232 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

Wayning_Star wrote...

I believe he went to help out on SWTOR, actually.

As for finishing his story, that was the crux of the problem: he (and all the other writers) never had a gameplan for finishing it in the first place. They were trying for autonomy and not tying their hands, which is how we got such a departure as we did in ME2, but the cost of that was, well, ME2. A game that worked fine as a stand-alone, but made a mess of the trilogy by ignoring the idea of a central premise for a bunch of unrelated characters, most of whome were irrelevant to the plotlines and almost all of whome were killable (and thus could not be critical to later plots).

It's not even 'others failed to continue where Drew left off': Drew helped write the series into a corner that ME3 was always going to have to claw out of.

I'm kind of skeptical about other non writers having internal knowledge of who's didn't do what and when inside the game/story efforts. Many mods quibble at such speculation.

It appears fans are 'clawing out of' if anyone are. Many just hope to rewrite/reverse engineer history to suit any given fancy.

It wasn't so much internal as much as it was him (him being Drew) mentioning it at some point. Can't recall if it was his blog, a news article, or on the forum. I can't remember with certainty, I do admit.


As for them not planning ahead, that's not really speculation when they themselves have said it. It's assuming that they weren't lying with the admissions, honestly.

[Dean_the_Young]

Helios969 wrote...

Mumba1511 wrote...

No, the only problem was the story that was written as they went along.

Absolutely this.  The writers never had a clearly defined path back in ME1...just a hodgepodge of ideas.  It was compounded in ME2.  There were too many cooks in the kitchen as the saying goes.  It didn't help that MP was incorporated, but I suppose the extra revenue is simply necessary for them to continue.

Considering that MP was done in a different studio entirely, it also probably didn't hurt. It's not like the Bioware resource allocation process would have given ME3 the same amount of resources had they dropped it, after all.

I do feel they evolved from game to game on the writing front with ME3 offering some fantastic story arcs.  Rannoch and Tuchunka just blew me away, and the entire final game had me in its grip right up to Citadel: Return.  I felt it was simply the anticlimatic nature to the endings that left me so disatisfied than what they were trying to convey.  It's the disappointment more than poor writing and plot holes since we've seen much of that before.  If ME3 had resolved itself much in the way ME2 did with the collector base I have no doubt it would have gotten the positive attention in largely deserves.

Multicolored explosions from magic frisbees with no clear direction to advance the plot or beat the Reapers? 

[Wayning_Star]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

I believe he went to help out on SWTOR, actually.

As for finishing his story, that was the crux of the problem: he (and all the other writers) never had a gameplan for finishing it in the first place. They were trying for autonomy and not tying their hands, which is how we got such a departure as we did in ME2, but the cost of that was, well, ME2. A game that worked fine as a stand-alone, but made a mess of the trilogy by ignoring the idea of a central premise for a bunch of unrelated characters, most of whome were irrelevant to the plotlines and almost all of whome were killable (and thus could not be critical to later plots).

It's not even 'others failed to continue where Drew left off': Drew helped write the series into a corner that ME3 was always going to have to claw out of.

I'm kind of skeptical about other non writers having internal knowledge of who's didn't do what and when inside the game/story efforts. Many mods quibble at such speculation.

It appears fans are 'clawing out of' if anyone are. Many just hope to rewrite/reverse engineer history to suit any given fancy.

It wasn't so much internal as much as it was him (him being Drew) mentioning it at some point. Can't recall if it was his blog, a news article, or on the forum. I can't remember with certainty, I do admit.


As for them not planning ahead, that's not really speculation when they themselves have said it. It's assuming that they weren't lying with the admissions, honestly.

Really tho, after being on the BSN I've learned new stuff about fan reaction and how not to be able to plan for it. Especially with any canon ending 'thrust' that they don't want or can appreciate, for what ever reasons. I think many just want a video gamey ending and then celebration of/to that ending. No dead Shepard..ever.. lol

[CaIIisto]

Wayning_Star wrote...
I think many just want a video gamey ending

To a videogame? F*cking heretics.....!

