Maybe not petulant, but it certainly seems over the top. It would be like me boycotting Honda because I don't like the way they designed the dash of my Accord, even though I love everything else about it. A reason to not buy that specific car maybe, but to not purchase anything from that maker ever again regardless of the merit of those future vehicles? How does that make any sense?
So now we're talking about a product, and not art?
If the artist who's work I'm viewing decided that a sharpie smilie on an otherwise beautiful portrait was "his vision" and he was unwilling to remove that smilie because he felt it important, then it would call in to question all his other artwork for me. I would say, "look, I can't buy your work sight-unseen anymore. I need to know if the sharpie additions are now an intregral part of your work or not."
But if you want to make it a product analogy, we can make it a product analogy. A game isn't anywhere near as expensive as a car, though. It's more like my attitude towards Samsung. On three separate occasions, I bought Samsung DVD players. All three of them died after 6 months. I will not buy Samsung products anymore. Is this really that unreasonable?
From the perspective of art it makes even less sense. I didn't like "The Persistence of Memory" by Dali because of the color scheme, so I'm going to boycott the rest of his work? What?How about I actually respond to what you said. If that is indeed the artist's vision for all future work, and it bothers you badly, then you SHOULD go elsewhere. However, I've seen no evidence that Bioware's vision of the future is nothing but shitty ending all the way down. I don't consider the refusal to modify that one particular painting (which we aren't even sure they are refusing to do) to be indicative of future intent. Being more wary makes sense, particularly if they have another bad ending in the near future. Saying "I'm not going to buy anything from Bioware because of this one game" is stupid.
As for products, if there is a pattern of it breaking, it makes sense to go elsewhere for products. This isn't how I view games generally, but I realize that others do. I guess I'm missing the part where Bioware has a history of promising the world to it's consumers and then giving them shitty endings, which would actually make boycotting them make sense. Or maybe the part where they told you where you could take your concerns and shove them, because insulting their customers would be another reason for you to go elsewhere.
I anticipate a game that is 99% great.
Bioware delivers a game that is 95% great and 5% terrible.
Therefore, I should never buy another Bioware game.
Do you see how that might seem unreasonable to people?
edit: added to the part re: art because I didn't really fully read your argument there
Maybe not petulant, but it certainly seems over the top. It would be like me boycotting Honda because I don't like the way they designed the dash of my Accord, even though I love everything else about it. A reason to not buy that specific car maybe, but to not purchase anything from that maker ever again regardless of the merit of those future vehicles? How does that make any sense?
So now we're talking about a product, and not art?
If the artist who's work I'm viewing decided that a sharpie smilie on an otherwise beautiful portrait was "his vision" and he was unwilling to remove that smilie because he felt it important, then it would call in to question all his other artwork for me. I would say, "look, I can't buy your work sight-unseen anymore. I need to know if the sharpie additions are now an intregral part of your work or not."
But if you want to make it a product analogy, we can make it a product analogy. A game isn't anywhere near as expensive as a car, though. It's more like my attitude towards Samsung. On three separate occasions, I bought Samsung DVD players. All three of them died after 6 months. I will not buy Samsung products anymore. Is this really that unreasonable?
From the perspective of art it makes even less sense. I didn't like "The Persistence of Memory" by Dali because of the color scheme, so I'm going to boycott the rest of his work? What?
As for products, if there is a pattern of it breaking, it makes sense to go elsewhere for products. This isn't how I view games generally, but I realize that others do. I guess I'm missing the part where Bioware has a history of promising the world to it's consumers and then giving them shitty endings, which would actually make boycotting them make sense. Or maybe the part where they told you where you could take your concerns and shove them, because insulting their customers would be another reason for you to go elsewhere.
I anticipate a game that is 99% great.
Bioware delivers one game that was 95% great and 5% terrible.
Therefore, I should never buy another Bioware game.
Do you see how that might seems unreasonable to people?
