197 réponses à ce sujet

[sr2josh]

TJBartlemus wrote...

Makai81 wrote...

Allan,

I have to disagree with you on saying it doesn't have any context within the story.  Admiral Anderson, the guy leading the resistance on Earth, tells Shepard basically, "hey I have this place on the Citadel and I'm obviously not using it right now so it's yours".  The Normandy obviously needed repairs just as a real warship does in real wars so it made sense for Shep and company to stay at Anderson's empty apartment while that was going on.  Shep's clone and Brooks were probably waiting for the Normandy crew to take their eventual shore leave on the Citadel from constantly fighting in stressful and bloody combat and launched their plot to kill him.  Citadel DLC doesn't directly involve the war against the Reapers but in my opinion it does have some context.  It couldn't have any less context within the story than Omega DLC.

 Uh...I have to disagree. A lot. All of the DLC for ME3 up until Citadel had solid context within the main story of ME3. From Ashes was about Asset Denial for the War Effort. Leviathan was about getting a powerful Asset for the War Effort. Omega was about getting an army of Pirates / FOB for ... the War Effort. 

 Citadel totally goes off this trend. Citadel is about Personal Reasons / Partying. 

Which is something that soldiers in practically every war in modern history will do during the course of a war.  I did this during multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan and we call it "R&R".  If Shepard and his crew were to constantly fight in bloody combat constantly with no rest, they would probably go insane or drop dead from exhaustion if not from being shot.

[DarkSpiral]

Jadebaby wrote...

Although I can't go through the annals of BSN posters to give you direct evidence, I can assure you this wasn't the case. Surely one of your points on your traingle is reserved for those that believe not only is the kid a bad character but that it is severely damaging to ME3 and it's pre-established themes. The Catalyst is the vanguard of ME's destruction. It, in and of itself, is what was wrong with the endings. Even those complaining that the endings weren't happy enough, simply a direct result of it's presense in the narrative.

Which in turn, I believe is a direct result of EA's deadlines. Mac said it best "I believe we did a great job considering our time frame."

I...actually had a rebuttal to this point all typed out, then I realized its a derailment of large proportions.  I do believe the thread was for discussing the Citadel DLC and its context.  Since the events after Hammer have nothing to do with that DLC, perhaps that particular discussion could be moved elsewhere.

One of the many, many thread that exist for it already, for example.

[Rikketik]

Kabooooom wrote...

Rikketik wrote...

In my opinion, Citadel is so good precisely because it's lighthearted and has nothing do to with the general plot (or tone) of ME3. I like the story of the game, at least up until the last thirty minutes or so, but I always find myself mentally... tired... of all the death and destruction that piles up over the course of the game. Citadel remedied that somewhat by giving me some much needed comedy relief. Playing it all in one go is a bit overkill, but playing the central story arc just after the Cerberus coup prevents it from feeling too out of place and the squad member events are great to play in between missions. The party, lastly, is best reserved for either just before the final missions or immediately after the ending.

So in short: I agree that the story lacks context and all, but it just doesn't bother me. In fact, it might be one of the better qualities of the DLC, in my opinion at least.

This. Finally someone gets it. I do disagree about where to play it though. After trying it post coup, post Rannoch and end game: it is best post Rannoch. It just feels right there. It's the only place the Normandy has really 'seen action', it is following on the heels of a major victory rather than a relative defeat (Coup- Citadel attacked, Udina dead, general mood is somber), and it improves pacing dramatically. Omega should be played right after the Coup, Citadel right after Rannoch in my opinion. Try it, and you'll see.

