware game, I know that I will have a game that I can play the way I want to, within reason, and not just enjoy it but for want of a better way to say it, live the game. 

Also, the other aspect of how Bioware has changed is subtle but one that I saw the company go through these past 16 years.
I remember the old website and forums, I remember our heated and lively discussions with NWN, NWN2, with then fellow fan Selene Moonsong, with Chris Avalone who stired up a hornets nest when he first revealed that he hated writing for Romances but the thing is, there was a much more intimate relationship between Bioware and your fans. 
I think I remembr Greg and Ray coming on every once in a while as well. 
But that was 10+ years ago. 
Things changed.

And trust me, I do know that you guys do read the forums, things get passed on and the *final* decisions are yours or whomever is in charge of the project to make.

Then we come to ME3. 
Seriously, one of the core factors of a Bioware game is that when we buy one, we know we can play to a multidude of conclusions, not just towards "happy endings" but taking the darker road, the more destructive path, but that "happy ending" is there. Baldur's Gate ends with the player making the choice to be a god or remain mortal, played on the light or dark path. And the ending for it ties everything up on the personal level. It talks about your companions, your deeds your actions. 

Neverwinter Nights, Neverwinter Nights 2, Knights of the Republic, Jade Empires, all have this common theme. You can play the path you want but it was always your choice to do so. 

And nothing is more clear in this as was in Dragon Age Origins. 
That game was an amazing piece of work.
I could play the noble martyr, fool that he is.
I could play the vicious, stab everyone in the back, jerk.
I could play a person who keeps his head out of the clouds and do what is right for him. 
As I have posted in another post, one of my favorite DA:O endings is that my Warden, bedded Morrigan, conviced Leliana to be his mistress, Married Anora, Killed Alister, later Killed Morrigan, became ruler of the Aramanthine coast, and while this is not in the game probably will do away with Anora and become King.

The game allowed for it.

DA2 and ME3 took this "choice" at the ending, of multiple endings away.

I won't rehash my arguments for why ME3's ending failed so badly, but it is to me one single nihilistic ending.
The EC tried to cover it up, does a good enough job at it but I was amazed that Bioware didn't take the most common theme of our suggestions, that for all that Shepard has done, for all our time as players being invested in Mass Effect, our and Shepard's reward was to watch him accept what is essentially an ultimatum, commit an act of suicide because he was told to and no matter what the player does, his end is death, death, death / maybe death - mostly dead, and with EC's refusal choice, death for everyone.

Shepard desvered better then that.

So, going forward.
It seemed to me at least that Bioware no longer wants to listen to things it does not want to.
I do miss having discussions or at least the perception that we are disscussing things over with the Devs how to improve their games and thus keep me and many others as their customers.

Prior to ME3, if I see a Bioware Game, I would not think twice in pre-ordering blind. Which I did with DA:O, DA2, ME3, ME3, almost a good year before it was even available. 
Now, I would not do so.
I would not pre-order anything Bioware comes out with, including sadly, DA3, even though they are of a different division simply because I do not "trust" you to have a product that I will be happy playing, and more importantly, at the end of that experience, remain happy.

Instead of "trusting" that the product will be of quality and shippped with content I'd be happy with, I'll have to wait till youtube / bsn reviews are out to see what is really included in the game. Could this cause me NOT to buy the game becauase it'll be spoiled, possibly, but at this point of time I rather have a game spoiled and me not purchasing it than me purchasing it, get invested and at the end made to feel poorly for doing so.

But the thing is...fans disregard the themes that the endings DA2 and ME3 took.

I am not going to fully defend what went on in the endgame of DA2, Orsino's crazy breakdown boss monster turn if you side with the mages was unnecessary and idiotic....but the ending did fit the entire theme of DA2....that one man or woman is not responsible for a collapse in society or a crisis, it takes many factors. This is why DA2 breaks cliche and instead of the protagonist being an actor that changes his environment, he is a reactor that responds to the environment. And having the protagonist complete power is unrealistic.

ME3's entire theme was victory through sacrifice....the ending fits into this theme. The fact is firing the Crucible requires a sacrifice, of yourself or of others. And the theme of sacrifice is FAR from nihilistic. If the ending was nihilistic, the Reapers would always win, no matter what.

Bioware didn't take the "most common theme" of your suggestions because simply put, thats not the story they wanted to tell. And why should they? Fans should not have the say to everything. We cannot write by popularity. If we did, everything would be play it safe.

[Jadebaby]

I'd say it was victory through unity. And that unity was attained through diversity.

