390 réponses à ce sujet

[78stonewobble]

Robosexual wrote...

78stonewobble wrote...

Here I just meant that it's a very human thing to get so caught up in your own point of view that you forget to view it from others as well.

I don't know if thats what happened, but to me it seems as likely an explanation as any.

PS: You guys remember this video (and ignore the angry dude at the end)?


IMHO: there must have been some kind of disconnect between what was obvious for the guys making the game and this poor guy playing the game.

It rather well describes my confusion at the same moment.

I'm glad we got the EC to clear atleast some of these things up. That really really helped on that.

I just don't think we should have had to be that confused with the original ending.

Pondering what happened maybe, but not confused.

Looking at that video it doesn't appear to be something you can explain. All I saw was a guy that ignored the Catalyst and wondered why he was confused, and then his brother started to, unecessarily, rile him up by asking him why he plays games.

The ending has been debated to death so many times that I'm fearfull of retreading the same ground.

My point is that the EC specifically tries to answer questions, that quite naturally arise from the perspective of the average player.

If the original ending was sufficiently explanatory there wouldn't have been questions and no need for en EC to answer questions.

The preferable situation being that the orginal ending would have taken these things into account. Eliminating the need for expanding upon it.

Note: I am making a distinction between being confused of what the ending is and reflecting upon the ending. I find those 2 very different.



Wouldn't you agree that the optimal solution is to make something "right" the first time rather than having to "fix"/"expand" upon?

Modifié par 78stonewobble, 20 janvier 2013 - 01:41 .

[Grubas]

Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...

Kroitz wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

2. BioWare comes in to talk to the fans. BioWare will be shouted down with the same kinds of accusations of incompetence and laziness, vitriol, and a whole lot of venting, none of which is constructive.

A question Stan.

When exactly was a dialouge or a discussion from Bioware initiated after the release, that would prove this point you raise?

It unfortunately happend to Mike Gamble when he was here in April. It happens to David Gaider from time to time as well.

I found only this. Is this what you are talking about?
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/12695580/22#12744478

Because its quite civil. Many people just thank him just for showing up and giving a stright answer on a subject.

This is also the last i have heard anything of him. So if that was not forthcoming enough i dont know.

Modifié par Grubas, 20 janvier 2013 - 01:55 .

[Obadiah]

Outsider edge wrote...

Well the "no A, B, C endings" quote can be looked at from different angles. If you take it litteraly and look at the Crucible options at the end it definately looks like just three options. But perhaps they meant the differences between low and high EMS endings or the earlier resolutions of the genophage and the Geth-Quarian conflict.

The quote in question was said when the PR blitz for Mass Effect 3 was at it's highest. Now i can imagine it's quite difficult if you have too show up at different gameshows, website interviews and what not and always have too drop a "hot" statement too keep the buzz going. Perhaps in their views Mass Effect 3 didn't have an ABC ending because they looked at it differently.

However i agree this is one debate they could have easily difused if they came out with their interpretation of that quote instead of remaining silent and let the anti-enders run away with it.

Well, here's the context and what Casey Hudson was talking about with regard to the endings. I think he was mostly accurate, but since the final choice is so major, it sort of overshadowed everything else.
From http://www.oxm.co.uk...-sophisticated/

XBox360 Mag...
...
"This story arc is coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot more different. At this point we're taking into account so many decisions that you've made as a player and reflecting a lot of that stuff. It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C.

"It's more like there are some really obvious things that are different and then lots and lots of smaller things, lots of things about who lives and who dies, civilizations that rose and fell, all the way down to individual characters. That becomes the state of where you left your galaxy. The endings have a lot more sophistication and variety in them."
...

Modifié par Obadiah, 20 janvier 2013 - 03:12 .

[geceka]

Obadiah wrote...

I think he was mostly accurate, but since the final choice is so major, it sort of overshadowed everything else.

I think so, too. Especially with Control and Synthesis, the change you affect on the galaxy feels much more important and fundamental than whether, say, the Geth live or die, or whether the genophage was cured. Those choices probably have more of an impact with "Destroy", which is the closest to returning the galaxy to the status-quo before the Reaper invasion.

But this is good, constructive feedback, I think: If the final choice is extremely epic/fundamental, it will overshadow the resolutions of the subplots, unless you account for that specifically, maybe by incorporating these resolutions in the final cutscenes, etc.. The EC does this to a point with its slides, though.

[Clayless]

78stonewobble wrote...

Wouldn't you agree that the optimal solution is to make something "right" the first time rather than having to "fix"/"expand" upon?