Haven't bought Omega (yet), but you're right about the Citadel DLC fitting in better just after Rannoch. When I wrote that message, I had only played the DLC once, with a save file created after the ending of the game, and from the top of my head I thought it might fit better after the Cerberus Coup. I didn't realize you have yet to recruit Tali at that point, though. Given that one of the slogans of the DLC is 'all hands on deck', it wouldn't be the same without her. And while it's possible to recruit her and immediately go on shore leave, the whole Rannoch-arc feels like it should be completed without pause. Aside from after the Cerberus Coup and Rannoch, there are two other moments when you could do it, but it would feel like a mood whiplash after Thessia and it doesn't mesh well with the sense of urgency after Sanctuary. So I agree, it fits best immediately after Rannoch.

[TJBartlemus]

Rikketik wrote...

Haven't bought Omega (yet), but you're right about the Citadel DLC fitting in better just after Rannoch. When I wrote that message, I had only played the DLC once, with a save file created after the ending of the game, and from the top of my head I thought it might fit better after the Cerberus Coup. I didn't realize you have yet to recruit Tali at that point, though. Given that one of the slogans of the DLC is 'all hands on deck', it wouldn't be the same without her. And while it's possible to recruit her and immediately go on shore leave, the whole Rannoch-arc feels like it should be completed without pause. Aside from after the Cerberus Coup and Rannoch, there are two other moments when you could do it, but it would feel like a mood whiplash after Thessia and it doesn't mesh well with the sense of urgency after Sanctuary. So I agree, it fits best immediately after Rannoch.

So true. The mood after Thessia would certainly put a downer on all the celebrating while the galaxy is dying.

[Redbelle]

After the Cerverus Coup I decided to invade Omega. Seemed like the right response at the time.

[fainmaca]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

fainmaca wrote...

Then this is probably one of the roots of the problem between BW and people like me. When I play the game, Shepard is meant to be me, my avatar in the game's world. The game shouldn't have to break the 4th wall to interact with me, as when I'm in the mindset to play Shepard, I'm already in there, alongside my allies and enemies.

I was speaking as a game player.  I have spent 0 minutes of my life working on Mass Effect.

I stated why it worked for me.  Unfortunately it doesn't work for you.

I realise that, and I apologise if my comment came off as being directed at you. I was simply stating what I feel is the divide between the devs on the ME team now and their original audience, between the story they told in ME3 and the story they gave us in the prior games. The previous games made me feel like I was the action hero in the setting, kicking ass and taking names. In ME3 and its related DLCs, I'm just watching Shepard have fun. Breaking the 4th wall like you mentioned only underlines this for me.

I just find it so hard to understand why Bioware felt the need to wrest control of the character back for his final outing, Citadel included.

[MrStoob]

Totally agree that Citadel smacked of 'Fan Fiction' at times. Knowing jokes and dialogue, like.

For what it was, Citadel was enjoyable.

As an addidtion to the MEU/Lore, meh.

Modifié par MrStoob, 20 mars 2013 - 10:54 .

[3DandBeyond]

fainmaca wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...
Contextually within the story, Citadel's story doesn't really make much sense. But I found, while playing it myself, that there's a sort of meta aspect to it. Most (I dare say the vast majority) of the players that play it will have already experienced the ending.  So as players when they play this, even though narratively it's "before" the ending, for the player it's still "after they've experienced all the other content in the game."  It's literally the last piece of content they will experience within the ME trilogy.

I found Citadel wasn't so much design to go on an adventure with Shepard. It was more to go on an adventure with the person playing the game. I think that's why it goes with breaking the 4th wall as much as it does. It invites the player along on a trip where they poke fun at the various memes that exist in the franchise, and delves more into spending time with the characters within the game as much as a player, rather than exclusively Shepard.


So rather than "lets go on an adventure with Shepard" it more said to me "Lets go on an adventure together with Allan."

Then this is probably one of the roots of the problem between BW and people like me. When I play the game, Shepard is meant to be me, my avatar in the game's world. The game shouldn't have to break the 4th wall to interact with me, as when I'm in the mindset to play Shepard, I'm already in there, alongside my allies and enemies.

