307 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

Read it here.

So Mike Gamble, Producer of the ME3 DLC plan (and much of ME2's DLC), wrote a sort of wrap-up afterthoughts on the DLC process for ME3 at the BioBlog, and since I didn't see it being discussed elsewhere I thought it would be worth bringing up and discussing... so long as it doesn't get bogged down on the endings.

(So, yeah, take ending discussion elsewhere, please.)


As a warning to the more critical/jaded about Bioware, the piece is written in public relations speak (it's not going to self-critize and bemoan all the errors or mistakes you want them to), and it takes a generally optimistic tone for how they feel the DLC's came out. If a Bioware dev post on the Bioware blog that isn't properly contrite or apologetic for ruining your experience and/or life isn't compatible with you and nothing they say otherwise can be believed, exist is that way.

(So, yeah, don't turn this into a discussion about how they're untrustworthy hacks living in denial, etc. etc., please.)


THAT SAID...

The piece does bring up some points I found interesting, which I'll summarize below. Some of it's stuff we already knew, some of it is stuff that was reasoned, and some of it is sort of new perspective.


-DLC is treated as an experimentation device for new ideas that the devs think are cool and want to try out, such as the Shadow Broker car chase or the Citadel DLC Party. How some of these get adopted in later games and others not isn't mentioned.

-The DLCs were balanced between Bioware Edmonton and Bioware Montreal, with various levels of overlap and cooperation. They might not have been as separated as some people think.

-Mike was asked to be Producer for the DLC towards the end of the ME3 development cycle, and the base game was the priority for the Devs until submitted for certification. DLC was intended to provide support and maintain interest through the end of the year.

===

From the Ashes

===

-With the exception of some aspects of Javik's dialogue plan and role planning, from the Ashes DLC work largely began after ME3 was submitted for certification. People convinced Bioware is lying won't be convinced, but it does support the often-provided reason by the Devs for why Day 0 DLC can exist by continuing past the base game certification cycle.

-Javik's development was based in large part on feedback from the strengths and criticisms of Zaeed and Kasumi, which led to more planning and effort to tie him into the main story and character conversations. Feedback was generally positive, and helped shaped considerations (unspecified) for the rest of the DLC.

(The DLC's built off of eachother, in other words.)

===

Extended Cut

(The dangerous one to talk about.)

===

-Everything else on the SP DLC schedule was bumped back to make way for the EC. EC was a collaboration effort by both the DLC and Main Leads for ME3 base game.

-The Devs put the entire flow chart on the entire ending sequence on a flow chart, as well as a consolidated list of fan feedback points they would work to incorporate.

-A significant design restraint for the EC DLC was download size: 2 GB was a technical limit that wouldn't be successfully broken until Citadel DLC.

===

Leviathan

===

-Leviathan got extra think-up time due to EC, thinking over things whether it should be parallel to the main game or tangental like Omega, which was good because...

-Leviathan didn't have a clear plan beforehand about what it would be about. It could have focused on Krogan, the STG, or other ideas. The Leviathan of Dis wasn't pre-decided as such.

-Two key themes of the DLC as intended were exploration (yeah player feedback!) and providing a mystery to be solved (the puzzles, the hunt to figure out what it is).

-Player feedback also helped include/incorporate the greater charater interaction, squad banter, etc.

===

Omega

===

-Developed by Bioware Montreal (the DLC team) concurrently with Leviathan by Bioware Edmonton, not sequentially. Omega actually began development shortly after ME3's release.

-Was meant to expand Omega, geographically and characterwise: the station, Aria, and what sort of other people lived on the station.

-Nyreen the Female Turian was heavily driven by player feedback, and is seen as an unexpected(?) success.

===

Citadel

===

-Character focused, character focused, character focused. Characters a 'pillar' of the ME universe.

-Described as a Love Letter from the Devs to the fans and trilogy.

-Incorporated gameplay advances developed by the multiplayer cycles in the hub and battle arena.

