I just want to Bioware to deliver quality writing/presentation in a mature way,meaning,if a character is a prostitute or drug addict/dealer or psychotic bounty hunter,then the characters/situations are portrayed in an honest,believable,mature way.I just feel that if Bioware adopts the politically correct/family friendly approach,you just end up with weak content with no substance,it's breaks immersion.
If the story requires you to "go there",then just go there.
I just want to Bioware to deliver quality writing/presentation in a mature way,meaning,if a character is a prostitute or drug addict/dealer or psychotic bounty hunter,then the characters/situations are portrayed in an honest,believable,mature way.I just feel that if Bioware adopts the politically correct/family friendly approach,you just end up with weak content with no substance,it's breaks immersion.
If the story requires you to "go there",then just go there.
I agree, though I worry more about them pushing an edge for its own sake rather than for what it adds to anything.
Saying If people don't like it they have to option to buy something else is fundamentally different to demanding BioWare tone down their content to make it less "objectionable".
On one side it's "don't buy the game if you don't like the content BioWare are putting into it".
On the other it's demanding BioWare tone down their content first and then telling those alienated fans that they should go buy something else.
Personally I think Mass Effect is pretty tame in the whole sex and gore department - and that's actually the problem. The games are so borderline that people who object to T&A or gibbage in games will still buy Mass Effect whereas they'd not touch Grand Theft Auto (for instance) so it's not an issue.
I'd be happy for BioWare to go a lot darker with much deeper consequences for your actions, more explicit with the portrayals of violence and sex ...
And you've already been told repeatedly by the devs and nearly everyone else the difficulties of implementing such and that the onus is on you to prove the financial viability of such features.
heck no! that's what plants versus zombies:grass effect is for.
I don't recall anyone making any such demands. There was a thread requesting a toggle, though. Polite request =/= demand.
I think you have that backwards. People who have requested the toggle - or would like less of certain kinds of content - are the ones constantly being told to buy something else. IOW, go away, we don't want your kind here. Classic bullying tactic.
Bioware could save quite a bit of work and expense if they didn't build those things into their games. People who want them could take your advice and buy other games that fit their preferences.
Appealing to a broader audience is a problem? Wow. Just wow.
I'm not quite sure how you could go darker than turning every sentient being in the galaxy into slushees...
Or have deeper consequences than deciding the fate of entire species - individually and collectively.
Big consequences but all superficial. What difference does it make if you save Ash or Kaiden? The Quarians or Geth? Cure the genophage or not?
Uh, it makes a huge difference, if you care about the world and characters in it. If all you care about is the complexity of a branch chart, then other games certainly do that better than the ME series.
Uh, it makes a huge difference, if you care about the world and characters in it. If all you care about is the complexity of a branch chart, then other games certainly do that better than the ME series.
It's not really reflected in the game though is what I'm saying... and all the "big" choices in the game are basically obliterated by that final RGB choice at the end. They're mostly pointless... and before the EC they were entirely pointless.
It's not? The Virmire sacrifice isn't present for the subsequent two games in the series while the survivor is. That's a big difference considering the initial scope of that choice. If you can't make peace on Rannoch, the other race is obliterated and absent from the final assault. If you do make peace, both races are present for the final assault. If you sabotage the genophage, Wrex finds out and you have to kill him on the Citadel. Otherwise, Wrex and and krogan represent on Priority Earth. If you sabotage the genophage and save the Rachni, they inherit Tuchanka. If you destroy the Collector base, then Destroy is your only option at Low EMS, same for saving it and Control.
The only big choice the endings potentially obliterate is Rannoch peace through Destroy. Otherwise, making peace preserves both races through Control and Synthesis.
Do you have a game that you feel more accurately aligns with your definition of depth and "having a point" so to speak?
It should get the rating which allows the creators to produce their vision uncencored and as intended. If that gets them a T rating, that's fine.
