163 réponses à ce sujet

[SwobyJ]

If this is true and I've understood it right - and I'm not even sure I have understood it right because it seems too ridiculous - this is a really, very stupid way to go about things. Is he actually saying the plan was to release a shoddy incomplete ending, then a string of DLC, then an actual proper ending months down the line? And the idea was that fans would be fine with the shoddy ending and be happy to keep buying DLC and doing playthroughs and then be pleasantly surprised to have been blessed with an actual ending? Which no doubt wouldn't have been free of charge.

 

Haha, oh dear. Still, I'm sceptical about this.

 

Yes thats my understanding too, it would explain a lot of the wierd things, but I still think it would have been a really awful move on their part

 

Bingo.

 

Is is possible? Yes. Its what many speculated on for months anyway.

 

Is it a good thing to do? Overall, still no. At the very least if the completed DLC ending was a paid content instead of free like EC.

 

I still have my thoughts about the next game being the (optionally) true ending for Shepard anyway. The real Shepard. The Shepard. lol

[SwobyJ]

It took three years to make Mass Effect 2 and two years to make Mass Effect 3. The game was definitely rushed. Remember how it was delayed once? You don't develop a final game in the trilogy with all those possible choices in less time than the second installment of the trilogy.

 

It really seems that 3 years is the baseline sweet spot for developing any game with significant RPG elements (and up to 4 years for a focused RPG genre title).

 

Companies can streamline the process all they want to get it to 2 years, but they're really taking a gamble with it being a relatively shoddy product that damages their reputation.

[SwobyJ]

The amount of toxicity, bile, hatred and vile behaviour around games at the moment is absolutely depressing.

It seems to be originating from a very small, but vocal, group of people and is, to me, absolutely staggeringly unacceptable in its message and actions.

The vitriol aimed at EA and Bioware is a minor example of this, confined to angry rants (I am not aware of anyone threatening to shoot any bioware developers as of yet) but it makes me, at the age of nearly 35 and hopefully having a future gamer to bring up in March, very saddened by the future if it carries on like this.

Especially if I have a daughter.

 

I don't care much about angry rants and rude comments in themselves. Often its just a bad way of expressing that the person cares, when it comes down to it.

 

Moderating them is good to do, I support that. Toxicity needs to be contained and deleted when necessary. Treat it especially serious if threats are uttered. I just always hope that games companies stay aware that even in many of the most vitriolic spewings, there can be nuggets of pure gold information that could end up saving their games. Its a big world that works in strange ways - even the haters can inadvertently help you.

[capn233]

This story actually sounds like wishful thinking or fan fiction.

 

I do not believe that they intended to have a halfway finished ending that would be revamped by purchasing DLC like Omega.  Sure Omega may have been in the main game at one time, and getting moved to DLC makes sense if they are behind schedule, but this doesn't lend any credence to the idea that DLC was going to do much in the way of altering the endings.

 

Consider Leviathan.  Technically it alters the ending, or more correctly expands on it.  We also ended up getting Extended Cut to expand on the same old thing.  I don't believe that if there wasn't an ending controversy that the effort put into Extended Cut or other DLC would have ended up allowing some other paid DLC that changes the ending to some grand spectacle that everyone was expecting.

 

Also he implies that there were many hints throughout the game that the ending that shipped with the game was "incomplete," and that BW assumed their fan base was intelligent enough to realize it wasn't "the real ending," and would patiently await the DLC that altered the ending.  I disagree with his purported examples, which would seem to imply I am not a "high brow fan."

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Seriously, I've looked at this plot line for ME3 that Mac used, and considering what was going on in the galaxy, the lore involved people having been indoctrinated by reaper artifacts, and reaper technology, the latter being the most serious evolution of the anti-technology and "find your own path" theme of the story, there was only one way to end it. The reapers could not be defeated conventionally. There would be a massive clean up effort afterward, and all those dead reapers would be able to indoctrinate the clean up crews. Even dead reapers could indoctrinate - look at the Leviathan of Dis, a one billion year old dead reaper - it indoctrinated the entire Batarian military.

 

The Crucible was the only way they could end it. So we were stuck with this unless they fundamentally changed the entire plot and modified the lore.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I'm pretty sure the bulk of the problems with the ending come down to writing.

 

I can imagine that implementation would be severely impacted by scheduling. But short of re-writing the ending at the last minute (and I have the impression that was not the case) then the ending we received was an issue of poor writing and decision-making. The delays/backlash my have exacerbated certain elements of the game's development, but it's a big stretch to suggest the ending was a result of them.

[BigglesFlysAgain]

I'm sure it would not have been radicaly different, but perhaps the form and quality it took would been a bit different

[AlanC9]

So basically this is about wild speculation from a guy who doesn't actually know anything?

[SwobyJ]

So basically this is about wild speculation from a guy who doesn't actually know anything?

 

Possibly. He could be anything from someone totally making stuff up, to someone who worked for Bioware and has some inside info. We can't know, so this files under 'rumor'.

