149 réponses à ce sujet

[Sanunes]

iakus wrote...

Sanunes wrote...
The Extended Cut is the compensation, they didn't have to do that at all and yes people still don't like it, but it was BioWare's attempt at a compromise.

I really don't see a whole lot of compromise.  Far more "my way or the highway"

I'd go so far as to suggest CItadel was closer to a compromise than EC.  THough not by much.

The problem is that is like Plantiff mentioned there is a lot of subjective "why I hate the ending" there were posts with people thanking BioWare for the Extended Cut because it fixed the problems they had with the ending.  They went back and looked at the complaints and took the most common ones that they would have been able to fix and changed that.

[Sanunes]

Ajensis wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...
Opinion being subjective is not the same as opinion being invalid. But no opinion should be regarded as gospel.

But if you ask for concrete "proof" (in whatever form that would come in) before something can be deemed of a certain quality, opinions are as good as invalid anyway. The Room might be as good a movie as American Beauty, because general opinions are just subjective and not proof of what quality the two movies possess.
I agree about no opinions being considered gospel, though

I have problems with ME3's ending (not the same as many other people have, because I came to the game late and only saw the extended cut ending), but to claim that ME3 broke some kind of law based on that, or demand that the developers do extra work to satisfy me, or be fired, or whatever, is stupid, and exactly the sort of childish, grossly entitled behaviour that makes people think the gaming community is populated entirely by basement-dwelling, cheetos-gorging man-children.

I'm not trying to say that ME3's ending broke any kind of law (except a metaphorical one, perhaps). I just think it's reasonable to conclude that based on the fan reaction and the many analyses highlighting various flaws (and the lack of analyses doing the opposite), the ending of this game wasn't good.
And I don't support the people who demanded a better ending. I'm not sure why you bring that up. But I agree that we cannot demand anything - it's the sole reason I never joined the Retake movement, for instance -, and that personal threats (like being fired or worse) are out of line and wrong. But that's kind of irrelevant here.

You might not be saying the ME3 broke the law, but there are some posts in this thread that make me think that way, including the title of the thread.  Right now from the limited amount of knowledge I have with the law I don't think there is anything besides an individual not buying an EA/BioWare product that can or will be done to BioWare because of the issues they see with the game, for a lot of it is still subjective and will vary from one person to the next.

[DarthLaxian]

for a story fix DLC look up Fallout 3: Broken Steel

(no more just being dead at the end of the game, which was IMHO bad - and many others agreed on that!)

greetings LAX
ps: how is telling us "no A, B or C ending" subjective? (it is A, B or C - even with extended cut DLC <_<

Modifié par DarthLaxian, 26 juillet 2013 - 01:26 .

[Plaintiff]

Ajensis wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...
Opinion being subjective is not the same as opinion being invalid. But no opinion should be regarded as gospel.

But if you ask for concrete "proof" (in whatever form that would come in) before something can be deemed of a certain quality, opinions are as good as invalid anyway. The Room might be as good a movie as American Beauty, because general opinions are just subjective and not proof of what quality the two movies possess.
I agree about no opinions being considered gospel, though

I have problems with ME3's ending (not the same as many other people have, because I came to the game late and only saw the extended cut ending), but to claim that ME3 broke some kind of law based on that, or demand that the developers do extra work to satisfy me, or be fired, or whatever, is stupid, and exactly the sort of childish, grossly entitled behaviour that makes people think the gaming community is populated entirely by basement-dwelling, cheetos-gorging man-children.

I'm not trying to say that ME3's ending broke any kind of law (except a metaphorical one, perhaps). I just think it's reasonable to conclude that based on the fan reaction and the many analyses highlighting various flaws (and the lack of analyses doing the opposite), the ending of this game wasn't good.
And I don't support the people who demanded a better ending. I'm not sure why you bring that up. But I agree that we cannot demand anything - it's the sole reason I never joined the Retake movement, for instance -, and that personal threats (like being fired or worse) are out of line and wrong. But that's kind of irrelevant here.