Your statement basically reads that BioWare could take the sex/gore out of their games and then previous fans could buy something else. You don't see the difference? In the first instance people who are happy with the games are saying if you don't like it, buy something else. In the second the "demand" is there that BioWare change their content style and anyone who doesn't like the new lighter version can buy something else.
By that token, as it has no sex or violence In the Night Garden should be the greatest mass appeal TV program ever made. Toning down the content may well alienate existing fans - it may actually diminish the appeal. As I said, I've no interest in Mass Effect the peaceful negotiation simulator.
Big consequences but all superficial. What difference does it make if you save Ash or Kaiden? The Quarians or Geth? Cure the genophage or not?
It's not? The Virmire sacrifice isn't present for the subsequent two games in the series while the survivor is. That's a big difference considering the initial scope of that choice. If you can't make peace on Rannoch, the other race is obliterated and absent from the final assault. If you do make peace, both races are present for the final assault. If you sabotage the genophage, Wrex finds out and you have to kill him on the Citadel. Otherwise, Wrex and and krogan represent on Priority Earth. If you sabotage the genophage and save the Rachni, they inherit Tuchanka. If you destroy the Collector base, then Destroy is your only option at Low EMS, same for saving it and Control.
The only big choice the endings potentially obliterate is Rannoch peace through Destroy. Otherwise, making peace preserves both races through Control and Synthesis.
Do you have a game that you feel more accurately aligns with your definition of depth and "having a point" so to speak?
OK - I was being way too harsh... there's also the knock on effect if you get Legion killed in ME2; you can't make peace between the Quarians and Geth...
But of those things that did matter in-game, Kaiden/Ash for instance, the impact was less than it could have been... it's not like there was even a significant side-quest that was specific to either character - and they were both basically benched for ME2.
I also felt there were some things that were pushed into the end-game cutscene that could have had more effect in the actual playable bit of the game - but you're right, there's more stuff that actually did have an effect in-game than I remembered.
Again - a request is not a demand.
True - but the people who are saying "if you don't like it, buy something else" aren't necessarily even making a request for BioWare to do anything different. They may be perfectly happy with Mass Effect as it's pitched now.
There are people - yourself included - requesting *more* explicit content. If telling people to go away is an appropriate response to those who'd like the content toned down, then it is an appropriate response to those wanting it ratcheted up.
Wrong - I'm perfectly OK with how the series treats sex/violence as-is... I might like it to be more "explicit" but I'm neither asking for nor expecting it.
Hyperbole much?
I may have been hyperbolic with the In The Night Garden reference - but to just say making a more child-friendly game is going to automatically broaden the appeal is an equally flawed assumption, especially when there's an already established fan-base. It might, it might not.
It can make a huge difference to Shepard personally - and the galaxy as a whole. That ME3 started with a reaper invasion - knowing that millions of people were being turned into slushees moment by moment - seeing the desperate refugees around the Citadel - all of it made the entire game feel really bleak to me. It isn't the game's fault if it had no impact on you personally.
It was comic book bleak at best (or should that be worst?) ... it had its moments; it could have been much darker but that's not BioWare's thing - Mass Effect is a comic book space opera with a superhero protagonist and that's pretty much what I expect from ME:A.
Well, that's rather impolite. Perhaps we might entertain the possibility that one person's interest in explicit content isn't automatically "degenerate" any more than another person's interest in filtered content is automatically prudish?
Brilliant idea.
Close. I realize the satire but if I remember right, didn't you also advocate in another thread that Bioware could simply sell the "violent content" as dlc? To some extent, I think that shows how divorced from practicality a lot of these suggestions are, given the minimal level of support expressed for these toggles/T-rated games.
It wasn't "violent content" as DLC but explicit content. Also, that wasn't a serious suggestion. The reasons it wouldn't work seem self evident.
Minimal support? There were 30+ supporters of the OP in the toggle thread last time I checked. Which, in this forum environment, seems quite a few. Of course, it's easier to label those that would support T or content control for Mass Effect as an isolated few and outliers than engaging them on topic, if supporting an opposing agenda. Easier but dishonest. It's much like taking a persons words out of context and rewriting them in an attempt to make them say something they didn't, don't you think?