Also, I replay the games. I was replaying ME1+ME2 right up until ME3 came out (and a little after). I like to explore the setting in various ways. The DLCs are most definitely not the last piece of content I experience, therefore they need to still work with what must come after.

In short- stop alienating your players from their avatars, and remember that a choice game thrives if it encourages replayability of the entire experience. Making it impossible to go back from the new DLC to the drudge of the core product is a fatally bad mistake.

The thing is exactly this.  The DLC goes contrary to what an RPG is (not saying what it should be) and what ME was.  It suits the needs of the devs to end the game experience on a less than depressing note, yet it does not end the story that way.  It's what they hope will be the last thing many remember and is meant to help fix the bridges they burnt down.

But, ME was a game/story where you played as Shepard as your avatar.  As I see it you are not supposed to be a player at that point.  To be clear, I was playing the way I felt made sense to me, making the choices amongst those given that most seemed to fit my personality-in that way I was playing as close as I could to myself.  But I was playing as Shepard.  The idea as I see it is the other way around is meta-gaming it and that's not what I think RPGs are supposed to be about.  Some of the best I've played really lose much of their appeal if meta-gamed.  Anyone who's played Dark Souls or Demon's Souls knows that meta-gaming just tends to ruin the experience. 

And that even goes for replay value.  RPGs do always head into meta-gaming land because if played again you know basically what will happen.  The brilliance of ME was that you could replay and get different things to happen.  Sure, in ME1 and 2 the basic outcomes had to be the same because they funneled the player into the next game. 

Citadel DLC is not really about anything in the stories and is more about fans.  I don't think of it as RPG material at all.  I don't really even think of it as fanservice stuff.  It is more about Bioware trying to leave this game on a happier note-fans that buy it they figure might hate them a little less.  But, I think that's water under the bridge at this point.  They passed up way too many opportunities and pre-ending content is not a substitute for a true RPG fixed ending.  I like it and I got it for myself.  So that I'd like the game better because it did make me feel somewhat better.  But as I said only if I totally disregard the endings-that means it does nothing to help the full replayability of the game.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 20 mars 2013 - 04:50 .

[3DandBeyond]

Calibrations52 wrote...

The Citadel DLC lacking context is the POINT. It's supposed to give us a break from the overly dour and somber tone of the game. It's supposed to give us fun interactions with our favorite characters from the trilogy. It's supposed to be "shore duty." I think it's also clear that it's supposed to be not taken too seriously in contrast to the rest of the game. It was purely fan service, and THAT'S the context that really matters imo.

Well sure it is, but it is also serving another purpose.  Bioware feared creating a new debacle by making some sort of post-ending content, reunion or whatever.  They didn't want to release paid for endings or a paid for epilog.  Since this is the last DLC for this game, it is meant though to serve that purpose.  People form opinions based upon first and last impressions of things, like in meeting people.  It's how we work.  We can try hard to change those opinions by what occurs in between.  Most people tend to go by their last impressions of things, subconsciously.  So, we see this DLC and it FEELS like the ending because it is the end.  It isn't at the end, but no matter.  Subconsciously, it will leave those who disliked the endings with a mostly better feeling and that was intentional, IMO.

In doing this, they also seem to hope that they may show people they can still create good stuff (but there's a lot of things that are just not great in the DLC that proves otherwise-the overuse of autodialogue for one thing).  And it's placement in the game, for another.

[3DandBeyond]

Bester76 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

The big problem for me is considering any of the "good" content in a context with the rest of ME3.  The parts I found bittersweet or just sweet or cheesy or any combination of not just plain depressing, all end up being so if capped off by the endings from hell.  I think the Normandy Evac scene is silly but the dialogue with some LIs is some of the best in the game.  Get to the end and then damn-I think the endings are made worse by any good content.  So, it's kind of like the last part of ME3 I want to see is that reunion stuff in Citadel.  I think that effect is what BW was after-instead of the crap taste of the endings, they figured many would hang onto the sweetness of Citadel instead.  Just never play to the end again.

