. We aren't THAT bad.dreamgazer wrote...
TheProtheans wrote...
And people love Twilight, some people just love bad stuff.
Huh. Then maybe Mass Effect was bad from the beginning, and the entire fanbase is equivalent to Twilight fans.
Did the release of the Extended Cut set a bad precedent for the video game industry?
Débuté par
Modius Prime
, mai 16 2013 09:53
#26
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:34
Steelcan
-
- Members
- 23 283 messages
Retour en haut
#27
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:34
JamesFaith
-
- Members
- 2 301 messages
TheProtheans wrote...
Optimystic_X wrote...
KingZayd wrote...
Yes it set a bad precedent:
It made a terrible ending more stupid.
And the people loved it!
QQ moar.
And people love Twilight, some people just love bad stuff.
And some people hate good stuff.
Subjective opinions isn't always good measure of objective quality.
#28
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:35
KingZayd
-
- Members
- 5 344 messages
Aaleel wrote...
No I don't think so. It's not like they removed the Catalyst and changed the entire ending. That would have set a bad precedent.
But some things needed explaining because they didn't make a lick of sense.
If anything hopefully this will make game designers think twice before they rush a product out the door.
I think that would have been a brilliant precedent.
#29
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:35
Steelcan
-
- Members
- 23 283 messages
I'd say there is no dangerous precedent anywhere here. BioWare wanted a certain, awful to many of us, way to conclude their story. Fans did not like this ending BioWare made. A compromise was reached, no new endings, but the existing one was expanded on.
#30
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:35
NeroonWilliams
-
- Members
- 723 messages
Honestly, the EC didn't change the ending at all. It merely put things into some semblance of context, since the original was almost like the end of 2001 in its lack of explanation. I do think that it was a band-aid in the cautionary tale of how to not rush a story driven game to market because, deadlines.
#31
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:37
dreamgazer
-
- Members
- 15 742 messages
Optimystic_X wrote...
KingZayd wrote...
Yes it set a bad precedent:
It made a terrible ending more stupid.
And the people loved it!
QQ moar.
Nah, the people dealt with it, meeting expectations and leading them to discard the issue.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
#32
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:37
CrutchCricket
-
- Members
- 7 734 messages
dreamgazer wrote...
Huh. Then maybe Mass Effect was bad from the beginning, and the entire fanbase is equivalent to Twilight fans.
Twilight... still better ending than....no... can't decide which is worse...
can't... praise... either...
*headasplode
#33
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:37
JamesFaith
-
- Members
- 2 301 messages
Aaleel wrote...
No I don't think so. It's not like they removed the Catalyst and changed the entire ending. That would have set a bad precedent.
This.
EC was compromise between two extremes - ignoring fans and forced change their story.
#34
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:39
AresKeith
-
- Members
- 34 128 messages
Twilight is like Spider-man 3, never happened
#35
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:42
CrutchCricket
-
- Members
- 7 734 messages
Now Spider-Man 3 is a better ending than ME3. I would take Topher Grace Venom over the holokid any day. And the Sandman was better at "forced feel sad damn it!" than the stupid kid was.
#36
Guest_magnetite_*
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:44
Guest_magnetite_*
Guest_magnetite_*
-
- Guests
Most of the answers to explain the ending were in the game before the Extended Cut. It just wasn't spoon-fed to you. People may have had to dig through codex entries or actually pay attention to what was going on.
As for certain things, such as closure, plot holes, or the fact that their choices had no impact on the final 5 minutes of the game. That is a result of misreading Bioware's PR statements.
Choices
How your choices were supposed to work
So essentially what Mac is saying is that your choices were supposed to affect the game as a whole, not the last 5 minutes. People took it as the choices were supposed to affect the last 5 minutes of the game. When they didn't see that, they got upset.
There was also a loading screen in Mass Effect 2 that stated "Decisions in Mass Effect 1 & 2 will have dire consequences in Mass Effect 3".
Not the last 5 minutes of Mass Effect 3, just sometime throughout the course of the game.
Closure
States, the game won't end with beat Reapers, proceed with medal ceremony (closure). So as much as people demanded closure with the Extended Cut, they were told this would not happen. Also states that part of the game will involve gathering clues to solve a puzzle.
Actually there was closure. Just not the kind people wanted. I mean in 98% of the endings Shepard dies. Since they said that Mass Effect 3 was the end of Shepard's story, that was the closure. All those squadmates and such were just along for the ride.
I don't recall many TV shows and such that I spent 9 years watching show how every single character that I met along the way ended up. Just the main characters. A lot of people might say that someone like Tali is a main character, however, from a story point of view, the main character is Shepard. All these characters would be considered supporting roles, not lead roles (in the form of a movie).