Well fraudulent advertising is a crime in most of Western Civilization, Bioware being held responsible for "misleading marketing" would be tantamount to saying they'd committed fraud; that theyd broken the law.

[Sanunes]

DarthLaxian wrote...

for a story fix DLC look up Fallout 3: Broken Steel

(no more just being dead at the end of the game, which was IMHO bad - and many others agreed on that!)

greetings LAX
ps: how is telling us "no A, B or C ending" subjective? (it is A, B or C - even with extended cut DLC <_<

Do you have the full quote besides "no A, B, or C ending" for I think there is more to what he is saying, but this forum seems to trim away what they don't want to hear and I don't want to search the internet trying to find the full quote.

[RiouHotaru]

iakus wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

ShepnTali wrote...

"huge consequences"

This may be true if you played no multiplayer with the initial release. How tight were the war asset numbers to getting a 'best' ending?

And this is how they'd weasel out of it.

Pretty much.  Goes for nearly every pre-release quote, too: they can all be interpreted away as being "accurate", even the A,B,C endings and the consequences storytelling vid. 

And even if it's technically accurate, it's still deliberately misleading.

Does your dog bite?

It's not deliberately misleading.  The reality not matching player-created expectations isn't any indication of malicious intent.

This is why, while I concede that there is blame on both sides that is' 70/30 or perhaps 80/20 as far as blame assignment between fans and devs, respectively.  Yes, the devs make vague, bland statements that can be interpreted in a number of ways.  But that's company policy.  You don't give away more information than is absolutely necessary, and if you can help it, don't give away anything at all.

A dev actually said on the forums that their usual stance is to not say anything because fans have a tendency for overkill.  Over-interpretation, over-analysis, over-deconstruction.  To the point that sometimes a fan interpretation of a statement is 2 or more leagues away from what was originally said.

The statement about the Rachni was a huge consequence.  It's a fairly heft chunk of points in the EMS.  It's entirely possible to skip that mission.  And even if you do the mission, making a "wrong" (relatively speaking) choice can not only result in no benefit, but an additional loss of points.  And those EMS points are big because they determine the type and quality of the ending you earn.

That's a huge consequence.

But it's not what players thought "huge consequence" meant.

Same with the A, B, C.  Your choices do a fairly big determination on your ending.  In ME1 and 2, regardless of whatever choices you made, the final decision was static (I don't count what happens after the final decision, because the argument is with regards to the decision itself).  No matter how much of the game I completed, no matter whether I was Paragon or Renegade, I always had the option to Save/Kill the Council, and Keep/Destroy the Collector Base.

Mass Effect 3 changes that entirely.  My decisions now not only determine the ending type, but the quality of said ending, and the priority in which those versions are made available.  Run through ME3 just doing story missions?  You're locked into ONE ending.  Not three.  ONE.  You have to work to improve the number of, and quality, of the endings.

That's not A, B, C.  That's not static choice.  It's not Deus Ex where I always have the same options regardless of what I do.

While some fault could be laid on the devs for making vague remarks, the onus is primarily on the fans for the manner in which they chose to interpret said statements.

[tanisha__unknown]

Sanunes wrote...

Jinx1720 wrote...

@Ninja Stan

around 70.000 can be confirmed. That's roughly the amount of people who voted that the ending sucked in a poll here on forums and (admmitedly I am not a member) I was given to understand that there is a facebook group which has a similar title and roughly the same amount of members. The rest is estimates.

The problem I have with those polls is nothing stopped people from signing up multiple times to keep voting, to make a false claim.

True, it can be done, but how many are going to do that? In order to bash some video game? There isn't even money involved, it seems like an awful lot of work to do.

As far as fake advertisement go: I actually do see a huge discrepancy between what was promised before and what the game actually was and a lot of statements turned out to b wrong. So let's accept the premise that BW/EA are guilty of false advertisement for the moment. Then you usually ask about repercussions. What would be apprpriate in this case?

