245 réponses à ce sujet

[Vovea]

neon skink wrote...

I don't think anyones getting angry at the nostalgia trip, and the article isn't complaining (and neither am I) it's merely offering for consideration the view that the DLC is a balm to sooth out the problems of the ending fiacso - many people wanted a happy ending and for some this DLC is just that. Even if it at times rides roughshod over characterization and the rest of the main narrative. After the backlash of the main game, and the success of the Citadel its not hard to imagine that in future investors would be unwilling to finance a game without a happy ending. Yes of course it's speculation, but it's a valid point worth descussing.

I got the impression the article was complaining.

And as I said before, I don't think investors don't get more imput than Bioware designers; I think it is hard to imagine them dictating the ending of an entire game. I can see them requesting more testers and feedback but I can't see how that'd effect anything too negatively.

[Haravikk]

Personally I do agree with Phil to some extent; a lot of what's in the Citadel DLC should have been in ME3 in the first place. It's a nice gratifying bundle, but it only highlights how bare ME3 is without it.

Also, I do agree that it's likely been partly done to try to win back fans alienated by the ending, but like Phil I hope Bioware don't take the wrong lessons away from it. I personally didn't mind that ME3's ending was dark and bleak with sacrifice in it, but that your party isn't involved at all, your decisions in the past become meaningless, and you're presented with multiple choice options from your enemy, and none of them make any sense. At the very least Anderson should have been there for the final decision so you had someone to give an opinion, and then he could die shortly afterward as the result of that decision become known. There are so many tiny changes that could have made the ME3 ending better, let alone the major ones such as not having such a weak justification for the Reapers.

Anyway, I don't want ME4 or whatever it's called to have a happy handing for the sake of it; I want either a happy ending that's happy because of the work I put in (like ME2) or a bittersweet ending that feels like it meant something.

[SpamBot2000]

Well, y'know folks, understanding being a three-edged sword and all... it is possible for the DLC to be fun fan service, a barely disguised repudiation of the ending AND a cynical play for the wallets of the disenchanted. Such is the way of the world.

And in any case, it does do odd things to the Epic Saga-ism of it all.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 14 mars 2013 - 10:54 .

[spirosz]

He's right, but it gave closure to an important aspect to me and my Shepard, Jack. I needed to see the those scenes in game.  It's not going to motivate me to purchase any future Bioware products, but at least they helped me find some more peace with the series. 

Modifié par spirosz, 14 mars 2013 - 11:04 .

[TheRealJayDee]

spirosz wrote...

He's right, but it gave closure to an important aspect to me and my Shepard, Jack. I needed to see the those scenes in game.  It's not going to motivate me to purchase any future Bioware products, but at least they helped me find some more peace with the series. 

Yup, the DLC contained some stuff that was sorely missing in the game, and all in all helped me to finally move on. ME3 and Shepard's story are over, they ended the way they did and there is nothing more that can and will be done about it. Citadel DLC as a funny and heartfelt farewell message from the devs is nice, as an actual part of ME3's story it's... problematic. Ah, I guess I'll never understand certain decisions made about ME3's story and characters, and Bioware's PR, but that's the past and I've learned from it. Let's see how things look after DA:I is released...

[xmadmardiganx]

Hey guys,
Mark Burnham here, Editor-in-Chief at Game Front. Just wanted to hop in here and thank everyone for all the lively discussion about Phil's post.

Also, Phil's post was actually a rebuttal to Ross Lincoln's review of Citadel. Ross liked it quite a bit, so if you enjoyed it too you might head over here for an entirely different take:
http://www.gamefront...-enough-almost/

One great thing about Mass Effect is it's deep enough to invite different interpretations and criticism, which we're seeing here even in this thread. If you agree cool, and if you don't, that's cool too. I'd encourage you to drop a comment on the article, and let's chat about it.

If you're not familiar with Game Front, Ross and Phil in particular are (and I know I'm biased...) very passionate BioWare fans, and also very knowledgeable Mass Effect gamers and critics. Last year when Mass Effect 3 was initially released, we were at the forefront of the discussion about THE ENDING. Incidentally, we took the side of "it was bad." Check it out: http://www.gamefront...fans-are-right/

Ross and Phil cowrote that bad boy ^.

Anyway, just wanted to hop in here and introduce ourselves.

Thanks again, guys.

[The Night Mammoth]

Does this prove IT?

[Maxster_]

SU37 wrote...

Yes, because obviously ONE DLC pack is going to shape the series' entire future.

Series entire future is set with ME3.
Nonsensical horrible-written fairytale.

[Maxster_]

Funkdrspot wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

PanzerGr3nadier wrote...

I'm so full of darky artsy integrity that I thought the dlc was fun and entertaining. Sure the jokes didn't hit the mark everytime but it was good fanservice.

It was horrible writing. All 15 or so squadmates forcibly trying to get in a joke every time they talk WHILE  in the middle of a firefight.

Seriously, some of you guys just amaze me with how bad your tastes are.

I guess you missed the point of that entire sequence. It works thematically.

Nope, didn't miss the point of anything. It was horribly written. Too many jokes off the mark. Too many attempted jokes back to back to back. Too many jokes while in the middle of battle. The writing in the mission was pure garbage.

It actually DOESNT work thematically because you have to take the entire game into context. You can't just weave your alternate reality for 1 mission. You can lighten it up but you have to take it within the context of the entire product. If 'dark' was a 1 and 'light' was a 10, you can't just jump from a 3 to a 9 in ONE  mission.

It is just a parody on ME, and a bad one.
But some people just have low standarts. It is inevitable. And this is the reason why game industry constantly descends to a new lows.

But it works for you b/c its a pander to all the anti-ender whiners who whined about a dying Shepard and whined about wanting a Disney ending or whined about conventional victory.