[NCommand]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Really tho, after being on the BSN I've learned new stuff about fan reaction and how not to be able to plan for it. Especially with any canon ending 'thrust' that they don't want or can appreciate, for what ever reasons. I think many just want a video gamey ending and then celebration of/to that ending. No dead Shepard..ever.. lol

Seems to be something unique for this series or maybe RPGs, the makers of call of duty got away with killing every player character in the series in the end, and that game series is as mainstream as you can get

[CaIIisto]

NCommand wrote...

Seems to be something unique for this series or maybe RPGs, the makers of call of duty got away with killing every player character in the series in the end, and that game series is as mainstream as you can get

Don't 90% of CoD fans only buy it for MP?

[NCommand]

Bester76 wrote...

NCommand wrote...

Seems to be something unique for this series or maybe RPGs, the makers of call of duty got away with killing every player character in the series in the end, and that game series is as mainstream as you can get

Don't 90% of CoD fans only buy it for MP?

Possibly, but still, if Call of Duty can get away with a rather tragic ending where killing the bad guy means allies will die then Mass Effect should be able to get away with it

[Helios969]

Also, I have no doubt they learned some valuable lessons through this process and any future series planned will be more concise in its execution. I'd recommend that they hire a professional scriptwriter to flesh out the overlying story so they can focus on what they do brilliantly...write interesting characters.

[Helios969]

NCommand wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Really tho, after being on the BSN I've learned new stuff about fan reaction and how not to be able to plan for it. Especially with any canon ending 'thrust' that they don't want or can appreciate, for what ever reasons. I think many just want a video gamey ending and then celebration of/to that ending. No dead Shepard..ever.. lol

Seems to be something unique for this series or maybe RPGs, the makers of call of duty got away with killing every player character in the series in the end, and that game series is as mainstream as you can get

If COD had been setup with a central character that people played through multiple games interacting with the same characters the makers would have faced a similar backlash from their fans.

They're relatively fun games to play, but I have no emotional connection whatsoever.  It's for hanging out with a buddy when you feel like shooting cr*p.

Modifié par Helios969, 19 mars 2013 - 12:51 .

[CaIIisto]

NCommand wrote...

Possibly, but still, if Call of Duty can get away with a rather tragic ending where killing the bad guy means allies will die then Mass Effect should be able to get away with it

Isn't Price the most popular character in MW? They didn't kill him off. Sure Soap died, but realistically, how attached were people to that character? You never got to shape or direct him. CoD is an on-rails FPS. Hence, you were partially correct with your original assertion that perhaps this experience is unique to RPGs - I'd go one further and suggest that whilst that's true, it's worse because ME goes beyond most traditional RPGs.

[Wayning_Star]

Bester76 wrote...

NCommand wrote...

Seems to be something unique for this series or maybe RPGs, the makers of call of duty got away with killing every player character in the series in the end, and that game series is as mainstream as you can get

Don't 90% of CoD fans only buy it for MP?

yeah, I mentioned in another post as an off topic thought about how multi player will eventually end up interactive to the point of being actually player interaction with each other, not just chasing flags and shoot'n up the place to do that. Kind of like a story that unfolds with players actually 'being' one or the other side of the story.

Cerberus vs Alliance. But the players will have to actually think their way through the story as it unfolds from user input. Not just fan vs computer simulated badies. Of course there'd be computer controls to it, as the story would have to be formulated, but the immersive qualities could be altered by the choices given/taken by opposing forces..and plenty of shootist/master gunfighter stuff as well.

All in the internet clouds.

[knightnblu]

Honestly, I don't believe that for a second. I have seen some amazing things come out of BioWare studios and I believe that they could handle the ME universe and do it justice. I'm just spit balling here, but I don't believe that he problems with ME3 were creative issues. I think that they were management issues that interfered with the creative process. Do I know that for a fact? Absolutely not, but there are just too many coincidences for there not to have been a leadership problem at the company.

In the end, I just don't think that BioWare meshed all that well with EA. While EA provided greater flexibility for bankrolling projects, they also trend toward a formulaic approach that stifles creativity and that is where I believe that ME3 went off of the rails. I think that years down the road we will learn that EA had a greater hand in the ME3 ending disaster than anybody has let on thus far. But again, that is pure speculation.

[CaIIisto]

Wayning_Star wrote...

yeah, I mentioned in another post as an off topic thought about how multi player will eventually end up interactive to the point of being actually player interaction with each other, not just chasing flags and shoot'n up the place to do that. Kind of like a story that unfolds with players actually 'being' one or the other side of the story.