[BigglesFlysAgain]

He remained anon to the viewers but known to the streamers,  I trust the guys who brought him on enough that I'm sure he is  part of the AAA game indsustry as he says. He says he is a concept artist that does freelance work, and admittedly the story does in places sound like its heard from friend of  a friend, but given I don't think anyone in the industry has ever broken ranks about what happened with me3 its certainly a lot better than nothing. Says he has never worked at bioware or EA

 

Also we can't see if he's a maverick or holds common opinions of the industry but its more interesting than the usual spoon fed pr you hear.

 

 

Ps does anyone know how to make firefox spellchecker work here?

[wolfhowwl]

Didn't Patrick Weekes break ranks?

Seems like the ending was the result of running out of time and two people cobbling something together.

[SwobyJ]

Didn't Patrick Weekes break ranks?

Seems like the ending was the result of running out of time and two people cobbling something together.

 

Yeah, but the question here (as for the supposed info in this thread) is whether that cobbling together was for the sake of putting in something else/more down the line.

[JasonShepard]

Wait - so the fan backlash stopped a paid-for DLC ending? And instead we got a free DLC ending? Cool.

 

Of course, given that the guy isn't a Bioware insider, and is just speculating/passing on a Chinese Whisper, I doubt that's what happened. In any case, it doesn't damage the respect that I have for Bioware for making the EC.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Oh, so this was kind of the thing behind "Puzzle Theory" that was going around a couple years ago. We buy all the DLC, then we get the real ending with the last one.

[wolfhowwl]

Even by EA's standards that would be scummy.

[themikefest]

Oh, so this was kind of the thing behind "Puzzle Theory" that was going around a couple years ago. We buy all the DLC, then we get the real ending with the last one.

I remember that thread

http://forum.bioware...l-refuse/page-1

[wolfhowwl]

Yeah, but the question here (as for the supposed info in this thread) is whether that cobbling together was for the sake of putting in something else/more down the line.

 

I doubt it. The claims of an "industry insider" that didn't even work at the involved company isn't particularly convincing especially when other stuff we know points to a simpler explanation (BioWare just screwed up).

 

I'm sure they had plans for DLC, there's an obvious hook for Omega, but I don't think it was much different than with ME2 where they cranked the game out in two years and then fleshed it out with content sold piecemeal.

[ImaginaryMatter]

So basically this is about wild speculation from a guy who doesn't actually know anything?

 

Isn't that what we on the BSN do, though?

[chris2365]

It took three years to make Mass Effect 2 and two years to make Mass Effect 3. The game was definitely rushed. Remember how it was delayed once? You don't develop a final game in the trilogy with all those possible choices in less time than the second installment of the trilogy.

 

Unfortunately, this isn't actually the case. ME1 released in Nov. 2007, ME2 January 2010. That's 26 months. ME3 came out March 2012. So between ME2 and ME3 there was 27 months. I'm in the belief that ME3 needed a bit more time in the oven (still an awesome game though), but when you consider the amount of changes and improvements made in ME2 compared to ME1 in terms of tech, gameplay, etc., it shows that the timeframe they were given to work with was perfectly fine. It's the design and narrative decisions that had some scratching their heads.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Unfortunately, this isn't actually the case. ME1 released in Nov. 2007, ME2 January 2010. That's 26 months. ME3 came out March 2012. So between ME2 and ME3 there was 27 months. I'm in the belief that ME3 needed a bit more time in the oven (still an awesome game though), but when you consider the amount of changes and improvements made in ME2 compared to ME1 in terms of tech, gameplay, etc., it shows that the timeframe they were given to work with was perfectly fine. It's the design and narrative decisions that had some scratching their heads.

 

And the art direction. Plus, character animations -- although to be fair they haven't been particularly top notch in any of the games, they're just more uncanny and noticeable in ME3 due to the higher resolution.

[cap and gown]

I don't believe this guy knows what he is talking about. But, for the sake of argument, let's say he's right, that the uproar over the ending killed plans for a "better" ending later. If that were the case then I say the gaming community did EA, BW and the entire gaming industry a service by getting up in their grill and saying this kind of thing is not acceptable. You don't sell schlock, then expect people to pay for something down the road because the original product was schlock. The very idea is ludicrous. Its such a poor business model that no one could imagine that would fly.

[chris2365]

I don't believe this guy knows what he is talking about. But, for the sake of argument, let's say he's right, that the uproar over the ending killed plans for a "better" ending later. If that were the case then I say the gaming community did EA, BW and the entire gaming industry a service by getting up in their grill and saying this kind of thing is not acceptable. You don't sell schlock, then expect people to pay for something down the road because the original product was schlock. The very idea is ludicrous. Its such a poor business model that no one could imagine that would fly.

 

Not to mention it's incredibly dumb to try this sort of thing on the premiere RPG franchise of your publishing label, especially for the end of a trilogy. Even EA wouldn't be that desperate for money to realize how badly it could backfire, and how it would never be worth the risk.

 

Well, at least if it ever was done intentionally that way, the lesson has been learned.