Some kind of compensation who felt betrayed and hurt by the endings? I was deeply disappointed by the original endings, which initially caused me a a-great-series-flushed-down-the-toilet-within-10-minutes-feeling, and I think that would be exaggerated. One might argue that dissatisfied customers would be eligible for a refund in this case, as far as I know, at least Amazon already proved to be very generous in this respect and actually took the game back. To my knowledge, this has been a generosity of the trader, as far as I know, no court ever stated that customers who were dissatisfied with the ending actually were entitled to a refund.

The Extended Cut is the compensation, they didn't have to do that at all and yes people still don't like it, but it was BioWare's attempt at a compromise.

I can agree that EC was an attempt by BW to satisfy the fans who had issues with the ending, still as you pointed out it was not something they were obliged to do because they were found guilty of false advertising. And I  disagree that people didn't like it. Some people didn't like it, that's for sure. I guess a lot of fans still admit it is an improvement on the original ending (admittedly, that is not hard) . Reviews on Amazon became much more positive since its release, which I take as evidence that it is generally well received.

[Iakus]

RiouHotaru wrote...

The statement about the Rachni was a huge consequence.  It's a fairly heft chunk of points in the EMS.  It's entirely possible to skip that mission.  And even if you do the mission, making a "wrong" (relatively speaking) choice can not only result in no benefit, but an additional loss of points.  And those EMS points are big because they determine the type and quality of the ending you earn.

That's a huge consequence.

But it's not what players thought "huge consequence" meant.

And the devlopers made these comments knowing what kind of expectation that would create.  The hype was building for an entire year, and they conciously fed it with, while not outright lies, then definitely misleading statements.

And when people called them on it, what response was there but "That's not my dog"

[RiouHotaru]

iakus wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

The statement about the Rachni was a huge consequence.  It's a fairly heft chunk of points in the EMS.  It's entirely possible to skip that mission.  And even if you do the mission, making a "wrong" (relatively speaking) choice can not only result in no benefit, but an additional loss of points.  And those EMS points are big because they determine the type and quality of the ending you earn.

That's a huge consequence.

But it's not what players thought "huge consequence" meant.

And the devlopers made these comments knowing what kind of expectation that would create.  The hype was building for an entire year, and they conciously fed it with, while not outright lies, then definitely misleading statements.

And when people called them on it, what response was there but "That's not my dog"

Did they know?  You're making the assumption the developers knew what the fans were doing.  And even if they did, again, company policy dictates they aren't allowed to say anything that would be potential spoilers.

The fans fed their own hype and worked themselves up into a frenzy.  That's not Bioware's fault.  You can't hold them accountable for the expectations of fans, nor can you hold them accountable for not dispelling the hype because they aren't allowed to divulge that information.

The only accountability on the part of the devs is the the statement itself.  Interpretation and digestion of that statement is entirely on the fanbase and the consumers.

[Fixers0]

I don't believe EMS is an accurate way to measure how meaninfull a consquence is, infact it's actually quite the opposite.

[Seboist]

Fixers0 wrote...

I don't believe EMS is an accurate way to measure how meaninfull a consquence is, infact it's actually quite the opposite.

Yeah, it's just an arbitary number where there's no real difference between a tank division, a dreadnought or a random NPC. It also becomes completely pointless when you have all the optimal ending conditions met.

[Iakus]

RiouHotaru wrote...
Did they know?  You're making the assumption the developers knew what the fans were doing.  And even if they did, again, company policy dictates they aren't allowed to say anything that would be potential spoilers.

The fans fed their own hype and worked themselves up into a frenzy.  That's not Bioware's fault.  You can't hold them accountable for the expectations of fans, nor can you hold them accountable for not dispelling the hype because they aren't allowed to divulge that information.

The only accountability on the part of the devs is the the statement itself.  Interpretation and digestion of that statement is entirely on the fanbase and the consumers.

I suggest going back and looking at the marketing leading up to ME3, the tweets, the interviews, the conventions, and then get back to me.

People might have been hyped, but it was Bioware doing the feeding.  They were throwing raw meat into the lion cage.  And boy did it come back to bite them

[Iakus]

Fixers0 wrote...

I don't believe EMS is an accurate way to measure how meaninfull a consquence is, infact it's actually quite the opposite.