If the ending doesn't make sense, even to this date, people didn't find all the clues to the puzzle (like the above video states). In the world of software testing, the issue with the ending is not a defect or problem with the game. It's a problem with the user playing the game. Yes, sometimes errors in software programs can be user related too.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that if people took their time to play the game, they would have known what was going on, and this whole Extended Cut wouldn't have to be made. I do recall somewhere in their PR statements that if you rush through the game, you won't get a decent ending. I'll have to find it. Or people who reacted to the ending the way they did, did so without having all the facts going in. Kind of makes it look like there was more to the ending than people realized. It went over their heads basically.
As for certain things, such as closure, plot holes, or the fact that their choices had no impact on the final 5 minutes of the game. That is a result of misreading Bioware's PR statements.
Choices
How your choices were supposed to work
So essentially what Mac is saying is that your choices were supposed to affect the game as a whole, not the last 5 minutes. People took it as the choices were supposed to affect the last 5 minutes of the game. When they didn't see that, they got upset.
There was also a loading screen in Mass Effect 2 that stated "Decisions in Mass Effect 1 & 2 will have dire consequences in Mass Effect 3".
Not the last 5 minutes of Mass Effect 3, just sometime throughout the course of the game.
Closure
States, the game won't end with beat Reapers, proceed with medal ceremony (closure). So as much as people demanded closure with the Extended Cut, they were told this would not happen. Also states that part of the game will involve gathering clues to solve a puzzle.
Actually there was closure. Just not the kind people wanted. I mean in 98% of the endings Shepard dies. Since they said that Mass Effect 3 was the end of Shepard's story, that was the closure. All those squadmates and such were just along for the ride.
I don't recall many TV shows and such that I spent 9 years watching show how every single character that I met along the way ended up. Just the main characters. A lot of people might say that someone like Tali is a main character, however, from a story point of view, the main character is Shepard. All these characters would be considered supporting roles, not lead roles (in the form of a movie).
If the ending doesn't make sense, even to this date, people didn't find all the clues to the puzzle (like the above video states). In the world of software testing, the issue with the ending is not a defect or problem with the game. It's a problem with the user playing the game. Yes, sometimes errors in software programs can be user related too.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that if people took their time to play the game, they would have known what was going on, and this whole Extended Cut wouldn't have to be made. I do recall somewhere in their PR statements that if you rush through the game, you won't get a decent ending. I'll have to find it. Or people who reacted to the ending the way they did, did so without having all the facts going in. Kind of makes it look like there was more to the ending than people realized. It went over their heads basically.
Modifié par magnetite, 16 mai 2013 - 10:58 .
#37
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:45
Iakus
-
- Members
- 30 285 messages
Well EC is a bad precedent in that it takes a bad ending and replaces it with the same bad ending but more detailed.
Fallout 3: Broken Steel, Much better precedent
Fallout 3: Broken Steel, Much better precedent
Modifié par iakus, 16 mai 2013 - 10:45 .
#38
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:45
dreamgazer
-
- Members
- 15 742 messages
iakus wrote...
Fallout 3: Much better precedent
One's free, the other's not.
#39
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:46
Megaton_Hope
-
- Members
- 1 441 messages
I'd sure discard it, if I were them. Remaking the game (like some people want them to do) would cost a lot of time, money and manpower, with no sure audience satisfaction at the end. Might as well make a completely different game at that point.dreamgazer wrote...
Nah, the people dealt with it, meeting expectations and leading them to discard the issue.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Modifié par Megaton_Hope, 16 mai 2013 - 10:46 .
#40
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:47
TheProtheans
-
- Members
- 1 622 messages
JamesFaith wrote...
TheProtheans wrote...
Optimystic_X wrote...
KingZayd wrote...
Yes it set a bad precedent:
It made a terrible ending more stupid.
And the people loved it!
QQ moar.
And people love Twilight, some people just love bad stuff.
And some people hate good stuff.
Subjective opinions isn't always good measure of objective quality.
Is that a thread suggesting a midquel is a good idea:sick:
#41
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:48
KingZayd
-
- Members
- 5 344 messages
dreamgazer wrote...
iakus wrote...
Fallout 3: Much better precedent
One's free, the other's not.
True, but at least one fixes the problem.
Fallout 3's ending was the second worst ending for a game I'd played before the DLC.
Modifié par KingZayd, 16 mai 2013 - 10:49 .
#42
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:50
The Night Mammoth
-
- Members
- 7 476 messages
I couldn't care less what the hacks who call themselves gaming journalists say, I'll leave it up to the developers. If that stupid buzzphrase 'artistic integrity' matters that much to them they'll tell the fans to stick it when they have a problem next time, or do whatever they want, it's their material. I've only seen completely meaningless and arbitrary reasons for why a piece of media can't be changed even if the fans are crying for it, whether it's called art or not, it's a meaningless phrase to me.
Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 16 mai 2013 - 10:58 .
#43
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:50
Iakus
-
- Members
- 30 285 messages
dreamgazer wrote...
iakus wrote...