Thing is not everyone was unhappy with the original endings (though that doesn't mean we aren't glad we got the EC).

And anyway, regardless of opinion on it, it is fixed now. There are those that don't agree, that still demand a different ending, but those people aren't interested in constructive discussions anyway, so I think we all just need to concentrate on the people who are mearly unhappy but do just want to discuss the game rather than demand changes.

[Fawx9]

Robosexual wrote...

78stonewobble wrote...

Wouldn't you agree that the optimal solution is to make something "right" the first time rather than having to "fix"/"expand" upon?

Thing is not everyone was unhappy with the original endings (though that doesn't mean we aren't glad we got the EC).

And anyway, regardless of opinion on it, it is fixed now. There are those that don't agree, that still demand a different ending, but those people aren't interested in constructive discussions anyway, so I think we all just need to concentrate on the people who are mearly unhappy but do just want to discuss the game rather than demand changes.

I'd say you are generalizing a bit too much. Some people who like MEHEM for example can still raise valid questions. Just because they want a slightly altered Destory ending (expanding a bit on the breath scene) doesn't mean that their questions wouldn't be constructive.

[Clayless]

Fawx9 wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

Thing is not everyone was unhappy with the original endings (though that doesn't mean we aren't glad we got the EC).

And anyway, regardless of opinion on it, it is fixed now. There are those that don't agree, that still demand a different ending, but those people aren't interested in constructive discussions anyway, so I think we all just need to concentrate on the people who are mearly unhappy but do just want to discuss the game rather than demand changes.

I'd say you are generalizing a bit too much. Some people who like MEHEM for example can still raise valid questions. Just because they want a slightly altered Destory ending (expanding a bit on the breath scene) doesn't mean that their questions wouldn't be constructive.

While I don't know too much about MEHEM, doesn't it also remove the Catalyst, Control and Synthesis, and keep synthetics alive?

[Fawx9]

Robosexual wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

Thing is not everyone was unhappy with the original endings (though that doesn't mean we aren't glad we got the EC).

And anyway, regardless of opinion on it, it is fixed now. There are those that don't agree, that still demand a different ending, but those people aren't interested in constructive discussions anyway, so I think we all just need to concentrate on the people who are mearly unhappy but do just want to discuss the game rather than demand changes.

I'd say you are generalizing a bit too much. Some people who like MEHEM for example can still raise valid questions. Just because they want a slightly altered Destory ending (expanding a bit on the breath scene) doesn't mean that their questions wouldn't be constructive.

While I don't know too much about MEHEM, doesn't it also remove the Catalyst, Control and Synthesis, and keep synthetics alive?

Considering its a mod, it can be anything you want to headcannon it as.

For me, it gives Harby much needed dialogue for the bit he has, skips over the catalyst (he's still there in my head, just I don't have to watch the mind numbing sequence, as I know what I'm picking anyways), Shepard is rescued and Synthestics still die(Them living is an optional slide you can put in).

Basically I use it as a complete* Destory ending. Other's however use it for what you said. But honestly I feel the main draw to it is the reunion, which can be present without all of the other modifications anyways.

*Yes I know not official, but to me it feels more compelte this way than what the EC gives.

Modifié par Fawx9, 20 janvier 2013 - 07:54 .

[dreamgazer]

Robosexual wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

Thing is not everyone was unhappy with the original endings (though that doesn't mean we aren't glad we got the EC).

And anyway, regardless of opinion on it, it is fixed now. There are those that don't agree, that still demand a different ending, but those people aren't interested in constructive discussions anyway, so I think we all just need to concentrate on the people who are mearly unhappy but do just want to discuss the game rather than demand changes.

I'd say you are generalizing a bit too much. Some people who like MEHEM for example can still raise valid questions. Just because they want a slightly altered Destory ending (expanding a bit on the breath scene) doesn't mean that their questions wouldn't be constructive.

While I don't know too much about MEHEM, doesn't it also remove the Catalyst, Control and Synthesis, and keep synthetics alive?

Yes. It takes everything on the Citadel out starting with when Shepard stumbles to the console, and it features Shepard being rescued by a shuttle.

Modifié par dreamgazer, 20 janvier 2013 - 07:11 .

[Clayless]

I see.

Generally there's nothing I can say that would suggest those that have MEHEM won't ask constructive questions.

[AresKeith]

Robosexual wrote...

I see.

Generally there's nothing I can say that would suggest those that have MEHEM won't ask constructive questions.

How so?