It made them as meangingful as a cup of water poured into a river.

[Seboist]

iakus wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...
Did they know?  You're making the assumption the developers knew what the fans were doing.  And even if they did, again, company policy dictates they aren't allowed to say anything that would be potential spoilers.

The fans fed their own hype and worked themselves up into a frenzy.  That's not Bioware's fault.  You can't hold them accountable for the expectations of fans, nor can you hold them accountable for not dispelling the hype because they aren't allowed to divulge that information.

The only accountability on the part of the devs is the the statement itself.  Interpretation and digestion of that statement is entirely on the fanbase and the consumers.

I suggest going back and looking at the marketing leading up to ME3, the tweets, the interviews, the conventions, and then get back to me.

People might have been hyped, but it was Bioware doing the feeding.  They were throwing raw meat into the lion cage.  And boy did it come back to bite them

I love how Walters claimed the collector base decision would have a big impact  in ME3.

[JamesFaith]

Fixers0 wrote...

I don't believe EMS is an accurate way to measure how meaninfull a consquence is, infact it's actually quite the opposite.

Well, maybe for you and other people, but if author of quote trully believed in it, then his quote isnť lie in that case.

And for someone, who see EMS system as good, is 200 points one of biggest EMS change in game and by this logic Rachni decision has huge consequences.

[RiouHotaru]

Seboist wrote...

iakus wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...
Did they know?  You're making the assumption the developers knew what the fans were doing.  And even if they did, again, company policy dictates they aren't allowed to say anything that would be potential spoilers.

The fans fed their own hype and worked themselves up into a frenzy.  That's not Bioware's fault.  You can't hold them accountable for the expectations of fans, nor can you hold them accountable for not dispelling the hype because they aren't allowed to divulge that information.

The only accountability on the part of the devs is the the statement itself.  Interpretation and digestion of that statement is entirely on the fanbase and the consumers.

I suggest going back and looking at the marketing leading up to ME3, the tweets, the interviews, the conventions, and then get back to me.

People might have been hyped, but it was Bioware doing the feeding.  They were throwing raw meat into the lion cage.  And boy did it come back to bite them

I love how Walters claimed the collector base decision would have a big impact  in ME3.

It did though.  Whether you keep it or destroy determines the major priority order of the endings you can earn.  That IS a significant impact.

[Seboist]

JamesFaith wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

I don't believe EMS is an accurate way to measure how meaninfull a consquence is, infact it's actually quite the opposite.

Well, maybe for you and other people, but if author of quote trully believed in it, then his quote isnť lie in that case.

And for someone, who see EMS system as good, is 200 points one of biggest EMS change in game and by this logic Rachni decision has huge consequences.

Yeah, a huge consequence. I liked how the Reapers pulled another one out of their ass despite my killing the Queen in 1.

[RiouHotaru]

iakus wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...
Did they know?  You're making the assumption the developers knew what the fans were doing.  And even if they did, again, company policy dictates they aren't allowed to say anything that would be potential spoilers.

The fans fed their own hype and worked themselves up into a frenzy.  That's not Bioware's fault.  You can't hold them accountable for the expectations of fans, nor can you hold them accountable for not dispelling the hype because they aren't allowed to divulge that information.

The only accountability on the part of the devs is the the statement itself.  Interpretation and digestion of that statement is entirely on the fanbase and the consumers.

I suggest going back and looking at the marketing leading up to ME3, the tweets, the interviews, the conventions, and then get back to me.

People might have been hyped, but it was Bioware doing the feeding.  They were throwing raw meat into the lion cage.  And boy did it come back to bite them

I have and I was a part of the marketing.  They were feeding hype to get the game, and IMO, the game was a solid purchase, worthy of every cent I put down for it.  But the marketing didn't hype up the dev comments, which are the major source of vitrol from the fans.  No trailers or videos made any reference to things like the endings or the Rachni.

[RiouHotaru]

Seboist wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

I don't believe EMS is an accurate way to measure how meaninfull a consquence is, infact it's actually quite the opposite.