-Well received by fans. (Duh.)

===

Multiplayer DLC

===

-Multiplayer an experiment with unexpected success.

-Did plan free multiplayer DLC: did not plan how many they would make. Free multiplayer DLC was intended to help keep playerbase from fracturing into haves/have-nots.

-Positive feedback fueled attempts to expand, such as the webtracking in N7 HQ. Limitations they had to consider were trying to push new kits, and how many kits the engine could support.

===



And that's about it, before the thanks and goodbye.

My personal key take-aways?


-DLC is an experimentation device for the devs to try new things differently from the Main Game.

-Technical limitations have real effects on content, including the Extended Cut.

-Fan feedback is important to their planning. Just because they don't give you what you want doesn't mean they aren't listening, or that it won't influence later things.

[M Hedonist]

I really hope they will see Citadel DLC's success as a sign people prefer Mass Effect as a fun space adventure with a focus on characters rather than a depressingly grim nihilistic Nietzschean abyss.
Eh, who am I kidding? As long as there's Multiplayer it won't make a difference.

[wolfsite]

I enjoyed the DLC overall.  Omega was a slight bump but that may have been more to the fact that is was much more contained (Stand alone) it was compared to other DLC that came out..... up to this point, with the exception of Pinnacle Station DLC did have minor affects to the overall story based on the choices you made or if you even completed it or not.

Citadel is honestly the best DLC overall, it gives the players one last chance to interact with all the great characters from the series in a more casual atmosphere.  I hope they do a DLC like this for future games as it really is a nice touch and a great way to say goodbye.

[Reorte]

Interesting that the Citadel party gets mentioned in the list of experiementation things that are trialled in DLC, since it's something that could only really fit in something like the Citadel DLC IMO. It was good stuff but absolutely required a lot of pre-knowledge of the characters and so on, something similar would probably never work in the first game of a new series.

I doubt that I'll ever be convinced that the EC could sensibly use up 2GB.

[M Hedonist]

I really liked Omega. Definitely more than Leviathan. Probably exactly because of the reason many people criticize it: It has little to do with the war that's going on in ME3. It lets you forget the grim reality for a time.
That's not to say Omega was perfect. It was still pretty stupid at times, but overall a fine experience.
I also don't get the hate for Petrovsky. He's a decent enough anti-villain. Definitely better executed than TIM. Heck, he's easily the best villain of ME3, though I guess that's not saying much.

[KiwiQuiche]

Well, they still seemed to do a massive hit-and-miss with fan feedback, despite showing off how much they listened to it.

[wolfsite]

Sauruz wrote...

I really liked Omega. Definitely more than Leviathan. Probably exactly because of the reason many people criticize it: It has little to do with the war that's going on in ME3. It lets you forget the grim reality for a time.
That's not to say Omega was perfect. It was still pretty stupid at times, but overall a fine experience.
I also don't get the hate for Petrovsky. He's a decent enough anti-villain. Definitely better executed than TIM. Heck, he's easily the best villain of ME3, though I guess that's not saying much.

Actually I woudln't have minded more interaction with Petrovsky.  After playing the DLC and looking back it would have been fun if there was more forshadowing about what projects he was involved in from past games or even TIM making a reference to taking him out at some point since he was supposed to be one of his higher ups.

[Dean_the_Young]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Well, they still seemed to do a massive hit-and-miss with fan feedback, despite showing off how much they listened to it.

Since fans contradict eachother on just about every single issue, the best they could ever do would be 50% (Fan 1 wants A, Fan 2 wants not-A), when it isn't even worse (three or more different positions).

Otherwise, a lot of the most persistent feedback wasn't really relevant: people who trawled through threads for non-ending DLC demanding more ending DLC weren't really on topic or relevant to feedback concerns for non-ending DLC.

[Dean_the_Young]

Sauruz wrote...

I really hope they will see Citadel DLC's success as a sign people prefer Mass Effect as a fun space adventure with a focus on characters rather than a depressingly grim nihilistic Nietzschean abyss.
Eh, who am I kidding? As long as there's Multiplayer it won't make a difference.

