716 réponses à ce sujet

[goishen]

Because time moves in only one direction.   If you wanna give cryptic questions, expect cryptic responses.

[Gothfather]

I think the lesson for us is to not pre-order the game and instead wait for reviews from actual players before purchasing. 

 

The sad thing here with the community (gamers in general not specifically BSN)  is that if you don't pre-order games until you see a few reviews you are less likely to be disappointed or feel cheated and MOST AAA titles lift embargo a few days to a week in advance of a titles release so there is a way to actually make an INFORMED decision and get the pre-order goodie so you don't have to lose out on that to make sound consumer choices. Yet people still pre-order sight unseen and then blame the developer for their disappointment.

 

The main issue with ME3 however for most people was the endings and that is a story content and most reviewers wont comment on the endings of games before release (cuz you know spoilers) and often they haven't had enough time to reach this point in a game before embargo lifts. Unless you waited a month after release before you bought you probably wouldn't have gotten any info that could have allowed for an informed decision about things in this particular case re: the endings.

[LinksOcarina]

They've never acknowledged how awful the ending is. They maintained that the problem was a lack of closure. They went so far as to claim that the Extended Cut didn't change anything and instead merely offered "clarity." 

 

Which is more or less what happened.

 

They won't acknowledge the ending as being awful because BioWare is likely satisfied with the ending as is, pre and post extended cut. Whether or not the consumer public is kind of relative to them. 

 

So honestly, do people really give a damn about what BioWare says or thinks about the ending still, or is it just going to be embittered feelings for the rest of your life over a video game?

[Killroy]

Which is more or less what happened.

No it isn't. What happened before the EC and after are completely different. It was a galactic dark age before and a dreamland after.
 

They won't acknowledge the ending as being awful because BioWare is likely satisfied with the ending as is, pre and post extended cut. Whether or not the consumer public is kind of relative to them.

If they were satisfied with the ending then why do we know about the displeasure the writing staff felt about the ending? One of the writers spilled the beans himself. And if the people running things were ever creatively satisfied with the ending then we should all have serious concerns about the company.
 

So honestly, do people really give a damn about what BioWare says or thinks about the ending still, or is it just going to be embittered feelings for the rest of your life over a video game?

That's moronic. You make it out to be an active, constant feeling of anger. Like I'm just seething 24/7, year after year, when in reality I simply have a memory longer than that of a goldfish.

[LinksOcarina]

No it isn't. What happened before the EC and after are completely different. It was a galactic dark age before and a dreamland after.
 

If they were satisfied with the ending then why do we know about the displeasure the writing staff felt about the ending? One of the writers spilled the beans himself. And if the people running things were ever creatively satisfied with the ending then we should all have serious concerns about the company.
 

That's moronic. You make it out to be an active, constant feeling of anger. Like I'm just seething 24/7, year after year, when in reality I simply have a memory longer than that of a goldfish.

 

The Extended Cut quite literally changed nothing in the endings, nor changed the aspects people were unsatisfied with. That is, sadly, not debatable. What you talk about is visual representation; coda scenes basically, which were missing in the original cut because of symbolism (adam/eve stuff and all that.) 

 

Weekes "spilling the beans" was never confirmed, it was just simply rumor turned into fact, which happens a lot out there on the internet. But I can solve this simply; remember when they used the PR line "artistic integrity?" Well, it is a PR line that stands for "well, we liked the endings." Most artists and creatives have used similar lines to defend their work without telling people to shut up about it. 

 

Whether or not people agree with them is another story, including members of the writer staff but it's again a relative point, what people agree/disagree with doesn't really matter to the higher ups.

 

And considering your posts, I think seething 24/7 is being nice about your forum-riddled anger and snarky comments to people. But then again, I guess when people have nothing better to do with their elephant memories it makes them feel better about what you do with your time. 

 

We're not playing this game tonight though.

[SKAR]

The Extended Cut quite literally changed nothing in the endings, nor changed the aspects people were unsatisfied with. That is, sadly, not debatable. What you talk about is visual representation; coda scenes basically, which were missing in the original cut because of symbolism (adam/eve stuff and all that.)

Weekes "spilling the beans" was never confirmed, it was just simply rumor turned into fact, which happens a lot out there on the internet. But I can solve this simply; remember when they used the PR line "artistic integrity?" Well, it is a PR line that stands for "well, we liked the endings." Most artists and creatives have used similar lines to defend their work without telling people to shut up about it.

Whether or not people agree with them is another story, including members of the writer staff but it's again a relative point, what people agree/disagree with doesn't really matter to the higher ups.