Well, maybe for you and other people, but if author of quote trully believed in it, then his quote isnť lie in that case.

And for someone, who see EMS system as good, is 200 points one of biggest EMS change in game and by this logic Rachni decision has huge consequences.

Yeah, a huge consequence. I liked how the Reapers pulled another one out of their ass despite my killing the Queen in 1.

And here we have the prime example of where player-built expectation didn't meet reality.

[AresKeith]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Seboist wrote...

iakus wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...
Did they know?  You're making the assumption the developers knew what the fans were doing.  And even if they did, again, company policy dictates they aren't allowed to say anything that would be potential spoilers.

The fans fed their own hype and worked themselves up into a frenzy.  That's not Bioware's fault.  You can't hold them accountable for the expectations of fans, nor can you hold them accountable for not dispelling the hype because they aren't allowed to divulge that information.

The only accountability on the part of the devs is the the statement itself.  Interpretation and digestion of that statement is entirely on the fanbase and the consumers.

I suggest going back and looking at the marketing leading up to ME3, the tweets, the interviews, the conventions, and then get back to me.

People might have been hyped, but it was Bioware doing the feeding.  They were throwing raw meat into the lion cage.  And boy did it come back to bite them

I love how Walters claimed the collector base decision would have a big impact  in ME3.

It did though.  Whether you keep it or destroy determines the major priority order of the endings you can earn.  That IS a significant impact.

No it didn't

[Seboist]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Seboist wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

I don't believe EMS is an accurate way to measure how meaninfull a consquence is, infact it's actually quite the opposite.

Well, maybe for you and other people, but if author of quote trully believed in it, then his quote isnť lie in that case.

And for someone, who see EMS system as good, is 200 points one of biggest EMS change in game and by this logic Rachni decision has huge consequences.

Yeah, a huge consequence. I liked how the Reapers pulled another one out of their ass despite my killing the Queen in 1.

And here we have the prime example of where player-built expectation didn't meet reality.

Whatever keeps you asleep at night pumpkin but in the real world BW once again disregarded player choice.

[Iakus]

RiouHotaru wrote...

It did though.  Whether you keep it or destroy determines the major priority order of the endings you can earn.  That IS a significant impact.

No it isn't.  You have to bury the needle and deliberately sabotage yourself to get that low an EMS.

That impact is about as relevant as FailShep dying in the Suicide Mission.  Easter eggs should not count as "significant impact"

[Iakus]

RiouHotaru wrote...

I have and I was a part of the marketing.  They were feeding hype to get the game, and IMO, the game was a solid purchase, worthy of every cent I put down for it.  But the marketing didn't hype up the dev comments, which are the major source of vitrol from the fans.  No trailers or videos made any reference to things like the endings or the Rachni.

But developer and writer commentsand interviews did.  And if they seriously thought reducing them to a side mission and an arbitrary number would be considered a "significant impact" then they have truly lost touch with their audience.

Edit:  Let me explain further.

In the end, it doesn't matter if you have the rachni with you or not. No more than it matters what the rest of your forces are composed of.  All that matters is the all-important EMS.  And those War Asset numbers can come from anywhere:  the vanilla game, DLC, promoted characters from multiplayer.  increased readiness in multiplayer.  Side missions, fetch quests.  It doesn't matter. 

The composition of your troops and alliances doesn't change one word of dialogue, doesn't alter the outcome of a single decision, doesn't change the variables at all.  Only the number matters.  

The player who saved the rachni and the player who killed the rachni but otherwise have identical EMS get the exact same ending.  Nothing changes

Modifié par iakus, 26 juillet 2013 - 11:37 .

[Iakus]

RiouHotaru wrote...
And here we have the prime example of where player-built expectation didn't meet reality.

An example of where common sense didn't meet reality, imo

[JamesFaith]

Seboist wrote...

Whatever keeps you asleep at night pumpkin but in the real world BW once again disregarded player choice.

No, they didn't disregard player choice. They just implement consequences of this choice in way you and other fans don't like. Disregarding choice would mean original Rachni queen for everyone, no two different version based on previous decision.

Little difference here.