[txgoldrush]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

I'd say it was victory through unity. And that unity was attained through diversity.

Casey Hudson didn't.....

I am using the very words..."victory through sacrifice"...that he did when he was asked to describe ME3.

[Grubas]

Sacrifice you say? So...

Where are the Krogan/ Salarians that i can sacrifice in order to make it to the beam?
Same gos for Jack and her students, Zaeed and every major character that landed on earth.
Did the normandy tried to stop Harbinger on its descend to the beam?
Did any of our assets had any impact on the theme?

I would be glad if priority earth stayed true to the selfimposed theme.
Because priority: earth is part of the ending. This is where the galaxys effort comes to a conclusion.

Modifié par Grubas, 04 janvier 2013 - 08:38 .

[CR121691]

Well I give Casey a second chance. Still believe in him even after all the broken promises.

[Jadebaby]

txgoldrush wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

I'd say it was victory through unity. And that unity was attained through diversity.

Casey Hudson didn't.....

I am using the very words..."victory through sacrifice"...that he did when he was asked to describe ME3.

Well maybe the sacrifice is patience.

And that's only the theme when describing Mass Effect 3 at the most.

Edit: It's definitely not the main theme of the trilogy.

Modifié par Jade8aby88, 04 janvier 2013 - 08:49 .

[Archonsg]

What happened in ME3 wasn't "sacrifice".
I know sacrifice.
I had an uncle taken by the Japanese, never to return home.
I have worked as humanitarian relief, seen **** that makes war the horror it is, seen the results of a regime so bent on genocide, fields of bones are its legacy.
I have seen personal sacrifices made by individuals.

ME3's ending might have wanted to convey that theme but it didn't.
It was forced suicide, forced upon Shepard by an entity that admits is the root, the creater of the very things Shepard was fighting against.
Had Shepard died fighting, I can accept that, as I had in real life, but to see this scenario play out as it is, calling it a sacrifice is a sham.

On that note, I saw in ME1, the theme that 1 man *can* make a difference.
In ME2, it takes more than 1 man, you needed a team, while you could loose that entire team and yourself die in the process of "winning" you could also win because you made that team stronger through loyalty and dedication.
Again, you did the impossible.

In ME3, the theme was in unity we find strength.
Because I would like to see you complete the game without bringing ANY OTHER race in to help.
You can't because it was written as such.
It is too bad that they choose right at the end to *change themes*

It became one nihilistic view and one that I do not condone.

Modifié par Archonsg, 04 janvier 2013 - 09:00 .

[Peranor]

I may not play ME3 ever again. But I've not given up on Bioware.
DA3 is on my list of anticipated games. And so is "ME4".

[Jadebaby]

Archonsg wrote...

What happened in ME3 wasn't "sacrifice".
I know sacrifice.
I had an uncle taken by the Japanese, never to return home.
I have worked as humanitarian relief, seen **** that makes war the horror it is, seen the results of a regime so bent on genocide, fields of bones are its legacy.
I have seen personal sacrifices made by individuals.

ME3's ending might have wanted to convey that theme but it didn't.
It was forced suicide, forced upon Shepard by an entity that admits is the root, the creater of the very things Shepard was fighting against.
Had Shepard died fighting, I can accept that, as I had in real life, but to see this scenario play out as it is, calling it a sacrifice is a sham.

On that note, I saw in ME1, the theme that 1 man *can* make a difference.
In ME2, it takes more than 1 man, you needed a team, while you could loose that entire team and yourself die in the process of "winning" you could also win because you made that team stronger through loyalty and dedication.
Again, you did the impossible.

In ME3, the theme was in unity we find strength.
Because I would like to see you complete the game without bringing ANY OTHER race in to help.
You can't because it was written as such.
It is too bad that they choose right at the end to *change themes*

It became one nihilistic view and one that I do not condone.

But what if they were going one step further and not making you rely on the rest of the galaxy but the entire Mass Effect community via the MP war effort etc...?

[GiarcYekrub]

ME3 Restored my faith in Bioware, DA2 had me very worried but ME3 is tied as GOTY with Walking Dead for me

[d-boy15]

well... depend on what trust we are talking about.

no doubt bioware will release only a good game but I'm never believe in everything
they claimed ever again.

[Archonsg]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

What happened in ME3 wasn't "sacrifice".
I know sacrifice.
I had an uncle taken by the Japanese, never to return home.
I have worked as humanitarian relief, seen **** that makes war the horror it is, seen the results of a regime so bent on genocide, fields of bones are its legacy.
I have seen personal sacrifices made by individuals.