As soon as BW stated that they wouldn't be changing the endings with any of the DLC I'd already made my mind up to move on from ME after the DLC schedule had run its course. That being the case, the main thing I wanted from the Citadel DLC was the chance to say goodbye to the characters on a better note than the ending. At this point the endings are what they are, love them or loathe them, they're a fixed point. As I said originally, narratively, the Citadel DLC may try for bittersweet but overshoots the mark into depressing - largely because no matter what happens you know what's still to come on the other side of the DLC. The bittersweetness, what there is to be had, comes in the meta sense that I know that this is the end for me. Despite loathing the end of ME3, I've loved the series up until that point. Still do. Saying goodbye to it, even given the strength of feeling towards the end of the game, is hard. If it weren't for the new DLC then my parting memories of the series would be of the Starbrat, the rainbow choice, and space magic. Instead, I'll be remembering the best part of ME - the characters. 

Yep, and just how I see it as well.  Well put.

[TJBartlemus]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Citadel DLC is not really about anything in the stories and is more about fans.  I don't think of it as RPG material at all.  I don't really even think of it as fanservice stuff.  It is more about Bioware trying to leave this game on a happier note-fans that buy it they figure might hate them a little less.  But, I think that's water under the bridge at this point.  They passed up way too many opportunities and pre-ending content is not a substitute for a true RPG fixed ending.  I like it and I got it for myself.  So that I'd like the game better because it did make me feel somewhat better.  But as I said only if I totally disregard the endings-that means it does nothing to help the full replayability of the game.

 Agreed. So much with this post. 

[TJBartlemus]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I wouldn't read too much into it as being "you just wanted a happy ending" (note, I have only read the OP)

In my opinion there wasn't really a "consensus" on what specifically made people upset with the ending (IIRC there were about 3 different themes that came up a lot, and I felt many people fit on it on a continuum in some way, like a place on a triangle with each point being the particular destination). One thing that I did feel was pretty consistent, however, is that in large part players had a strong emotional investment into the game, most specifically the characters (there were other aspects as well, but I don't remember them being as common).

Contextually within the story, Citadel's story doesn't really make much sense. But I found, while playing it myself, that there's a sort of meta aspect to it. Most (I dare say the vast majority) of the players that play it will have already experienced the ending.  So as players when they play this, even though narratively it's "before" the ending, for the player it's still "after they've experienced all the other content in the game."  It's literally the last piece of content they will experience within the ME trilogy.

I found Citadel wasn't so much design to go on an adventure with Shepard. It was more to go on an adventure with the person playing the game. I think that's why it goes with breaking the 4th wall as much as it does. It invites the player along on a trip where they poke fun at the various memes that exist in the franchise, and delves more into spending time with the characters within the game as much as a player, rather than exclusively Shepard.


So rather than "lets go on an adventure with Shepard" it more said to me "Lets go on an adventure together with Allan."


I think that that's why it works so well. Had it been released with the game, it wouldn't have made a lick of sense. As the Forbes writer said, it only works as post-release content. As such, it came across as the game sort of saying "Thanks for all the memories." Which may sound sappy, but I really enjoyed the Citadel DLC and this I feel is why.


Cheers.

Allan

 Well said.  I just have a few comments...and sorry if I sound a tad redundant. 

 While yes, the emotional aspect was one of the problems with the ending, as stated by others before me, what a lot of the people I have discussed with have stated was the biggest problem with the ending was the inconsistencies / problems in the writing. Or to put it simply, there were parts of the ending that made no sense to them and have yet to be addressed as to make them understand. Perhaps that's why the EC did very little in people's opinions. While it took care of the emotional aspect and provided a bit more closure, it did little to make the things that made no sense...make more sense.