This DLC is in no way changes a fact, that ME3 is a horrible written garbage. Only reassures that fact.

[someguy1231]

I think Phil makes some very good points. I called Citadel "bad fanfiction" after it was released, and he clearly agrees.

Also, the knee-jerk reactions of many people in this thread are merely playing into his claims. All it takes is a little shallow fanservice to make a fan forget about the game's broader flaws...

[sravenblood]

Haven't forgotten any of the flaws, still hate the endings, was not enraged ever with them, just thought it was a tired old trope. Citadel is pure fun and that is what it is meant to be. So, there was never any conflict for me anyways. Phil is only relevant if you had the rage and then changed your mind for some reason, otherwise his statements are meaningless and pointless.

[Sibu]

Phil is a freaking idiot

[eddieoctane]

Citadel is blatant pandering to the disgruntled fans. Phil's dead right about that. He's also right about the fact that dissatisfaction with the ending had little-to-nothing to do its dark tone.

Yes, some parts of Citadel are enjoyable. But some are awkward and feel like they were included to specifically appeal to certain groups of fans. The DLC also doesn't seem to fit in anywhere in the overarching plot of the game. I can understand why people like it, but to say BioWare did it because "they love us" or some-such is utter bullcrap. And those who buy into that are setting the bad precedent that others were accused of doing in calling for a new ending.

[dreamgazer]

someguy1231 wrote...

Also, the knee-jerk reactions of many people in this thread are merely playing into his claims. All it takes is a little shallow fanservice to make a fan forget about the game's broader flaws...

Who's "forgetting" anything?

[eddieoctane]

dreamgazer wrote...

someguy1231 wrote...

Also, the knee-jerk reactions of many people in this thread are merely playing into his claims. All it takes is a little shallow fanservice to make a fan forget about the game's broader flaws...

Who's "forgetting" anything?

I've seen more than one  "Citadel was awesome. I'm sorry for criticizing you, BioWare" threads. I also saw them after Leviathan and Omega. People get their desired pandering and forget what pissed them off and that it wasn't addressed at all quite regularly around here.

EDIT:

Here's one of the threads I spoke about. The first setence is literally "Citadel is aweomse, I'm a fool to think the game was ever bad.

Modifié par eddieoctane, 15 mars 2013 - 03:57 .

[Cutlass Jack]

I've also seen more than one who wasn't horribly traumatized by the endings and found the DLC enjoyable on its own merits. Whats a 'broad flaw' to one player might not bother another player much at all.

[Vajraja]

As a quick summary - I was very disappointed by the original endings but appeased by the EC dlc to an extent.

I really enjoyed the Citadel dlc and I think it showcases Bioware's ability to make really amazing characters people connect with.

I enjoyed it for what it was a great bit of fan service and a last chance to hang out with characters I loved and I appreciate Bioware for doing it.

I do find Phil's ideas that this will prevent games from being bold or bleak and how that is a tragedy for games. If a developer wants to go in that direction it's their perogative - I personally play games to have fun and take a break from the real world and sometimes I want to save the world and have everything turn out all right after some struggles. I hate how some people push that it is bad to have a happy ending. I think you can have happy endings and then bleaker ones if it fits the story - no need to get extreme on it.

[Armass81]

He makes a lot of good points. Citadel dlc may have a lot of good content and dialogue, but in the end to me it feels like butt kissing pandering, self-referential fanservice for the lowest common denominators and doesnt really fit that well with the rest of the game .A moment like this might have worked better in the end of the game, or in ME2 perhaps.

Modifié par Armass81, 15 mars 2013 - 04:38 .

[Bill Casey]

simfamSP wrote...

This is why there are references to the war. No one has forgotten it's on. I believe a few people in the military here have pointed out the absolute *need* for R&R. Have you seen some documentries on people who go absolute bat**** after too much combat?

No, but I have seen it happen in Mass Effect 3...

[Locutus_of_BORG]

ME3's original pacing was way too fast and gave the player no breaks. It also did very little to give closure to most of the character relationships from ME2, which was practically all about character relationships. The Citadel DLC gave these things.

I think Phil has a point in saying that the DLC's plot was a little too "happy", but really, when taken in context with the rest of the story (which is still incredibly bleak), it strikes a needed balance. I agree with him that the real controversy over ME3 was its dismissal of key themes and characterizations, but BW made it pretty clear from the get go that there was nothing they could do about the ending, so really, the only thing they could do was offer players a way to say goodbye.

[Bill Casey]

HolyAvenger wrote...

The post-clone content in Citadel is IMO much better spread out through the second half of ME3 rather than played out all at once. It is jarring if you hang out with Vega and Cortez watching sports, then go and meet Miranda for drinks at the casino and then go to the arcade with Jacob all at once. But it feels much more realistic to do some story stuff, then hit up the Citadel to buy gear etc, do one or two of the interactions, go do more story stuff, come back and lighten up the tone, then go back out to the war etc.

I agree with this...
I also think the story portion makes a lot of sense if you play it right after the Citadel Coup...

The Citadel's defenses were compromised and Kai Leng is at large; it makes sense to hang around on the Citadel while they repair damage, shore up defenses and resecure it. Shepard also just completed a major part of his job by securing the full support of both the Council and the Krogan. His job was basically forming alliances, and he's made enormous headway at this point in the story...

It's also a good time for Brooks to make her move. The Citadel is compromised from the Cerberus Coup and Shepard just did what has to be in Brooks mind the unthinkable, unforgivable and unacceptable. He and his crew just killed the human councilor to protect some aliens. For a pro human group plotting to replace Shepard, that act has to be nothing short of pure motivation to pull the trigger on their operation even though the war is still going on...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 15 mars 2013 - 05:05 .