Cerberus vs Alliance. But the players will have to actually think their way through the story as it unfolds from user input. Not just fan vs computer simulated badies. Of course there'd be computer controls to it, as the story would have to be formulated, but the immersive qualities could be altered by the choices given/taken by opposing forces..and plenty of shootist/master gunfighter stuff as well.

All in the internet clouds.

Well we can dream! lol

[Wayning_Star]

knightnblu wrote...

Honestly, I don't believe that for a second. I have seen some amazing things come out of BioWare studios and I believe that they could handle the ME universe and do it justice. I'm just spit balling here, but I don't believe that he problems with ME3 were creative issues. I think that they were management issues that interfered with the creative process. Do I know that for a fact? Absolutely not, but there are just too many coincidences for there not to have been a leadership problem at the company.

In the end, I just don't think that BioWare meshed all that well with EA. While EA provided greater flexibility for bankrolling projects, they also trend toward a formulaic approach that stifles creativity and that is where I believe that ME3 went off of the rails. I think that years down the road we will learn that EA had a greater hand in the ME3 ending disaster than anybody has let on thus far. But again, that is pure speculation.

there isn't really any 'ending disaster' only fan tea cup tempests. I never had any problems with the ending of ME3, ever. Only until I reached the BSN did the trumpets of doom blare on the trilogy. As with most video games, the endings usually lack luster,as the story and finances of profits carry the day in business practices. We're micro managing the thing, instead of just enjoying what we purchased as it is. ONLY because bioware has this chat page for feed back...and it's almost become a spectator sport with interactive qualities in of it's self..lol

[Helios969]

knightnblu wrote...

Honestly, I don't believe that for a second. I have seen some amazing things come out of BioWare studios and I believe that they could handle the ME universe and do it justice. I'm just spit balling here, but I don't believe that he problems with ME3 were creative issues. I think that they were management issues that interfered with the creative process. Do I know that for a fact? Absolutely not, but there are just too many coincidences for there not to have been a leadership problem at the company.

In the end, I just don't think that BioWare meshed all that well with EA. While EA provided greater flexibility for bankrolling projects, they also trend toward a formulaic approach that stifles creativity and that is where I believe that ME3 went off of the rails. I think that years down the road we will learn that EA had a greater hand in the ME3 ending disaster than anybody has let on thus far. But again, that is pure speculation.

Many people have echoed those sentiments on these forums, however, it never really made much sense to me.  Wouldn't EA (the greedy moneymaking entity) want to keep Shepard's story going?  It's a money maker...and it would be the safe direction to go.  Keep the hardcore fans coming back, while continuing to attract more gamers.  BW must have made one hell of a sales pitch to the corporate giant on their future endeavors to take that kind of risk.  My thoughts, anyway.

[Wayning_Star]

dafangirl wrote...

The first thing one is taught in school when creating a story is to begin with a skeleton framework...maybe it's time for BioWare to go back to school.

Don't get me wrong, I love the ME trilogy. I'm still amazed even after dozens of playthroughs of all the little details, such as Lorik Qui'in's letter in ME2 which I never before received 'til recently because I usually helped Parasini.

However the overall theme/message had a "whisper-down-the-lane" effect from ME1 to ME3. I just finished another ME1 last night and Vigil clearly states in response to Shepard asking, "The war was lost, maybe if you surrendered..." to which Vigil responds along the lines of "No offer of surrender was ever given...the Reapers had one goal the galactic EXTINCTION of all advanced organic life." That goal somehow became the PRESERVATION of organic life in ME3.

well, there are limits to proof reading something, some times you just have to jump into the mean green beam and hope for the best..lol

[CaIIisto]

Wayning_Star wrote...

some times you just have to jump into the mean green beam and hope for the best..lol

Hope for the best.......but get space rape! 

[Helios969]

Wayning_Star wrote...

dafangirl wrote...

The first thing one is taught in school when creating a story is to begin with a skeleton framework...maybe it's time for BioWare to go back to school.

Don't get me wrong, I love the ME trilogy. I'm still amazed even after dozens of playthroughs of all the little details, such as Lorik Qui'in's letter in ME2 which I never before received 'til recently because I usually helped Parasini.