You can't look at a gestalt and say that only one part of it is bad, and so you should like the rest of it. If I try on a dress, and it's a gorgeous dress but it simply doesn't come in my size, I shouldn't "buy it anyway" because otherwise I'm just being petulant over "a problem of 5%". And "the colors are wrong" is not the complaint for this piece of artwork. It's that everything is well composed and beautiful, except there's one part of the picture that doesn't belong and doesn't even look like the same artist added it (like maybe the artist decided to let his 5 year old finger paint in the corner). As a gestalt image, you can't just ignore the bad part, no matter how much you might like to. It's too much part of the whole.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
People were playing towards a conclusion. Mass Effect was about choice and consequence. You made the tough choices and worked hard in order to get the best possible outcome. It was like that all series, people loved replaying the game to see different results to actions as well. People were looking forward to an ending they were promised, one where their tough choices made them an ending they deserved but got a literary train wreck instead.
Up until that last 5% people left the game longing for more. After that 5% people felt disappointed, betrayed and utterly unwilling to play the game again. I've actively told a few people to stop watching the ending past a certain point so their Mass Effect experience isn't ruined.
Haven't succeeded yet, the Mass Effect ending has become like Pandora's box. It contains something terrible but people now know it's so terrible their curiosity forces them to see it... to their endless regret. At least people thank me for trying.
Have left PA forums.
If this community believes that hating someone based soley upon their gender is acceptable and understandable, I have no interest in being a part of it.
Here's what seems to be the meat of the argument, these "promises." These are not "advertisements," they're personal thoughts on the game from different people involved. It's arguably promotion, but it's not fucking gospel. Sometimes people are wrong (the producer quotes seem especially vague) or have false impressions. Maybe in their view, they thought they were being accurate. Were they mistaken? Maybe. When it comes down to it, they made good on those promises (perhaps they thought 4 was "many"). The majority of the audience (including me) seems to disagree with their perception of their game. Can people complain? Totally.
I'm sorry but no, that is not true. Many of the quotes I listed are from interviews, this means that they are acting and speaking on behalf of the company. These are not their private twitter feeds, or opinions they posted on their own blog. These are official statements about the game, and as such they hold weight. The only reason I bought ME3 was because of statements such as the ones I listed. Ones that assured me this and told me that. Especially the one from Mr. Hudson which states we will not get an A, B, or C ending. These claims(several of them quantifiable) fell flat and thus it is my right as a consumer to a refund or a fixed product which accurately reflects their claims. Just the same as if it were any other product. The "art" shield is not something you can so easily hide behind. Is it art, sure but that isn't some magic shield that protects you from scrutiny. It also isn't a shield Bioware can hide behind since we have evidence that this ending was rushed at the last minute(they were working to change it in November).
An example for you, film is art. This means that the Green Lantern film was art(bad art). Now many of the advertisements made it appear that the film would focus on the Green Lantern Corp and that was one of the major reasons I wanted to see the film. It quickly became apparent that this was not true and that the film was horribly godawful. Now sure it might have been the 'artistic vision' to majorly change Hal Jordan's character and deviate so much from the source, but that is not the product I came to see nor the one I was sold on. I left the theater, asked for a refund, and was promptly given one. Now does that make me a "petulant child"?
Actually there's a strong current running throughout this entire "dissatisfied" movement that points out that the game was excellent right up until the last moments of the game.
It's not a complaint that the game or product didn't deliver, but that the game ended in a few dissatisfying moments. Even the guy who went to the FTC only brought the accusation that the ending didn't deliver on promises, not the entire game.
It isn't that the ending was dissatisfying(at least for me) it's that it flew in the face of previous official statements about the game, the ending, and the impact the player would have. It doesn't matter if the rest of the car drives awesome. If you advertise, claim, make official statements that the air conditioner can make cotton candy flavored snow, well than it had better do that or we have an issue.
They probably shouldn't have named it that then.
They probably just assumed that people wouldn't take things so seriously and would educate themselves both on the movement and ME3.