And considering your posts, I think seething 24/7 is being nice about your forum-riddled anger and snarky comments to people. But then again, I guess when people have nothing better to do with their elephant memories it makes them feel better about what you do with your time.

We're not playing this game tonight though.

You really think that's gonna stop him? I'm expecting another snide remark soon.

[Gothfather]

What does that change? I don't think ME3 wasn't worth my money - I just think it was a **** product comparatively because of an awful ending, and I think the awful ending retroactively hurt my ability to enjoy the remainder of the trilogy. But that would be true even if I never bought ME3 - the damage was done regardless of how I chose to spend my money. And it's not as if Bioware doesn't acknowledge that the ending was undercooked - they released an extra content/cinematic mod in response to the furor. Doesn't fix that the ending is crap as a matter of concept, but that's still not really a lesson for us.  

 

 

You said that before, but what does that mean? I just don't get what you're going for here. What were you fooled by? The idea that the game wouldn't have a **** ending? 

 

To be honest this is a risk we all take in any form of entertainment media. I love Peter Jackson's Fellowship of the ring until the end where he does an about face with the source material and has Frodo and Strider say good-bye. Then for me the series goes down hill but it isn't ruined for me until the Green swirly thing of death and Aragorn MURDERING the mouth of Sauron during PARLEY! Even the dark Lord himself never violated parley but the King of the free people's does!?!

 

My point is the risk that a series can be 'ruined' by a subsequent entry is always part and parcel of the experience. While ME3's endings are disliked/hated by a majority there are many people who like them and this is just the way of subjective tastes. As hard as it is to stomach Bioware didn't actually do anything "wrong" with ME3's story they simply created something that wasn't subjectively liked and that might be a failure but it isn't doing something untoward or wrong. That is simply something that all media risks doing for all of us, there is no way to eliminate said risk.

 

Don't get me wrong if people don't like the endings then they should feel free to pan the content but I think it is unreasonable to demand an acknowledgement from the developers or a fix that some people think is owed to them. I don't expect Peter Jackson to fix his movies subject to my approval yet some people expect this of Bioware for ME3. It is reasonable to be gun shy after a bad ending and unlike yourself i can still enjoy ME3 and the series. I basically ignore the whole choice of the ending and pick destroy. i view the Catalyst's conversation as its last ditch attempt to distract you long enough for your injuries to kill you and thus save itself. Yes it is head cannon and it forces me to ignore obvious things but because most of me3 and the rest of the series was a positive experience I have the ability to make the ending palatable. To be clear there are no choices they aren't tricks of the Ai they don't exist. lol. I hate indoctrination theory its a convoluted way to explain the endings and make it appear that Bioware were secretly brilliant. lol no they just fraked up. it happens. 

[Teabaggin Krogan]

To be honest this is a risk we all take in any form of entertainment media. I love Peter Jackson's Fellowship of the ring until the end where he does an about face with the source material and has Frodo and Strider say good-bye. Then for me the series goes down hill but it isn't ruined for me until the Green swirly thing of death and Aragorn MURDERING the mouth of Sauron during PARLEY! Even the dark Lord himself never violated parley but the King of the free people's does!?!

...

I don't remember the first two things you mentioned at all although its been a while since I last saw the fellowship. When was the goodbye between Frodo and Aragorn and where was the green swirly? But I agree about the killing the emissary, that was handled quite differently from the books and not in a good way. 

 

But then again as you said, it is the artistic freedom of the director to visualize the scene as they deem best. Sometimes these artistic liberties turn out quite well and maybe even better than the source, sometimes they don't turn out so well. The same is true of this case as well, I think bioware has the freedom to write the ending the way they please even if it does not cater to the fantasies of the majority of the audience. Would you ask the writer of a tragedy to change the ending of his work just because it's not a happy ending or if it doesn't meet your expectations? You can critique it but the artist has the freedom to decide on the final nature of his work and needn't be influenced by the whims of the viewers. 

 

I don't mind the indoctrination theory either because while I'm pretty sure bioware doesn't have the quads to actually pull off something like that, it is an interesting viewpoint and it's fun to think about. Convoluted perhaps but an entertaining concept nevertheless. Then again I've never been too fixated on the ending, I played through it a couple times, made my peace with the ending and moved on to the Mp. 

[Killroy]

The Extended Cut quite literally changed nothing in the endings, nor changed the aspects people were unsatisfied with. That is, sadly, not debatable. What you talk about is visual representation; coda scenes basically, which were missing in the original cut because of symbolism (adam/eve stuff and all that.)

You just contradicted yourself. There is no Adam & Eve symbolism without the galactic dark age. The whole point of it was that they were restarting civilization.
 

Weekes "spilling the beans" was never confirmed, it was just simply rumor turned into fact, which happens a lot out there on the internet.