 Obviously I agree that the DLC lacks context. No arguement there. However I do have a problem with the meta-aspect. As with anything, too much of one thing is a bad thing. To automatically assume that a majority of players who will buy the DLC will of played the ending already and tailoring that content to that I feel is a problem as well. However, many others have already posted on this topic already and I don't want to sound redundant... 

 My view is with DLC, is that it shouldn't be separated in our minds that DLC are separate from the rest of the game. Once downloaded it becomes one with the rest of the game. What I'm trying to say, is that DLC SHOULD be treated as if it was released with the original game. 

Anyway, I'll finish off with thanking you for taking the time to post in the thread!!  

Modifié par TJBartlemus, 21 mars 2013 - 02:00 .

[CronoDragoon]

TJBartlemus wrote...
 My view is with DLC, is that it shouldn't be separated in our minds that DLC are separate from the rest of the game. Once downloaded it becomes one with the rest of the game. What I'm trying to say, is that DLC SHOULD be treated as if it was released with the original game. 

For the most part, it has been. Citadel is the exception and, I think, was always advertised as the exception. I doubt you'll see the first DLC of ME4 mimic Citadel, for example.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 21 mars 2013 - 02:11 .

[CaIIisto]

CronoDragoon wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...
 My view is with DLC, is that it shouldn't be separated in our minds that DLC are separate from the rest of the game. Once downloaded it becomes one with the rest of the game. What I'm trying to say, is that DLC SHOULD be treated as if it was released with the original game. 

For the most part, it has been. Citadel is the exception and, I think, was always advertised as the exception. I doubt you'll see the first DLC of ME4 mimic Citadel, for example.

Agree - Citadel works so well because it is specifically something that couldn't, and shouldn't have been part of the main game. I highly doubt that you'll see anything resembling Citadel again anytime soon. It succeeds because it's the emotional payoff to the previous three games. The next game will kick off a new story. 

Modifié par Bester76, 21 mars 2013 - 02:23 .

[TJBartlemus]

Bester76 wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...
 My view is with DLC, is that it shouldn't be separated in our minds that DLC are separate from the rest of the game. Once downloaded it becomes one with the rest of the game. What I'm trying to say, is that DLC SHOULD be treated as if it was released with the original game. 

For the most part, it has been. Citadel is the exception and, I think, was always advertised as the exception. I doubt you'll see the first DLC of ME4 mimic Citadel, for example.

Agree - Citadel works so well because it is specifically something that couldn't, and shouldn't have been part of the main game. I highly doubt that you'll see anything resembling Citadel again anytime soon. It succeeds because it's the emotional payoff to the previous three games. The next game will kick off a new story. 

 I guess we will see with the next game. I just hope that this IS an exception and doesn't become the standard. But then again, you never know with some companies...they would do whatever to make money.

[CronoDragoon]

Citadel also works because ME3 is essentially a completed work after Omega. I don't mean that in the sense that the story is perfectly told, but there's no further dangling threads like Leviathan or Shadow Broker or Omega that need to be wrapped up. In that sense the final DLC would pretty much be a stand-alone story no matter what.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 21 mars 2013 - 03:05 .

[TJBartlemus]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Citadel also works because ME3 is essentially a completed work after Omega. I don't mean that in the sense that the story is perfectly told, but there's no further dangling threads like Leviathan or Shadow Broker or Omega that need to be wrapped up. In that sense the final DLC would pretty much be a stand-alone story no matter what.

 Do you think that if ME3 shipped with Leviathan and Omega people would have been more happy than they were initially at release?  I would think so. Not totally happy cause the ending prevents that, but I think there would have been way less fan rage than they got at release.

[CronoDragoon]

TJBartlemus wrote...

 Do you think that if ME3 shipped with Leviathan and Omega people would have been more happy than they were initially at release?  I would think so. Not totally happy cause the ending prevents that, but I think there would have been way less fan rage than they got at release.

