482 réponses à ce sujet

[shingara]

I was thinking more along the lines of TIM manages to take on the concuosness of the reapers but is controlled by Harbringer and you kill TIM and the weapon fires, awards go around, the world is good but the militery forces of the milky way are decimated from the battles with the reapers.

[FlamingBoy]

I have often disagreed with the school of thought that "any press is good press", Simply put the pr damage from mass effect 3 is beyond comprehension.

[KaiserShep]

iakus wrote...

Fans:  We want new/different endings
Bioware:  No.  But let's compromise:  We won't change the endings
Fans:  ...yay?

Technically, the Extended Cut is a compromise. It doesn't change the general message of the ending, but it does change one of the original ending's biggest flaw: no follow-up on the choices given. To imply that BioWare doesn't listen to its fans because they don't rewrite the entire ending is disingenuous, and the demands for a completely different ending is not reasonable. If BioWare catered to everyone down to even the MEHEM crowd, it would essentially be a new product. Rewriting the ending to alter the premise and remove the catalyst AI encounter makes it a completely separate game from the copies they initially released. I can't recall any devs that have gone so far as to completely rewrite the ending of a game to appease fans after the product is on the shelf,, but I would be interested if you can name any. 

The EC may not have helped the game for you, but it salvaged it in a big way for others, such as myself. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 08 août 2013 - 01:09 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

KaiserShep wrote...

iakus wrote...

Fans:  We want new/different endings
Bioware:  No.  But let's compromise:  We won't change the endings
Fans:  ...yay?

Technically, the Extended Cut is a compromise. It doesn't change the general message of the ending, but it does change one of the original ending's biggest flaw: no follow-up on the choices given. To imply that BioWare doesn't listen to its fans because they don't rewrite the entire ending is disingenuous, and the demands for a completely different ending is not reasonable. If BioWare catered to everyone down to even the MEHEM crowd, it would essentially be a new product. Rewriting the ending to alter the premise and remove the catalyst AI encounter makes it a completely separate game from the copies they initially released. 

And that's a good thing. I think the entire concept behind the ending should have been scrapped. 

[KaiserShep]

Don't get me wrong. I'd love a rewrite to improve it, but I'd never really expect a game dev to do such a thing after release.

[Iakus]

KaiserShep wrote...

iakus wrote...

Fans:  We want new/different endings
Bioware:  No.  But let's compromise:  We won't change the endings
Fans:  ...yay?

Technically, the Extended Cut is a compromise. It doesn't change the general message of the ending, but it does change one of the original ending's biggest flaw: no follow-up on the choices given. To imply that BioWare doesn't listen to its fans because they don't rewrite the entire ending is disingenuous, and the demands for a completely different ending is not reasonable. If BioWare catered to everyone down to even the MEHEM crowd, it would essentially be a new product. Rewriting the ending to alter the premise and remove the catalyst AI encounter makes it a completely separate game from the copies they initially released. I can't recall any devs that have gone so far as to completely rewrite the ending of a game to appease fans after the product is on the shelf,, but I would be interested if you can name any. 

The EC may not have helped the game for you, but it salvaged it in a big way for others, such as myself. 

Fallout 3: Broken Steel.  I'd have gladly paid $10, or heck $15-$20 for a similar expansion dlc for ME3 

And yeah for me EC did not change the choices, the context of the choices. or the outcomes.  Nothing that I hated about the origninal endings was altered.  in fact, it further reinforced several things i despised.  Therefore it's good for nothing but raw materials for MEHEM.

[FlamingBoy]

KaiserShep wrote...

Don't get me wrong. I'd love a rewrite to improve it, but I'd never really expect a game dev to do such a thing after release.

No one actually expected it, however the fans took the game to the next level and demanded (and despite what people say, it was in their right) it from them. The whole basis of the argument was the game was not fit for purpose or was marketed.

Did they succeed? No.

But it was one hell of a step forward for consumer rights in video games, especially considering how much its eroded in the last 5 years.

[shingara]

KaiserShep wrote...

Don't get me wrong. I'd love a rewrite to improve it, but I'd never really expect a game dev to do such a thing after release.

 I doubt they would do it aswell but it would show some kahunaz on the side of Bioware if they did and bring closure to the hate wars that are currently burning on bsn.

[JamesFaith]

iakus wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

iakus wrote...

Fans:  We want new/different endings
Bioware:  No.  But let's compromise:  We won't change the endings
Fans:  ...yay?