Where's the logic in this? Plenty of series which have multiplayer aren't grim nihilstic Nietzschean abyses.

Hell, ME3 isn't a grim nihilistic Nietzschean abyss, unless you distort the meanings of nihilism and Nietzschean so far away from their roots that the lables aren't worth anything.

[JasonShepard]

Yeah, Omega was the only weak point in the DLCs from my perspective. I adored the exploration/mystery/Lovecraftian nature of the Leviathan DLC. I don't use Javik much, and I have a couple of gripes with the Eden Prime mission, but nothing huge. EC was great. Citadel was bombastically awesome.

Omega would have been better if... if it was less focused on Omega. I never really got Omega as a location - I felt as if I was supposed to see it as more than just pirate base. If the Omega DLC had played with the Omega-4 Relay a bit, I'd have approved.

Overall... the DLCs needed more focus on the Reapers and less of a focus on Cerberus, possibly with a Harbinger appearance somewhere. But I did enjoy it all, and I loved having my Squadmates talk in 4/5 of them.

Modifié par JasonShepard, 21 avril 2013 - 11:38 .

[M Hedonist]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

I really hope they will see Citadel DLC's success as a sign people prefer Mass Effect as a fun space adventure with a focus on characters rather than a depressingly grim nihilistic Nietzschean abyss.
Eh, who am I kidding? As long as there's Multiplayer it won't make a difference.

Where's the logic in this? Plenty of series which have multiplayer aren't grim nihilstic Nietzschean abyses.

Hell, ME3 isn't a grim nihilistic Nietzschean abyss, unless you distort the meanings of nihilism and Nietzschean so far away from their roots that the lables aren't worth anything.

What I'm saying is that the next ME will sell regardless of the story if it has Multiplayer.
And ME3 is that, petty much. You just don't get to really experience it until the end if you've got a perfect import. Otherwise you get to make many more decisions like that - where there's simply no ideal solution and you have to compromise your morals constantly. Your squadmates constantly reminding you that you'll have to sacrifice your morals and honor to win this hopelessly bleak war, doesn't help, either.

[KiwiQuiche]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Well, they still seemed to do a massive hit-and-miss with fan feedback, despite showing off how much they listened to it.

Since fans contradict eachother on just about every single issue, the best they could ever do would be 50% (Fan 1 wants A, Fan 2 wants not-A), when it isn't even worse (three or more different positions).

Otherwise, a lot of the most persistent feedback wasn't really relevant: people who trawled through threads for non-ending DLC demanding more ending DLC weren't really on topic or relevant to feedback concerns for non-ending DLC.

It just reminds me of that "what would be the worse ending" thread and it seems everything in that thread actually showed up in ME3 lmao.

[Dean_the_Young]

Sauruz wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

I really hope they will see Citadel DLC's success as a sign people prefer Mass Effect as a fun space adventure with a focus on characters rather than a depressingly grim nihilistic Nietzschean abyss.
Eh, who am I kidding? As long as there's Multiplayer it won't make a difference.

Where's the logic in this? Plenty of series which have multiplayer aren't grim nihilstic Nietzschean abyses.

Hell, ME3 isn't a grim nihilistic Nietzschean abyss, unless you distort the meanings of nihilism and Nietzschean so far away from their roots that the lables aren't worth anything.

What I'm saying is that the next ME will sell regardless of the story if it has Multiplayer.

Ah, I see. That makes sense, I suppose.

And ME3 is that, petty much. You just don't get to really experience it until the end if you've got a perfect import. Otherwise you get to make many more decisions like that - where there's simply no ideal solution and you have to compromise your morals constantly. Your squadmates constantly reminding you that you'll have to sacrifice your morals and honor to win this hopelessly bleak war, doesn't help, either.

What you describe still isn't nihilistic, or particularly Nietschean abysian. Grim, certainly, but grim isn't a synonym for the rest.