Fallout 3: Much better precedent
One's free, the other's not.
Yup, you get what you pay for.
#44
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:50
Lenimph
-
- Members
- 4 561 messages
Extended cut wasn't made for the whiners... most of the whiners are still whining today.
So no I don't think its a bad precedent that the devs decided to fix what they knew needed to be fixed to their own specifications.
So no I don't think its a bad precedent that the devs decided to fix what they knew needed to be fixed to their own specifications.
#45
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:53
AresKeith
-
- Members
- 34 128 messages
The Night Mammoth wrote...
I couldn't care less what the hacks who call themselves gaming journalists say, I'll leave it up to the developers. If that stupid buzzphrase 'artistic integrity' matter that much to them they'll tell the fans to stick it when they have a problem next time.
But the Art
#46
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:53
dreamgazer
-
- Members
- 15 742 messages
iakus wrote...
dreamgazer wrote...
iakus wrote...
Fallout 3: Much better precedent
One's free, the other's not.
Yup, you get what you pay for.
And charging for a new ending to a heavily narrative-driven game, not a sandbox, would be a good thing?
#47
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:57
GreyLycanTrope
-
- Members
- 12 706 messages
I'm assuming you mean IT.magnetite wrote...
Most of the answers to explain the ending were in the game before the Extended Cut. It just wasn't spoon-fed to you. People may have had to dig through codex entries or actually pay attention to what was going on.
As for certain things, such as closure, plot holes, or the fact that their choices had no impact on the final 5 minutes of the game. That is a result of misreading Bioware's PR statements.
Choices
How your choices were supposed to work
So essentially what Mac is saying is that your choices were supposed to affect the game as a whole, not the last 5 minutes. People took it as the choices were supposed to affect the last 5 minutes of the game. When they didn't see that, they got upset.
There was also a loading screen in Mass Effect 2 that stated "Decisions in Mass Effect 1 & 2 will have dire consequences in Mass Effect 3".
Not the last 5 minutes of Mass Effect 3, just sometime throughout the course of the game.
Closure
States, the game won't end with beat Reapers, proceed with medal ceremony (closure). So as much as people demanded closure with the Extended Cut, they were told this would not happen. Also states that part of the game will involve gathering clues to solve a puzzle.
Actually there was closure. Just not the kind people wanted. I mean in 98% of the endings Shepard dies. Since they said that Mass Effect 3 was the end of Shepard's story, that was the closure. All those squadmates and such were just along for the ride.
I don't recall many TV shows and such that I spent 9 years watching show how every single character that I met along the way ended up. Just the main characters. A lot of people might say that someone like Tali is a main character, however, from a story point of view, the main character is Shepard. All these characters would be considered supporting roles, not lead roles (in the form of a movie).
If the ending doesn't make sense, even to this date, people didn't find all the clues to the puzzle (like the above video states). In the world of software testing, the issue with the ending is not a defect or problem with the game. It's a problem with the user playing the game. Yes, sometimes errors in software programs can be user related too.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that if people took their time to play the game, they would have known what was going on, and this whole Extended Cut wouldn't have to be made. I do recall somewhere in their PR statements that if you rush through the game, you won't get a decent ending. I'll have to find it.
#48
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:57
KingZayd
-
- Members
- 5 344 messages
dreamgazer wrote...
iakus wrote...
dreamgazer wrote...
iakus wrote...
Fallout 3: Much better precedent
One's free, the other's not.
Yup, you get what you pay for.
And charging for a new ending to a heavily narrative-driven game, not a sandbox, would be a good thing?
It's not a great precedent but in the case of Fallout 3 it's a bit different:
A character is terrible because he forces a situation where someone has to die for absolutely no reason other than "It's your destiny". Now, while that's incredibly unsatisying, it's not beyond belief that a character would be so stupid. It doesn't make the Fallout Universe stupid, just this character.
In ME3, the lore suffers.
#49
Guest_magnetite_*
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:59
Guest_magnetite_*
Guest_magnetite_*
-
- Guests
Greylycantrope wrote...
I'm assuming you mean IT.
I made no mention of those words. I simply said there was more to the ending than people realized and they essentially brought this whole situation upon themselves. Although most people would not like to take responsibility for their actions and just say it's an issue with the game or otherwise. If they had taken their time with the game, then they wouldn't have been as disappointed.
Modifié par magnetite, 16 mai 2013 - 11:02 .
#50
Posté 16 mai 2013 - 10:59
Iakus
-
- Members
- 30 285 messages
dreamgazer wrote...
And charging for a new ending to a heavily narrative-driven game, not a sandbox, would be a good thing?
No, a good thing would have been producing an acceptable ending the first time around, rather than ramming...this...down our throats.
Charging for a new ending would have been...less bad...than producing a free DLC that does little but say "You just don't get it. Let me explain louder and slower."