Technically, the Extended Cut is a compromise. It doesn't change the general message of the ending, but it does change one of the original ending's biggest flaw: no follow-up on the choices given. To imply that BioWare doesn't listen to its fans because they don't rewrite the entire ending is disingenuous, and the demands for a completely different ending is not reasonable. If BioWare catered to everyone down to even the MEHEM crowd, it would essentially be a new product. Rewriting the ending to alter the premise and remove the catalyst AI encounter makes it a completely separate game from the copies they initially released. I can't recall any devs that have gone so far as to completely rewrite the ending of a game to appease fans after the product is on the shelf,, but I would be interested if you can name any. 

The EC may not have helped the game for you, but it salvaged it in a big way for others, such as myself. 

Fallout 3: Broken Steel.  I'd have gladly paid $10, or heck $15-$20 for a similar expansion dlc for ME3 

And yeah for me EC did not change the choices, the context of the choices. or the outcomes.  Nothing that I hated about the origninal endings was altered.  in fact, it further reinforced several things i despised.  Therefore it's good for nothing but raw materials for MEHEM.

You call one dialog change completely rewritting of ending? 

Demands about changing ME3 ending spoke about much bigger scale of changes.

[FlamingBoy]

Yeah I have to agree with faith, The changing of me3 demanded the game to make sense in the finale hence the changes would have been astronomical.

(however the "bigness" of the project does not get them out of it.)

[Iakus]

JamesFaith wrote...

You call one dialog change completely rewritting of ending? 

Demands about changing ME3 ending spoke about much bigger scale of changes.

The Lone Wanderer does not die in the Project Purity chamber.  You can even order a radiation-proof companion to do it if you so desire.That's a major change.

In addition, the game continues past that point, allowing for far more...closure... to the Brotherhood/Enclave conflict.  The end is no  longer the End.

[JamesFaith]

iakus wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

You call one dialog change completely rewritting of ending? 

Demands about changing ME3 ending spoke about much bigger scale of changes.

The Lone Wanderer does not die in the Project Purity chamber.  You can even order a radiation-proof companion to do it if you so desire.That's a major change.

In addition, the game continues past that point, allowing for far more...closure... to the Brotherhood/Enclave conflict.  The end is no  longer the End.

I don't speak about nature of change but about form of change - which is one alterned dialog.  

Rest of DLC was completely new content, so it's hardly qualify as change of ending of original Fallout.

[Leonardo the Magnificent]

Besides, Fallout 3 doesn't even qualify as a Fallout!

In my book, anyway. Bastardize the BoS, why don't you? Resurrect the Enclave, make your own goddamn mutants! Just so long as you've got the icons, who cares? Yech.

[David7204]

Fallout 3 was way, way better than New Vegas. And a lot better than the 15 minutes I've played of Fallout since I keep getting killed by scorpions because I'm level one.

[Leonardo the Magnificent]

What makes 3 better than New Vegas to you? Bugginess aside, of course; they have patches official and unofficial for both games.

[Iakus]

JamesFaith wrote...

I don't speak about nature of change but about form of change - which is one alterned dialog.  

Rest of DLC was completely new content, so it's hardly qualify as change of ending of original Fallout.

The change leads to the content.  You are changing the outcome.

If anything, this shows that only a "minor" change in the ending could have led to something many who hated the ending could have accepted (as Broken Steel proved to be a more satisfactory ending than the original)

[chemiclord]

iakus wrote...

The change leads to the content.  You are changing the outcome.

If anything, this shows that only a "minor" change in the ending could have led to something many who hated the ending could have accepted (as Broken Steel proved to be a more satisfactory ending than the original)

If the problem with ME3's ending could be handled with one minor addition, I think you would have seen that.

But it doesn't.  Sure, say you make Shepard clearly survive the Destroy ending... and that you can add content from there (i.e. making Citadeal a post-Destroy party), now you've pissed off everyone else because now Destroy is clearly the "right" ending.

What YOU wanted wasn't what everyone wanted.  To fix the ending's flaws would have required a complete redo, and that was NEVER going to happen.

[shingara]

chemiclord wrote...

iakus wrote...

The change leads to the content.  You are changing the outcome.

If anything, this shows that only a "minor" change in the ending could have led to something many who hated the ending could have accepted (as Broken Steel proved to be a more satisfactory ending than the original)

If the problem with ME3's ending could be handled with one minor addition, I think you would have seen that.

But it doesn't.  Sure, say you make Shepard clearly survive the Destroy ending... and that you can add content from there (i.e. making Citadeal a post-Destroy party), now you've pissed off everyone else because now Destroy is clearly the "right" ending.

What YOU wanted wasn't what everyone wanted.  To fix the ending's flaws would have required a complete redo, and that was NEVER going to happen.

 If they introduce a new ending, remove the old endings and choices and make it so it continues the actual mission you have been doing from 1-3 what exactly would be the problem ?

[Iakus]

chemiclord wrote...

If the problem with ME3's ending could be handled with one minor addition, I think you would have seen that.