[CosmicGnosis]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Leviathan

===

-Leviathan got extra think-up time due to EC, thinking over things whether it should be parallel to the main game or tangental like Omega, which was good because...

-Leviathan didn't have a clear plan beforehand about what it would be about. It could have focused on Krogan, the STG, or other ideas. The Leviathan of Dis wasn't pre-decided as such.

-Two key themes of the DLC as intended were exploration (yeah player feedback!) and providing a mystery to be solved (the puzzles, the hunt to figure out what it is).

-Player feedback also helped include/incorporate the greater charater interaction, squad banter, etc.

Hmmmmmmm. Interesting. This suggests that BioWare had no idea what Leviathan was going to be when they released ME3. It's possible, then, that the discussion about the origin of the Catalyst and the organic-synthetic conflict was added because of the ending complaints.

This is unfortunate. It might be more evidence that BioWare really wasn't prepared to address the story information that was revealed at the very end of the game.

Modifié par CosmicGnosis, 21 avril 2013 - 12:46 .

[Dean_the_Young]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Well, they still seemed to do a massive hit-and-miss with fan feedback, despite showing off how much they listened to it.

Since fans contradict eachother on just about every single issue, the best they could ever do would be 50% (Fan 1 wants A, Fan 2 wants not-A), when it isn't even worse (three or more different positions).

Otherwise, a lot of the most persistent feedback wasn't really relevant: people who trawled through threads for non-ending DLC demanding more ending DLC weren't really on topic or relevant to feedback concerns for non-ending DLC.

It just reminds me of that "what would be the worse ending" thread and it seems everything in that thread actually showed up in ME3 lmao.

These are, I presume, the same people who proclaimed that the actual Dark Energy plot concept would have been infinitely superior? Or who claimed that the ending couldn't have been worse than it was no matter what?

A startling lack of imagination on their part, I suppose, but I don't see the relevance to where Bioware does or does not consider fan feedback.

[KiwiQuiche]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Well, they still seemed to do a massive hit-and-miss with fan feedback, despite showing off how much they listened to it.

Since fans contradict eachother on just about every single issue, the best they could ever do would be 50% (Fan 1 wants A, Fan 2 wants not-A), when it isn't even worse (three or more different positions).

Otherwise, a lot of the most persistent feedback wasn't really relevant: people who trawled through threads for non-ending DLC demanding more ending DLC weren't really on topic or relevant to feedback concerns for non-ending DLC.

It just reminds me of that "what would be the worse ending" thread and it seems everything in that thread actually showed up in ME3 lmao.

These are, I presume, the same people who proclaimed that the actual Dark Energy plot concept would have been infinitely superior? Or who claimed that the ending couldn't have been worse than it was no matter what?

A startling lack of imagination on their part, I suppose, but I don't see the relevance to where Bioware does or does not consider fan feedback.

I didn't go and harrass those people for their opinion of the dark energy plot. Don't presume things.

This thread was made months before ME3 was even released.

[Dean_the_Young]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Well, they still seemed to do a massive hit-and-miss with fan feedback, despite showing off how much they listened to it.

Since fans contradict eachother on just about every single issue, the best they could ever do would be 50% (Fan 1 wants A, Fan 2 wants not-A), when it isn't even worse (three or more different positions).

Otherwise, a lot of the most persistent feedback wasn't really relevant: people who trawled through threads for non-ending DLC demanding more ending DLC weren't really on topic or relevant to feedback concerns for non-ending DLC.

It just reminds me of that "what would be the worse ending" thread and it seems everything in that thread actually showed up in ME3 lmao.

These are, I presume, the same people who proclaimed that the actual Dark Energy plot concept would have been infinitely superior? Or who claimed that the ending couldn't have been worse than it was no matter what?

A startling lack of imagination on their part, I suppose, but I don't see the relevance to where Bioware does or does not consider fan feedback.

I didn't go and harrass those people for their opinion of the dark energy plot. Don't presume things.