Nudity, sex, profanity, and excessive violence seem to be sore spots with a segment of this fanbase for a number of different reasons. What better way to restrain these things, and open up new revenue opportunities, than to aim for a T rating as a benchmark for any and all content? BioWare's already gone back in that direction with Star Wars: The Old Republic, after all.
Would you be bothered by this? Why or why not? Do the things you enjoy about Mass Effect demand a MATURE rating?
I would not be in favor of this. Not so much because I demand mature themes, but because I'm against limiting the scope of the story being told. I'd rather the creativity of the writers be unfettered by anything other than making sense.
True - but the people who are saying "if you don't like it, buy something else" aren't necessarily even making a request for BioWare to do anything different. They may be perfectly happy with Mass Effect as it's pitched now.
Wrong - I'm perfectly OK with how the series treats sex/violence as-is... I might like it to be more "explicit" but I'm neither asking for nor expecting it.
I may have been hyperbolic with the In The Night Garden reference - but to just say making a more child-friendly game is going to automatically broaden the appeal is an equally flawed assumption, especially when there's an already established fan-base. It might, it might not.
Personally I think Mass Effect is pretty tame in the whole sex and gore department - and that's actually the problem. The games are so borderline that people who object to T&A or gibbage in games will still buy Mass Effect whereas they'd not touch Grand Theft Auto (for instance) so it's not an issue.
Also - just as with DA, ME has changed over time, and that may continue. The first 2 DA titles did not include nude sex scenes; the latest one did. A request to avoid that in ME is not a request for change, but to maintain the status quo.
...
I believe you're the one who suggested that toning down some content made the game more appealing to some consumers.
Except ME has always had a certain degree of nudity.
Technically what I said could literally be read as "appealing" yes - but I also said that people who aren't keen on T&A/gore still buy ME games anyway; the content is so borderline it's not "offensive" enough to warrant personally boycotting it.
So the increased catchment of lowering the content to make it suitable for a 12/13 yr old (PEGI/ESRB) might be pretty slim ... and would come at the risk of alienating existing fans who are happy with the current levels (even if they might prefer more explicit content). What exactly would you have to sacrifice to make the game socially acceptable for 12 yr olds? Language, yes. Nudity, yes. Gore, probably not. Would the story suffer... hard to say, characters probably would though as they'd need to fit within a more limited scope.
As it stands I already find Mass Effect's language fairly unrealistic - I'm English... Lock Stock isn't a million miles off the mark, even Jack is pretty tame compared to a normal conversation on a smoke break at work. If Anderson was really from London, when the Reapers attacked the Alliance Council in the prologue, he'd have probably yelled something like "The f**k ?... leg it you dozy b***ards!" 
Mass Effect walks a fine line - it's not too explicit for people who'd prefer no nudity, sex or swearing to avoid the game altogether and it's not so sanitised that people who prefer their games a little more "salty" find the whole thing laughable and thus don't bother with the game. If BioWare failed in walking that line these kinds of debate wouldn't happen; either one side or the other wouldn't play the games and wouldn't bother posting here.
It's not really reflected in the game though is what I'm saying... and all the "big" choices in the game are basically obliterated by that final RGB choice at the end. They become mostly pointless... and before the EC, entirely pointless.
True, most of the choices are reflected in the future of the galaxy and have minimal gameplay or story impact. I think this was a mistake and they should have had Priority Earth actually affected by how many and which assets you brought along.
However, the same was true with Dragon Age Origins, and that was great. The biggest difference is that Origins had a proper, detailed epilogue so you got to know what happened to the people and groups you met. ME3 didn't give us that at all and even the EC is very vague and superficial.