But it doesn't.  Sure, say you make Shepard clearly survive the Destroy ending... and that you can add content from there (i.e. making Citadeal a post-Destroy party), now you've pissed off everyone else because now Destroy is clearly the "right" ending.

What YOU wanted wasn't what everyone wanted.  To fix the ending's flaws would have required a complete redo, and that was NEVER going to happen.

Broken Steel accounted for whether you activated Project Purity,or sabotaged it, and the content beyond that reflects that choice, as well as Sarah Lyon's survival.

So yeah, if ME3 had a DLC that made all three endings survivable, I think it could (potentially) have redeemed the ending by giving Shepard one last adventure in the galaxy he/she helped create.  Where the ramifications of Destroy, Control, and Synthesis start to become apparant, and we could see firsthand how rapidly these choices diverge.  Where we could actually see the changes start to take place, rather than get some hasitly made ending slides.

[Wayning_Star]

dead horse reinvention aside, OP, it would seem that having all players win their own way via their choice wasn't the "boss fight" everyone likes. Really, they (evile devs) expected a win win win win situation with the three, NO four choices menu. But, now each player proclaims the "official" version of a "win" relies on, well... their version of win. That new gray mare just ain't what she was expected to be, eh?

[Wayning_Star]

iakus wrote...

chemiclord wrote...

If the problem with ME3's ending could be handled with one minor addition, I think you would have seen that.

But it doesn't.  Sure, say you make Shepard clearly survive the Destroy ending... and that you can add content from there (i.e. making Citadeal a post-Destroy party), now you've pissed off everyone else because now Destroy is clearly the "right" ending.

What YOU wanted wasn't what everyone wanted.  To fix the ending's flaws would have required a complete redo, and that was NEVER going to happen.

Broken Steel accounted for whether you activated Project Purity,or sabotaged it, and the content beyond that reflects that choice, as well as Sarah Lyon's survival.

So yeah, if ME3 had a DLC that made all three endings survivable, I think it could (potentially) have redeemed the ending by giving Shepard one last adventure in the galaxy he/she helped create.  Where the ramifications of Destroy, Control, and Synthesis start to become apparant, and we could see firsthand how rapidly these choices diverge.  Where we could actually see the changes start to take place, rather than get some hasitly made ending slides.

biggest problem I can see with ME3 DLC coverage..




win  
/win/






Verb




Be successful or victorious in (a contest or conflict).




Noun




A successful result in a contest, conflict, bet, or other endeavor; a victory.




Synonyms




verb.  
gain - get - obtain - conquer - acquire - take - overcome



noun.  
victory - triumph - winning - success - conquestMore info - Dictionary.com - Answers.com - Merriam-Webster - The Free Dictionary

[shingara]

Wayning_Star wrote...

dead horse reinvention aside, OP, it would seem that having all players win their own way via their choice wasn't the "boss fight" everyone likes. Really, they (evile devs) expected a win win win win situation with the three, NO four choices menu. But, now each player proclaims the "official" version of a "win" relies on, well... their version of win. That new gray mare just ain't what she was expected to be, eh?

 Exactly, well put. And there are larger ramifications to this. To create a sequel of any substance they are going to have to choose one specific ending as canon that is gonna peev of the other 2 camps.

[JamesFaith]

iakus wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

I don't speak about nature of change but about form of change - which is one alterned dialog.  

Rest of DLC was completely new content, so it's hardly qualify as change of ending of original Fallout.

The change leads to the content.  You are changing the outcome.

If anything, this shows that only a "minor" change in the ending could have led to something many who hated the ending could have accepted (as Broken Steel proved to be a more satisfactory ending than the original)

So which "minor" change would altered Catalyst nature? Or functions of Crucible? Or Priority: Earth?

Because changing of these things was part of demands of BSN.

Not everyone need happy-ending like you, there were whole bunch of demands.  

[Wayning_Star]

shingara wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

dead horse reinvention aside, OP, it would seem that having all players win their own way via their choice wasn't the "boss fight" everyone likes. Really, they (evile devs) expected a win win win win situation with the three, NO four choices menu. But, now each player proclaims the "official" version of a "win" relies on, well... their version of win. That new gray mare just ain't what she was expected to be, eh?

 Exactly, well put. And there are larger ramifications to this. To create a sequel of any substance they are going to have to choose one specific ending as canon that is gonna peev of the other 2 camps.

actually, the star gazer scene depicts the ending that is official, and the next series of ME will be long removed from current events. Time. I'm thinking there'll be some 'reflection' on that past, but only remotely. The issue will be more about what to do and how to do it than being about 'who' we're to do this and that with.  The dreaded enemy to vanquish is another question to be answered. It won't be anyone we know now tho, I'd guess.