Harass and presume what?

You used a very nebulous form of popular appeal. The same sort of popular appeal movements and exagerations have been used in the claims I mentioned.

This thread was made months before ME3 was even released.

Ah, that thread. In that case, I'm not sure what in it you're referring to: that thread went all over the place, and was about as accurate as throwing spaggeti at a wall. Something hit and stuck, sure... but that's the nature of wild guessing. Most proposals weren't particularly 'worst' either.

[KiwiQuiche]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Well, they still seemed to do a massive hit-and-miss with fan feedback, despite showing off how much they listened to it.

Since fans contradict eachother on just about every single issue, the best they could ever do would be 50% (Fan 1 wants A, Fan 2 wants not-A), when it isn't even worse (three or more different positions).

Otherwise, a lot of the most persistent feedback wasn't really relevant: people who trawled through threads for non-ending DLC demanding more ending DLC weren't really on topic or relevant to feedback concerns for non-ending DLC.

It just reminds me of that "what would be the worse ending" thread and it seems everything in that thread actually showed up in ME3 lmao.

These are, I presume, the same people who proclaimed that the actual Dark Energy plot concept would have been infinitely superior? Or who claimed that the ending couldn't have been worse than it was no matter what?

A startling lack of imagination on their part, I suppose, but I don't see the relevance to where Bioware does or does not consider fan feedback.

I didn't go and harrass those people for their opinion of the dark energy plot. Don't presume things.

Harass and presume what?

You used a very nebulous form of popular appeal. The same sort of popular appeal movements and exagerations have been used in the claims I mentioned.

This thread was made months before ME3 was even released.

Ah, that thread. In that case, I'm not sure what in it you're referring to: that thread went all over the place, and was about as accurate as throwing spaggeti at a wall. Something hit and stuck, sure... but that's the nature of wild guessing. Most proposals weren't particularly 'worst' either.

That those people who thought the current ends are bad and the dark energy plot would have been better? You wrote it right above my statement.

I only have a vague idea of what the dark energy thing is about and I don't care for it.  Yeah, but it still stuck. And Bioware wonders why so many people were pissed off about the end?

[KiwiQuiche]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

I really hope they will see Citadel DLC's success as a sign people prefer Mass Effect as a fun space adventure with a focus on characters rather than a depressingly grim nihilistic Nietzschean abyss.

I'm no fan of the way the ending to Mass Effect 3 turned the trilogy into a celebration of moral degeneracy, but Citadel was a disjointedly spoofy, unnecessarily goofy diversion that had no place sitting within what was a much darker narrative. I mean, if Bioware really must experiment with their DLC so, I'd much rather they take a Darkspawn Chronicles ‘alternative history’ approach to things instead of dumping their Hot Shots! Part Deux DLC slap bang into the middle of what is essentially a war story.

As for the rest of ME3's DLC, I was *ahem* fortunate enough to snag myself a CE, despite the collective efforts of EA, Bioware and Game to make that as difficult for me as possible, but, upon completing the game, found myself strangely unwilling to support it with more of my money.

I admit, Citadel was incredibly out of place- especially when Bioware shoved the whole "everyone is dying and it's a race against time! Oh no wait, lets go get drunk lol!" It was really really jarring and I personally found most of the DLC blatant fanservice that was completely out of place. Also, we got even more Shepderp and a cliched clone that made the whole game seem even more stupid. Not to mention the cheese. I'm fine with some cheese, but not getting smothered in it.

And yes, I would have liked a Reaper POV-hell, even playing as some of the ground forces would have been extremely fun.

Same here. Instead all I got was a hoodie and a useless dog.

[M Hedonist]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

I really hope they will see Citadel DLC's success as a sign people prefer Mass Effect as a fun space adventure with a focus on characters rather than a depressingly grim nihilistic Nietzschean abyss.
Eh, who am I kidding? As long as there's Multiplayer it won't make a difference.