[Clayless]

Because Faux said this:

I'd say you are generalizing a bit too much. Some people who like MEHEM for example can still raise valid questions. Just because they want a slightly altered Destory ending (expanding a bit on the breath scene) doesn't mean that their questions wouldn't be constructive.

That's true. I only said those that demand a different ending aren't interested in constructive discussion.

Modifié par Robosexual, 20 janvier 2013 - 07:30 .

[AresKeith]

Robosexual wrote...

Because Faux said this:

I'd say you are generalizing a bit too much. Some people who like MEHEM for example can still raise valid questions. Just because they want a slightly altered Destory ending (expanding a bit on the breath scene) doesn't mean that their questions wouldn't be constructive.

That's true. I only said those that demand a different ending aren't interested in constructive discussion,

But that's still generalizing a bit too much

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

Now on the expanding breath scene, I still don't understand what the huge deal with it is. I know that they made those alterations in that ending to imply Shepard survived, and they even said it themselves that it really doesn't matter whether or not shepard lives or dies because shepard won't be in the next ME games.

So if that's the case, why not just say or show that Shepard does indeed survive, and in ME games that take place after the reaper invasion just say that shepard and the LI dropped off the radar and settled down somewhere as some easter egg? There, problem solved.

[katamuro]

Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...

Now on the expanding breath scene, I still don't understand what the huge deal with it is. I know that they made those alterations in that ending to imply Shepard survived, and they even said it themselves that it really doesn't matter whether or not shepard lives or dies because shepard won't be in the next ME games.

So if that's the case, why not just say or show that Shepard does indeed survive, and in ME games that take place after the reaper invasion just say that shepard and the LI dropped off the radar and settled down somewhere as some easter egg? There, problem solved.

Exactly my point. Or make him an admiral that gives orders like hackett. either way he is not in the field anymore.

[Clayless]

@Ares: Possibly, but I've had 10 months of evidence that backs it up, so it's not a statement I worry about making. I generally think those that stand by and let all the misquotes, thread derailings, and mindless memes happen just because they agree with their POV are just as bad as the people that make them. There's countless threads with someone asking a question that's answered in the game/can be answered with logical deduction, but there will be pages upon pages of people bashing Bioware instead of attempting to answer the question. Even if you dislike Bioware/the ending I don't understand why that means you can't have a constructive discussion or even answer questions that you must know the answer to.

It is a negative statment to make, but witnessing BSN for 10 months with a different opinion on the ending (an outside perspective almost) will do that to you.

Modifié par Robosexual, 20 janvier 2013 - 07:52 .

[Iakus]

dreamgazer wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

While I don't know too much about MEHEM, doesn't it also remove the Catalyst, Control and Synthesis, and keep synthetics alive?

Yes. It takes everything on the Citadel out starting with when Shepard stumbles to the console, and it features Shepard being rescued by a shuttle.

To be slightly more accurate, while MEHEM does include new ending slides featuring the geth surviving, these are optional instalations, not required to run the mod.

[78stonewobble]

Robosexual wrote...

78stonewobble wrote...

Wouldn't you agree that the optimal solution is to make something "right" the first time rather than having to "fix"/"expand" upon?

Thing is not everyone was unhappy with the original endings (though that doesn't mean we aren't glad we got the EC).

And anyway, regardless of opinion on it, it is fixed now. There are those that don't agree, that still demand a different ending, but those people aren't interested in constructive discussions anyway, so I think we all just need to concentrate on the people who are mearly unhappy but do just want to discuss the game rather than demand changes.

Personally I'm not gonna demand a new ending and I was glad just to get the EC. They didn't "have to" do that.

From my subjective point of view the original ending could have been alot better. Also in it's execution. The EC did alot of good stuff to improve the execution of the ending.

But I've allready droned on and on about that on occasion. Lately in the "why cant we have a happy ending" thread. Which... I think I managed to derail unintentionally.


*ponders on how to sum up my point of view on the ending to something that can be helpfull in the future*

A: For me atleast. it's a natural tendency to be suspicious about something "new". Adding something late game requires extra attention to detail and a very solid reasoning.

B: When you explain something in a logical fashion the logic should be sound. Maybe not quite bulletproof but solid reasoning nonetheless. I find that the catalyst makes sense on the surface but if you break it down it starts making less and less sense. To me, this was a pandoras box of emotional undermining of the ending.

C: The original endings, but less so the EC ending felt "cheap" for me. Sure there was some awesome cutscenes that were very well done, but 3 different coloured explosions? Yes I know there were differences in the details but... I think the 3 choices deserved different videos.