ME3's ending might have wanted to convey that theme but it didn't.
It was forced suicide, forced upon Shepard by an entity that admits is the root, the creater of the very things Shepard was fighting against.
Had Shepard died fighting, I can accept that, as I had in real life, but to see this scenario play out as it is, calling it a sacrifice is a sham.

On that note, I saw in ME1, the theme that 1 man *can* make a difference.
In ME2, it takes more than 1 man, you needed a team, while you could loose that entire team and yourself die in the process of "winning" you could also win because you made that team stronger through loyalty and dedication.
Again, you did the impossible.

In ME3, the theme was in unity we find strength.
Because I would like to see you complete the game without bringing ANY OTHER race in to help.
You can't because it was written as such.
It is too bad that they choose right at the end to *change themes*

It became one nihilistic view and one that I do not condone.

But what if they were going one step further and not making you rely on the rest of the galaxy but the entire Mass Effect community via the MP war effort etc...?

Then it they should not label the game as "single player" and have a warning in big bold red letters that state "Game ending is dependant on Multi-Player"

It is an interesting idea though but one that I think should be outside of, and not dependant of. 
To clarify, I think it is fine IF they made it so that multi-player can help improve your odds, but you should not suffer for it if NO ONE plays multi-player.

Or have a *seperate mode* call it Multi-player Nexus campaign.
Where the entire game can be played co-op, have multi-player missions and thus EMS from MP and successes / losses from MP carry over into your Nexus campaign. 
Hell, I'll probably be in that mode 99.99% of the time once I have completed SP insanity modes for my SP saved games.

*points at my signature*
I am not one to be shy and no to wade into multplayer to put up the good fight, the old man that I am. 

Modifié par Archonsg, 04 janvier 2013 - 09:24 .

[txgoldrush]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

I'd say it was victory through unity. And that unity was attained through diversity.

Casey Hudson didn't.....

I am using the very words..."victory through sacrifice"...that he did when he was asked to describe ME3.

Well maybe the sacrifice is patience.

And that's only the theme when describing Mass Effect 3 at the most.

Edit: It's definitely not the main theme of the trilogy.

And the main theme, the very foundation of the Mass Effect universe....is built on the conflict between the "creators" and the "created". The ending not only fits this theme but defines it.

However, each game has a different main theme specifically.

ME1 was about finding humanities place in the galaxy.
ME2 was about earning trust and loyalty, as well as leading through a difficult mission.
ME3 is about victory through sacrifice.

While the series as a whole has the main theme above.

[magnuskn]

ME3's ending and the ensueing PR disaster of the *way* too arrogant developers with their "artistic integrity" BS broke the camels back for me. DA2 and SWTOR already had worked on lowering my faith in BioWares integrity, but, yeah, ME3's ending did it.

I'll still look at their games, but they went from a "100% pre-order" to "wait until the reviews are in, wait until the fans have looked at the game" for their upcoming releases.

[LotDeathhail]

Short answer, no.

I've been playing Bioware games since Icewind Dale, which is still one of my favorite series. Not everything they've made was perfect, but they've had some real knock outs. Have I lost faith? After beating ME3 I did. I was super mad. But I got over it. DA2, was kind of a joke, and the writing was trash, and yet I played several times. I might never have the sense of wonder I had the first time I experienced the ME universe, but I'll give the next game a go. I just won't expect a life changing experience. Just nice way to waste 25-50 hours, which just enough time to forget my life is boring and pointless.

I think I felt more betrayed by video games all together. I waited 10 years for Diablo 3. That was a way bigger let down than ME3. Having several games this year not meet my expectations, really blew. But that's life. You get over it or you stay bitter and look super lame. Not to say that the OP is lame, but if they aren't over it 10 years (I know, I'm giving them WAY too much time) then you're super lame.

[Zaizer]

For the most part, yeah.

If they "fix" the ending, I'll been willing to do business with them at least.

[TheAussieRocket]

I feel like it's been damaged. But not because of the stupid ending and EA influence over the company, but I just feel like their new product will be yet another failed masterpiece. I feel that Bioware took a big gamble on Mass Effect 3 and lost. But I do know that Bioware have the capability to make yet another gem but I'll have to see it to believe it.

I just think that the whole ending thing and before that the day-one DLC has damaged their reputation as a gaming company, but I still have faith that they can produce Triple-A titles. Only time will tell. Can they redeem themselves with Mass Effect 4?

[Sable Rhapsody]

I am mostly just over Mass Effect at this point. ME3 wasn't good, and it wasn't terrible. It was meh. And that's almost worse than just a straight-up bad game.