Maybe not petulant, but it certainly seems over the top. It would be like me boycotting Honda because I don't like the way they designed the dash of my Accord, even though I love everything else about it. A reason to not buy that specific car maybe, but to not purchase anything from that maker ever again regardless of the merit of those future vehicles? How does that make any sense?
So now we're talking about a product, and not art?
If the artist who's work I'm viewing decided that a sharpie smilie on an otherwise beautiful portrait was "his vision" and he was unwilling to remove that smilie because he felt it important, then it would call in to question all his other artwork for me. I would say, "look, I can't buy your work sight-unseen anymore. I need to know if the sharpie additions are now an intregral part of your work or not."
But if you want to make it a product analogy, we can make it a product analogy. A game isn't anywhere near as expensive as a car, though. It's more like my attitude towards Samsung. On three separate occasions, I bought Samsung DVD players. All three of them died after 6 months. I will not buy Samsung products anymore. Is this really that unreasonable?
From the perspective of art it makes even less sense. I didn't like "The Persistence of Memory" by Dali because of the color scheme, so I'm going to boycott the rest of his work? What?
As for products, if there is a pattern of it breaking, it makes sense to go elsewhere for products. This isn't how I view games generally, but I realize that others do. I guess I'm missing the part where Bioware has a history of promising the world to it's consumers and then giving them shitty endings, which would actually make boycotting them make sense. Or maybe the part where they told you where you could take your concerns and shove them, because insulting their customers would be another reason for you to go elsewhere.
I anticipate a game that is 99% great.
Bioware delivers one game that was 95% great and 5% terrible.
Therefore, I should never buy another Bioware game.
Do you see how that might seems unreasonable to people?
You can't look at a gestalt and say that only one part of it is bad, and so you should like the rest of it. If I try on a dress, and it's a gorgeous dress but it simply doesn't come in my size, I shouldn't "buy it anyway" because otherwise I'm just being petulant over "a problem of 5%". And "the colors are wrong" is not the complaint for this piece of artwork. It's that everything is well composed and beautiful, except there's one part of the picture that doesn't belong and doesn't even look like the same artist added it (like maybe the artist decided to let his 5 year old finger paint in the corner). As a gestalt image, you can't just ignore the bad part, no matter how much you might like to. It's too much part of the whole.
I'll agree with that, and I had modified my post to more accurately respond to what you had written.
So ME3 isn't just tainted by the ending, it's ruined. That still is a case for not liking that particular piece of art. Unless Bioware comes out with statements indicating that this is how they plan to do all future works. It still seems like an overreaction to say "I'm not going to buy anything else from them." If for no other reason than you DO have to purchase their art sight unseen, and they've produced some fantastic work before this stinker. Why is this piece weighted so heavily compared to their other works?
Maybe not petulant, but it certainly seems over the top. It would be like me boycotting Honda because I don't like the way they designed the dash of my Accord, even though I love everything else about it. A reason to not buy that specific car maybe, but to not purchase anything from that maker ever again regardless of the merit of those future vehicles? How does that make any sense?
So now we're talking about a product, and not art?
If the artist who's work I'm viewing decided that a sharpie smilie on an otherwise beautiful portrait was "his vision" and he was unwilling to remove that smilie because he felt it important, then it would call in to question all his other artwork for me. I would say, "look, I can't buy your work sight-unseen anymore. I need to know if the sharpie additions are now an intregral part of your work or not."
But if you want to make it a product analogy, we can make it a product analogy. A game isn't anywhere near as expensive as a car, though. It's more like my attitude towards Samsung. On three separate occasions, I bought Samsung DVD players. All three of them died after 6 months. I will not buy Samsung products anymore. Is this really that unreasonable?
From the perspective of art it makes even less sense. I didn't like "The Persistence of Memory" by Dali because of the color scheme, so I'm going to boycott the rest of his work? What?