I think that if ME3 had shipped with Leviathan and the EC (Omega is pretty irrelevant to the fan rage, I think) then there would have been a lot of complaining, but probably not 80k raised for charity level of complaining. I would have been disappointed still, but not confused and depressed and nerdragey.

[CaIIisto]

Despite picking up the game at launch I didn't actually get around to playing through it until after Leviathan had come out anyway, hence my first play had From Ashes and Leviathan installed. Not Omega, but as mentioned above, I think that's largely irrelevant to the overriding complaints that people had.

I loathed the ending, even with the additional exposition. I loathe the Starbrat, I loathe the rainbow choice, and I absolutely f*cking detest the rubble scene. I can only imagine the initial reaction of folks playing through the game last March without the EC, or Leviathan.

[V-rcingetorix]

It was like a gut punch, honestly. Everything up to that last 10 minutes was fantastic for me, I'd even peg it at being EPIC! But that last ten...especially prior to EC...

[Rikketik]

The game should've ended when Shepard was sitting there beside Anderson and they were looking at earth. The Crucible connects, Hackett announces that it's working, Reapers get killed in the background while Shepard and Anderson look on. The scene fades to black and the credits roll. Afterwards there's an epilogue in the form of galaxy rebuilding and the consequences of your actions over the course of the game(s). Last scene is of Shepard reuniting with their crew and their LI in particular if they have one. The end.

[TJBartlemus]

Rikketik wrote...

The game should've ended when Shepard was sitting there beside Anderson and they were looking at earth. The Crucible connects, Hackett announces that it's working, Reapers get killed in the background while Shepard and Anderson look on. The scene fades to black and the credits roll. Afterwards there's an epilogue in the form of galaxy rebuilding and the consequences of your actions over the course of the game(s). Last scene is of Shepard reuniting with their crew and their LI in particular if they have one. The end.

Yeah that really should have been the ending, with various degrees of success rather than a choice at the ending. We have already made our choices throughout the game and the ending is not the time to make one that overrides everything else you have done. Perhaps if they didn't work so much on the the choice at the end factor and worked more on showing results from your choices in Priority: Earth and the Epilogue, people would be much more happy.

But anyway, that is venturing a tad off topic though... 

[tevix]

I'm gonna go ahead and take a stab at the argument that this DLC is a play to leave people feeling happy so they buy the next game.

The amount of work the writing and design team put into it was phenominal. I feel said folks did a great job with the limited time and resources they had on the main game.

Has anyone considered maybe the higher ups (the ones who just bark orders and don't really make the game) told them redoing the ending or adding to it was unacceptable. Blah blah blah we can't admit fault blah blah blah?

Maybe they wanted to, but this is the best they could do, so they try to make up for it by making it the way they did.

"From the devs to the fans, with love. Sorry we couldn't do more."

[TJBartlemus]

tevix wrote...

I'm gonna go ahead and take a stab at the argument that this DLC is a play to leave people feeling happy so they buy the next game.

The amount of work the writing and design team put into it was phenominal. I feel said folks did a great job with the limited time and resources they had on the main game.

Has anyone considered maybe the higher ups (the ones who just bark orders and don't really make the game) told them redoing the ending or adding to it was unacceptable. Blah blah blah we can't admit fault blah blah blah?

Maybe they wanted to, but this is the best they could do, so they try to make up for it by making it the way they did.

"From the devs to the fans, with love. Sorry we couldn't do more."

 That is exactly one of the purposes of the Citadel DLC is to do. It is a last ditch attempt to suck back in as many fans as they could. You hit that right on the head.

 On the second thing, a lot of people I know seem to think that was the idea. The producers (or even higher up than that) most likely wouldn't allow anything to do with the ending because it could make the company look weak. So the devs did the best with what they had. 

 So in essence, I agree with your post. 

[Alien Number Six]

BioWare listened to their fans and made a character based DLC for those who wanted more time with their favorite characters. Dispite Thane and Legion being left out for the most part that is what they got.