Where's the logic in this? Plenty of series which have multiplayer aren't grim nihilstic Nietzschean abyses.

Hell, ME3 isn't a grim nihilistic Nietzschean abyss, unless you distort the meanings of nihilism and Nietzschean so far away from their roots that the lables aren't worth anything.

What I'm saying is that the next ME will sell regardless of the story if it has Multiplayer.

Ah, I see. That makes sense, I suppose.

And ME3 is that, petty much. You just don't get to really experience it until the end if you've got a perfect import. Otherwise you get to make many more decisions like that - where there's simply no ideal solution and you have to compromise your morals constantly. Your squadmates constantly reminding you that you'll have to sacrifice your morals and honor to win this hopelessly bleak war, doesn't help, either.

What you describe still isn't nihilistic, or particularly Nietschean abysian. Grim, certainly, but grim isn't a synonym for the rest.

"Moral nihilism, also known as ethical nihilism, is the meta-ethical view that morality does not exist as something inherent to objective reality; therefore no action is necessarily preferable to any other." (courtesy to Wikipedia)
It's the whole atmosphere of ME3. It throws you into a hopeless war and constantly makes you aware of the fact that you will have to do amoral things to win it. That morality does not matter in this war.
And if you didn't have a 'perfect' import you're forced to do amoral things all throughout the game. Do you betray the Krogan and uphold the genophage or risk Wreav leading the Krogan onto a bloody path of revenge? Do you kill the Quarians or the Geth? These are the two major conflicts, but there's also a a number of other conflicts that won't allow you to solve them with your morality intact. That is what some call Nietzschean abysses.
If you did have a 'perfect' import, you can try to just shrug all of it off, but sooner or later you will be forced to accept that morality won't win you this war, and the later it is you come to that realization, the harder it hits you.

Modifié par Sauruz, 21 avril 2013 - 01:35 .

[M Hedonist]

Is it Citadel DLC that is out of place or is it ME3?
I agree that some parts of Citadel DLC were unnecessarily goofy, but if it was set in ME2 or a hypothetical ME3 that doesn't have a hopeless war against the Reapers throughout the entire game, there'd be no problem with it.

[themikefest]

I wonder if they were wanting to put more in the EC but were limited to the download size. And if they did, what more would they of added?

[Dean_the_Young]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Well, they still seemed to do a massive hit-and-miss with fan feedback, despite showing off how much they listened to it.

Since fans contradict eachother on just about every single issue, the best they could ever do would be 50% (Fan 1 wants A, Fan 2 wants not-A), when it isn't even worse (three or more different positions).

Otherwise, a lot of the most persistent feedback wasn't really relevant: people who trawled through threads for non-ending DLC demanding more ending DLC weren't really on topic or relevant to feedback concerns for non-ending DLC.

It just reminds me of that "what would be the worse ending" thread and it seems everything in that thread actually showed up in ME3 lmao.

These are, I presume, the same people who proclaimed that the actual Dark Energy plot concept would have been infinitely superior? Or who claimed that the ending couldn't have been worse than it was no matter what?

A startling lack of imagination on their part, I suppose, but I don't see the relevance to where Bioware does or does not consider fan feedback.

I didn't go and harrass those people for their opinion of the dark energy plot. Don't presume things.

Harass and presume what?

You used a very nebulous form of popular appeal. The same sort of popular appeal movements and exagerations have been used in the claims I mentioned.

This thread was made months before ME3 was even released.

Ah, that thread. In that case, I'm not sure what in it you're referring to: that thread went all over the place, and was about as accurate as throwing spaggeti at a wall. Something hit and stuck, sure... but that's the nature of wild guessing. Most proposals weren't particularly 'worst' either.

That those people who thought the current ends are bad and the dark energy plot would have been better? You wrote it right above my statement.

What is the harassment?

I only have a vague idea of what the dark energy thing is about and I don't care for it.  Yeah, but it still stuck. And Bioware wonders why so many people were pissed off about the end?

What is the relevance to the topic of the OP?