D: D for diversity or difference in the endings:
The above didn't help on that. I felt there was too little difference between the endings. Visually, storywise and emotionally. Visually I sort of explained above. Storywise I mean that all 3 are "wins with a compromise" with a lose scenario for good measure now. Emotionally, for me atleast, the endings were also too similar.

E: E for emotions:
Now there is nothing wrong with "bittersweet". It can be very good if done correctly. In my humble oppinion bioware just didn't quite pull that off. I tend to think of "bittersweet" as lots of bitter and lots of sweet combined not cancelling each other out and I didn't get that with the ending. In some way I think they held back too much with happy and sad for the ending. Instead of a full emotional spectrum they became concentrated around a narrow band in the middle. By holding back I mean no shepard surviving and no killing off li's/squadmates. Something that would have made people very happy or very sad and I kind of wanted them to go "poke" our attachment to the games and characters to the maksimum. And I know bioware can do that. They've done that before.



Ok... There it was. An post about the ending.

Now remember. It's just my subjective view on the ending and people certainly doesn't have to agree (most probably don't).

All this is is a list of thing that I personally think could have been better and would have made for a better ending of the game for me.

People can take it or leave it.

PS: I still think it's a good game as a whole.

[Grubas]

Grubas wrote...

Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...

Kroitz wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

2. BioWare comes in to talk to the fans. BioWare will be shouted down with the same kinds of accusations of incompetence and laziness, vitriol, and a whole lot of venting, none of which is constructive.

A question Stan.

When exactly was a dialouge or a discussion from Bioware initiated after the release, that would prove this point you raise?

It unfortunately happend to Mike Gamble when he was here in April. It happens to David Gaider from time to time as well.

I found only this. Is this what you are talking about?
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/12695580/22#12744478

Because its quite civil. Many people just thank him just for showing up and giving a stright answer on a subject.

This is also the last i have heard anything of him. So if that was not forthcoming enough i dont know.

Or was it this one? The overall majority thanked Gamble for dropping a comment.
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10773293/7
 
Guys, you really need to help me out on this. 

[dorktainian]

www.youtube.com/watch 

[XXIceColdXX]

Seems like this thread is going off topic unfortunately, but answering Grubas 'on topic' From what i remember Gamble wasn't treated too badly also recieving comments thanking him for stopping by.

But I'd hope if the devs do return for a chat on BSN, they can talk openly as side stepping the major concerns is all we've had so far and is pretty frustrating. 

Modifié par XXIceColdXX, 20 janvier 2013 - 10:45 .

[Oni Changas]

To those who say BW shouldnt or wont respond to us because of ill-conceived hostility, I have this to say: LOOK AT MP FORUM.

You see mostly polite discussions with the team and us joking around lightheartedly. Its what happens when the conversation goes two ways.

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

OniTYME wrote...

To those who say BW shouldnt or wont respond to us because of ill-conceived hostility, I have this to say: LOOK AT MP FORUM.

You see mostly polite discussions with the team and us joking around lightheartedly. Its what happens when the conversation goes two ways.

Or even the DA3 forums. You have fans talking with David Gaider and Allan pretty much all the time.

[dreamgazer]

Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...

OniTYME wrote...

To those who say BW shouldnt or wont respond to us because of ill-conceived hostility, I have this to say: LOOK AT MP FORUM.

You see mostly polite discussions with the team and us joking around lightheartedly. Its what happens when the conversation goes two ways.

Or even the DA3 forums. You have fans talking with David Gaider and Allan pretty much all the time.

Again, the difference is the moral-horror folks.  MP and Gaider weren't accused of the same "revolting" writing.

[SpamBot2000]

Robosexual wrote...

That's not a constructive discussion, you just want to demand Bioware make a new ending.

Also I managed to track down this "rabies" quote you seem to think I said.

It could only be described as rabid.

Rabid:

Raging; uncontrollable: rabid thirst
Extremely zealous or enthusiastic; fanatical: a rabid football fan

I never called you out on it before because I assume you're not a native English speaker.

con·struc·tive 

adj. 1. Serving to improve or advance; helpful: constructive criticism.2. Of or relating to construction; structural.3. Law Based on an interpretation; not directly expressed.

rab·id  

adj. 1. Of or affected by rabies.2. Raging; uncontrollable: rabid thirst.3. Extremely zealous or enthusiastic; fanatical: a rabid football fan.



Englisch, she is difficult, ja?

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 20 janvier 2013 - 11:48 .