It's not? The Virmire sacrifice isn't present for the subsequent two games in the series while the survivor is. That's a big difference considering the initial scope of that choice. If you can't make peace on Rannoch, the other race is obliterated and absent from the final assault. If you do make peace, both races are present for the final assault. If you sabotage the genophage, Wrex finds out and you have to kill him on the Citadel. Otherwise, Wrex and and krogan represent on Priority Earth. If you sabotage the genophage and save the Rachni, they inherit Tuchanka. If you destroy the Collector base, then Destroy is your only option at Low EMS, same for saving it and Control.
The only big choice the endings potentially obliterate is Rannoch peace through Destroy. Otherwise, making peace preserves both races through Control and Synthesis.
Do you have a game that you feel more accurately aligns with your definition of depth and "having a point" so to speak?
The VS is barely in the next two games, which diminishes that choice from the first game. Geth or Quarian or both has no effect on the game other than your war asset score and the same goes for the Genophage. The ME2 collector base choice matters for no good reason whatsoever.
As I said above, Origins' choices didn't affect the game itself other than the ones that would make your party members mad, but it reflected the effects on the world far better than ME3 did.
What a staggeringly well researched counter-argument - please enlighten me then, oh great sage, what is the purpose of the EU?
The purpose of EU is to extend USA's influence in Europe, and turn it into an ideological satellite. To that end, unelected EU institutions have power over national governements to force them to take ultraliberalist policies, at the expense of populations.
The purpose of EU is to extend USA's influence in Europe, and turn it into an ideological satellite. To that end, unelected EU institutions have power over national governements to force them to take ultraliberalist policies, at the expense of populations.
What does that have to do with the USA? If anything, the USA is following Europe into its decline.
What does that have to do with the USA? If anything, the USA is following Europe into its decline.
USA, or rather the big industrial and financial groups want the liberalization of all european markets, like power grids, natural ressources, distribution, mail network, telecommunications; infrastructure, health insurance, etc...lots of areas of competence that were or still are public, are progressively being privatized.
I would not be in favor of this. Not so much because I demand mature themes, but because I'm against limiting the scope of the story being told. I'd rather the creativity of the writers be unfettered by anything other than making sense.
I agree. I don't need mature themes in ME games but I think it would be too limiting to make a game for Teen rating especially now that the series started as a mature game.
It wasn't "violent content" as DLC but explicit content. Also, that wasn't a serious suggestion. The reasons it wouldn't work seem self evident.
Minimal support? There were 30+ supporters of the OP in the toggle thread last time I checked. Which, in this forum environment, seems quite a few. Of course, it's easier to label those that would support T or content control for Mass Effect as an isolated few and outliers than engaging them on topic, if supporting an opposing agenda. Easier but dishonest. It's much like taking a persons words out of context and rewriting them in an attempt to make them say something they didn't, don't you think?
Not at all. It's simply calling a spade a spade. Virtually every person on here wants to think that their requests are unique or are important enough to merit investigating. Me, I absolutely despise romances, but I'm under no illusions that I'm going to be convincing Bioware to remove them simply because I could find a couple people in a thread to support my cause.
Some basic facts: David Gaider himself has commented on how these forums represent less than 1% of the fan base. Far as I recall, were you even able to get 30+ supporters in the last toggle thread? I recall maybe 10 people repeating the same desires in a thread of over 130 pages. Even if so, that's a minority of a minority even in this forum context.
Add on top of that, you had a Bioware developer popping in commenting in that very thread you referenced on how he doesn't think there is virtually any reason to implement this feature based on the support shown in the toggle thread. He saw your support and thought it was not indicative of anything.
In this forum environment, 30 posters (being generous here) is virtually nothing. It took the ME3 movement over 100,000 players signing a poll on the internet while mobilizing charity donations, amongst other things, to convince Bioware to add maybe 15 minutes of cut-scenes. While a toggle may be cheaper, if Bioware followed every request with minimal support, I can't say the end result would be positive, given the size of the fan base. This is what's led to the mistaken impression amongst some toggle fans that we need to "compromise" so everyone can be happy. If you're not interested in T-related content, from a game theory perspective, you have absolutely no reason to pursue a compromise.
Retour en haut