However the overall theme/message had a "whisper-down-the-lane" effect from ME1 to ME3. I just finished another ME1 last night and Vigil clearly states in response to Shepard asking, "The war was lost, maybe if you surrendered..." to which Vigil responds along the lines of "No offer of surrender was ever given...the Reapers had one goal the galactic EXTINCTION of all advanced organic life." That goal somehow became the PRESERVATION of organic life in ME3.

well, there are limits to proof reading something, some times you just have to jump into the mean green beam and hope for the best..lol

Or shoot the tube;)

[SpamBot2000]

NCommand wrote...

Possibly, but still, if Call of Duty can get away with a rather tragic ending where killing the bad guy means allies will die then Mass Effect should be able to get away with it

Without going into the question whether Mass Effect should be able or even willing to "get away with it", I'd just like to point out that playing an RPG trilogy where you create the character and make choices for that character over a span of several years is hardly the same thing as playing a CoD MP tutorial over a span of several hours.

If all games are the same to you, I guess that goes for all movies, books, music etc. too. So where most hip hop fails is not enough arias by the soprano. Because if Verdi does it, Young Jeezy ought to do it too.

[Jukaga]

scyphozoa wrote...

Yeah, I do think they wrote themselves into a corner. Having such powerful godlike enemies means that shep himself had to become a god himself to defeat them. Too much divinity, not enough hard science fiction.

It was always pretty obvious that we would have to McGuffin them to beat them, even though all three games did objectively prove that we can beat them conventionally despite telling us we can't. I mean they are pretty incompetent, they could have saved themselves a lot of trouble had they just picketed the relays with a Destroyer or two.

[Jukaga]

dafangirl wrote...

The first thing one is taught in school when creating a story is to begin with a skeleton framework...maybe it's time for BioWare to go back to school.

Don't get me wrong, I love the ME trilogy. I'm still amazed even after dozens of playthroughs of all the little details, such as Lorik Qui'in's letter in ME2 which I never before received 'til recently because I usually helped Parasini.

However the overall theme/message had a "whisper-down-the-lane" effect from ME1 to ME3. I just finished another ME1 last night and Vigil clearly states in response to Shepard asking, "The war was lost, maybe if you surrendered..." to which Vigil responds along the lines of "No offer of surrender was ever given...the Reapers had one goal the galactic EXTINCTION of all advanced organic life." That goal somehow became the PRESERVATION of organic life in ME3.

Point of view here, to Vigil and to any other non-reaper what they are doing is extinction, to the Reapers gooifying trillions to do... something in their Reaper shells is preservation.

[Bizantura]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@OP:
Yes, but not in the way you think. I think ME3 could have been an absolutely awesome game redefining storytelling in video games with one year more development time. The problem was Bioware had to resolve too many little stories in too little time. Thus, autodialogue, thus, sloppy handling of the endings, thus, contrived drama with little grounding in in-world logic, thus, lack of depth in character conversations, thus, ignored character story arcs and cut off romances. No unifying vision because there was just no time to oversee everything.

The ME trilogy as a whole still redefines storytelling in video games, and ME3 is still a great game for me. But seeing what it could've been without those time and resource constraints, that hurts.

This is wierd, really wierd, I actually agree with you!!

[AlanC9]

Dude_in_the_Room wrote...
First we see a gigantic Reaper.  It's huge....how the hell do we handle something that size?

Then we talk to one...and we cannot fathom their existence.  THEN, not only did they destory an ancient population....but enslaved it as well. 

Not only that....but theres lots of them.  Then in ME3...theres soldier type enemies they've created.  THEEENNN...they enslave ppl again.

Then....we get the starchild and the background.

Actually, we see soldier types in ME1 and ME2 -- husks and scions.

As I read this post, this isn't really about the size of the design per se. It's whether Bio made the Reapers too powerful for .... something. 

I don't see an issue unless you're opposed to anything but a conventional military victory. Note that Bio doesn't ever seem to have considered that design approach.

[The Night Mammoth]

I think it's patently obvious form both the beginnings of the latter two games, and the end of the second, that BioWare really didn't have any sort of concrete plan before starting off the series.

Even if that hadn't basically already been stated by members of the development team, it'd be obvious.

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 19 mars 2013 - 08:29 .