Nice revisionist history, but there is no debate because of the source of the comments.

But I can solve this simply; remember when they used the PR line "artistic integrity?" Well, it is a PR line that stands for "well, we liked the endings." Most artists and creatives have used similar lines to defend their work without telling people to shut up about it.

Sorry, but that's blatant BS. "Artistic integrity" has/had nothing to do with their satisfaction with the ending and everything to do with telling the people making the complaints to ****** off.
 

Whether or not people agree with them is another story, including members of the writer staff but it's again a relative point, what people agree/disagree with doesn't really matter to the higher ups.

The higher ups have no artistic integrity, they have fiduciary responsibility. Going back and remaking a significant portion of the game would have been counter to that responsibility.
 

And considering your posts, I think seething 24/7 is being nice about your forum-riddled anger and snarky comments to people. But then again, I guess when people have nothing better to do with their elephant memories it makes them feel better about what you do with your time.

Hurrrrrrr
 

We're not playing this game tonight though.

All you're doing is playing a game. You're entirely disingenuous.

[Gothfather]

I don't remember the first two things you mentioned at all although its been a while since I last saw the fellowship. When was the goodbye between Frodo and Aragorn and where was the green swirly? But I agree about the killing the emissary, that was handled quite differently from the books and not in a good way. 

 

/snip

 

At Tol Brandir after Boromir tried to persuade Frodo to come to Minas Tirith and then seize the Ring after that fails the fellowship is scattered (as per the books) but Aragorn and Frodo meet in the confusion in the movie where they don't in the books, where Aragorn kneels before Frodo and say good-bye and then Boromir's horn blows and Aragorn rushes to investigate and Frodo runs to the boats to be met by Sam.

 

The Green swirly thing of death is Peter Jackson's interpretation of the Oath breakers from the paths of the dead finally fulfilling their oath. In the books they attack and seize the Corsair ships at Pelargir and this releases them from their curse. It is the Southern army of Gondor that sails north and  meets the Riders of Rohan during the battle of Pelennor fields. Now that the Corsairs are defeated and their ships seized the Southern Army of Gondor no longer needs to secure their southern flank and can come to the aid of the city. In Jackson's cluster Frak it is bloody green ghost that charge through the fields and up the ringed walls of Minas Tirith killing the besieging army.

[Teabaggin Krogan]

At Tol Brandir after Boromir tried to persuade Frodo to come to Minas Tirith and then seize the Ring after that fails the fellowship is scattered (as per the books) but Aragorn and Frodo meet in ...

Oh right yes, I'd forgotten about that bit and had to look it up. Yes it is different to the book indeed but I didn't find it too jarring of a brek from the source as I felt that they were trying to show the resolve of Aragorn and how the ring calls to Isildur's heir. What was more jarring was the way they made the orcs dumb Af. They were supposed to be the fighting Uruk Hai and yet tripped over their own boots half the time. They also missed out on all the orc banter from the books.

 

As for the second bit, yes the green undead swirlies was slightly overdone. From what I heard, Jackson was reluctant to include them but did it for the sake of the readers. And speculatively perhaps due to their CGI nature they were more convenient as a plot device than the southern army of gondor to clear the besieging enemy. On that note I also am not a fan of how they passed over Glorifindel for Arwen and how they removed the legions of Dol Amroth and Imrahil but I can understand those decisions from a filmmaker's viewpoint.

[In Exile]

Choices reduced to arbitrary numbers

Loads and loads of autodialogue 

Role playing choices reduced to being sad or p*ssed off when you are graced with a dialogue option.

 

And yes, the ending which, to call it a cr*p ending, would be an insult to cr*p.

 

But the first two aren't different from ME1 - just because you got 3 options didn't mean it wasn't autodialogue when all lines when the same way, and your choices were mostly binary - in fact ME2 and ME3 tried to add more than just binary choices. We lost the neutral option, but not even ME1 or ME2 always gave you a neutral option. ME3 was a step back from ME2 a bit, but not ME1. 

 

I'm with you on the ending - I just don't really see the other stuff. And I do think they changed the type of works they were channeling, so the tone of ME2 and ME3 is different (from ME1 and each other).

[Sartoz]

                                                                                       <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

So, Shinobi said "...The game’s playable from beginning to end....".

 

What exactly does this mean?  All VO dialogue is completed? The main story arc is done? Planets are explorable but in "skeleton" mode to be fleshed out as we go along? Side quests are incomplete?

 

'Cause, Jos in the tweet section is still plugging along and creating levels.

[von uber]

Peter Jackson murdered LotR. Literally took it out around the back and shanked it.