As for products, if there is a pattern of it breaking, it makes sense to go elsewhere for products. This isn't how I view games generally, but I realize that others do. I guess I'm missing the part where Bioware has a history of promising the world to it's consumers and then giving them shitty endings, which would actually make boycotting them make sense. Or maybe the part where they told you where you could take your concerns and shove them, because insulting their customers would be another reason for you to go elsewhere.
I anticipate a game that is 99% great.
Bioware delivers one game that was 95% great and 5% terrible.
Therefore, I should never buy another Bioware game.
Do you see how that might seems unreasonable to people?
You can't look at a gestalt and say that only one part of it is bad, and so you should like the rest of it. If I try on a dress, and it's a gorgeous dress but it simply doesn't come in my size, I shouldn't "buy it anyway" because otherwise I'm just being petulant over "a problem of 5%". And "the colors are wrong" is not the complaint for this piece of artwork. It's that everything is well composed and beautiful, except there's one part of the picture that doesn't belong and doesn't even look like the same artist added it (like maybe the artist decided to let his 5 year old finger paint in the corner). As a gestalt image, you can't just ignore the bad part, no matter how much you might like to. It's too much part of the whole.
I'll agree with that, and I had modified my post to more accurately respond to what you had written.
So ME3 isn't just tainted by the ending, it's ruined. That still is a case for not liking that particular piece of art. Unless Bioware comes out with statements indicating that this is how they plan to do all future works. It still seems like an overreaction to say "I'm not going to buy anything else from them." If for no other reason than you DO have to purchase their art sight unseen, and they've produced some fantastic work before this stinker. Why is this piece weighted so heavily compared to their other works?
Because it is the end to a massive trilogy. It is an end that fails to deliver on the promises of 5 years. It is an end that trivializes or even undoes everything the players have accomplished. It is an end that completely taints the journey. You have to understand, some people have put in hundreds of hours over three games and multiple different characters. They have done this because they were promised, were sold, on the fact that they would be able to craft a story. That all of their decisions would mean something, have an effect. Instead they got an ending were the god from the machine descends, makes everything they have done(hundreds of hours) worthless, just handwaves it away, and then presents them with the same three options that everyone else gets. This is after they were assured that they would not get an A, B, or C ending.
*edit*
Imagine that you have been in a happy, committed relationship for 5 years. You are in love, and your partner is just your favorite thing ever. But then one day you find your beau balls deep in some chick. Not only does this spell an end to your relationship, but it probably also colors or changes your perspective on your relationship thus far. Odds are it won't be for the better.
Corrik on
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
If that is indeed the artist's vision for all future work, and it bothers you badly, then you SHOULD go elsewhere.
Thank you for that acknowledgment, anyway.
However, I've seen no evidence that Bioware's vision of the future is nothing but shitty ending all the way down. I don't consider the refusal to modify that one particular painting (which we aren't even sure they are refusing to do) to be indicative of future intent. Being more wary makes sense, particularly if they have another bad ending in the near future. Saying "I'm not going to buy anything from Bioware because of this one game" is stupid.
As for products, if there is a pattern of it breaking, it makes sense to go elsewhere for products. This isn't how I view games generally, but I realize that others do. I guess I'm missing the part where Bioware has a history of promising the world to it's consumers and then giving them shitty endings, which would actually make boycotting them make sense. Or maybe the part where they told you where you could take your concerns and shove them, because insulting their customers would be another reason for you to go elsewhere.
Yeah, Bioware actually has a history at this point. Take the last single player game Bioware released, Dragon Age 2. Now I actually kind of liked where they went with that; I thought it was an interesting and experimental way to end the series (essentially that the choices that you make don't matter in the end, that you are an observer in history, not it's master). But that's because in that series, "choices are paramount" was never the driving theme behind the series, not the way it is with Mass Effect. Moreover, even if you accept the "nothing you do matters" ending, like I did, it's still noticble that they rolled the game out with an extremely short delelopment time (something around 9 months, I believe), which shows in the game. There's an insane amount of map reuse, for example. But I think I didn't mind Dragon Age 2 so much because, like I said, it wasn't themed so much towards choice, but also because I probably am not as big a fan of Dragon Age as I am of Mass Effect. Other people were not nearly so charitable as I was with my reaction; many fans absolutely despise Dragon Age 2.