[Almostfaceman]

Peter Jackson murdered LotR. Literally took it out around the back and shanked it.

 

[LinksOcarina]

                                                                                       <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

So, Shinobi said "...The game’s playable from beginning to end....".

 

What exactly does this mean?  All VO dialogue is completed? The main story arc is done? Planets are explorable but in "skeleton" mode to be fleshed out as we go along? Side quests are incomplete?

 

'Cause, Jos in the tweet section is still plugging along and creating levels.

 

I think it means the game can be played, and everything is more or less done in it in terms of content for the main storyline. My guess is incidental quests are still being fleshed out or made, which means planets that have nothing to do with big ticket choices.

 

It's actually a good move by shinobi, its vague enough where he wont get into trouble, but revealing enough where we can reasonably guess what he means.

[dreamgazer]

I don't trust Shinobi.

I don't trust turtles. They're condescending.

[LinksOcarina]

 
The higher ups have no artistic integrity, they have fiduciary responsibility. Going back and remaking a significant portion of the game would have been counter to that responsibility.
 

 

Which again, they didn't really do. They added that clarity because thematically, the endings are the same, the difference now is you see it.The argument of the endings being changed completely into something different is a fallacy.

 

Again that is not debatable so again, we're not arguing this point, you are simply wrong in your assertion, and that's the final say of it. 

[LinksOcarina]

I don't trust turtles. They're condescending.

 

Damn turtles, thinking they are better than us until they need us to help them when they roll on their backs! 

[Sanunes]

                                                                                       <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

So, Shinobi said "...The game’s playable from beginning to end....".

 

What exactly does this mean?  All VO dialogue is completed? The main story arc is done? Planets are explorable but in "skeleton" mode to be fleshed out as we go along? Side quests are incomplete?

 

'Cause, Jos in the tweet section is still plugging along and creating levels.

 

I am going by my memory of old BioWare behind the scenes videos.  From what I understand the game is all tied together, but the design of the game can still be worked on.  Using ME3 as an example they will have all the planets in the game, but they might not have any of the art assets or animations for those areas yet so a wall might explode to have enemies attack but all it is, is a wall that is there in one frame gone in the next with enemies just being there.  So there is a good chance they don't have animations, voice acting, interactive objects, cover, spell animations, weapons, etc ready yet.

 

Edit:

 

Just looking out my window it would be like a house that has its framing complete, but very little else is when they would start describing it as a "playable game" for you have an idea what the final product will be, but there is still a lot of work to go for the final product.

[dreamgazer]

Shinobi talks a bit about Andromeda feeling like a true follow-up to ME1. Obviously, that could just be a tone thing, but I wonder if there's a hint there about when the trip across space actually happens. As in, maybe they embark before the events of both ME2 and ME3.

[MissOuJ]

                                                                                       <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

So, Shinobi said "...The game’s playable from beginning to end....".

 

What exactly does this mean?  All VO dialogue is completed? The main story arc is done? Planets are explorable but in "skeleton" mode to be fleshed out as we go along? Side quests are incomplete?

 

'Cause, Jos in the tweet section is still plugging along and creating levels.

 

I think (back when it was still in production) that something similar was said (pretty early, even) of DAI, and if I remember correctly, some key production people got a "playable from start to finish" copy home to play during their Christmas break (? I might have the wrong holiday). I remember that Gaider commented on it in his blog (which has since been deleted) when people were asking about it, since the release had been delayed, and told that the "playable copy" had enemies running at you in T-pose etc... so "playable from start to finish" does not equal "finished" in any sense of the word.

[LinksOcarina]

Shinobi talks a bit about Andromeda feeling like a true follow-up to ME1. Obviously, that could just be a tone thing, but I wonder if there's a hint there about when the trip across space actually happens. As in, maybe they embark before the events of both ME2 and ME3.

 

That may be reading into it a bit too much, although I have a feeling we will find out in about a month anyway.

[Killroy]

Which again, they didn't really do. They added that clarity because thematically, the endings are the same, the difference now is you see it.The argument of the endings being changed completely into something different is a fallacy.
 
Again that is not debatable so again, we're not arguing this point, you are simply wrong in your assertion, and that's the final say of it.

You are a completely disingenuous, absurd person. Not only are you objectively wrong, you think just saying "this is not debatable" will make everyone else forget how wrong you are. 

[AlanC9]

You are a completely disingenuous, absurd person. Not only are you objectively wrong, you think just saying "this is not debatable" will make everyone else forget how wrong you are.

Isn't this the part where you prove that it is debatable by debating it?

You're saying there was a thematic change, right? So, what was it?

You did say that Adam and Eve symbolism can't work without a galactic dark age, but that was nonsense if meant literally.