Additionally, there have been issues, and continue to be issues with SWTOR. Things that I've basically glossed over in my mind and didn't bother to feel angry about, because I was (and still am, frankly) a huge Bioware fan, and at the time my thought was: "I don't mind giving them more money, because they are doing things in gaming that no one else is doing for me." Like for example, I bought the collector's edition for SWTOR, because the collector's edition had special in-game stores that no one else got. I wasn't expecting anything game-breaking from those stores, I figured it would all be visual stuff (like maybe getting to dress your smuggler in something exactly like Han Solo, or getting an outfit exactly like Obi Wan's. Something like that). But the stores ended up containing virtually nothing. What was in there was often broken, or sometimes cheaper versions of the wares were available at regular vendors. That's just a minor complaint, though, compared to the bugs and balance issues in the game. About all of which I've been constantly saying, "give them time, they'll fix it." And again, many other fans are far less forgiving about the problems with SWTOR than I am. Many have already quit the game and consider it a joke.
So it's not as if this is Bioware's first ever misstep, nor is this even the first game where they decided to completely ignore player choice in order to give a single ending. So yeah, at this point, I'm wary of Bioware. Less expecting them to be able to 'get it right'. More concerned that whatever they create in the future is going to be hopelessly broken.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
Maybe not petulant, but it certainly seems over the top. It would be like me boycotting Honda because I don't like the way they designed the dash of my Accord, even though I love everything else about it. A reason to not buy that specific car maybe, but to not purchase anything from that maker ever again regardless of the merit of those future vehicles? How does that make any sense?
So now we're talking about a product, and not art?
If the artist who's work I'm viewing decided that a sharpie smilie on an otherwise beautiful portrait was "his vision" and he was unwilling to remove that smilie because he felt it important, then it would call in to question all his other artwork for me. I would say, "look, I can't buy your work sight-unseen anymore. I need to know if the sharpie additions are now an intregral part of your work or not."
But if you want to make it a product analogy, we can make it a product analogy. A game isn't anywhere near as expensive as a car, though. It's more like my attitude towards Samsung. On three separate occasions, I bought Samsung DVD players. All three of them died after 6 months. I will not buy Samsung products anymore. Is this really that unreasonable?
From the perspective of art it makes even less sense. I didn't like "The Persistence of Memory" by Dali because of the color scheme, so I'm going to boycott the rest of his work? What?
As for products, if there is a pattern of it breaking, it makes sense to go elsewhere for products. This isn't how I view games generally, but I realize that others do. I guess I'm missing the part where Bioware has a history of promising the world to it's consumers and then giving them shitty endings, which would actually make boycotting them make sense. Or maybe the part where they told you where you could take your concerns and shove them, because insulting their customers would be another reason for you to go elsewhere.
I anticipate a game that is 99% great.
Bioware delivers one game that was 95% great and 5% terrible.
Therefore, I should never buy another Bioware game.
Do you see how that might seems unreasonable to people?
You can't look at a gestalt and say that only one part of it is bad, and so you should like the rest of it. If I try on a dress, and it's a gorgeous dress but it simply doesn't come in my size, I shouldn't "buy it anyway" because otherwise I'm just being petulant over "a problem of 5%". And "the colors are wrong" is not the complaint for this piece of artwork. It's that everything is well composed and beautiful, except there's one part of the picture that doesn't belong and doesn't even look like the same artist added it (like maybe the artist decided to let his 5 year old finger paint in the corner). As a gestalt image, you can't just ignore the bad part, no matter how much you might like to. It's too much part of the whole.
I'll agree with that, and I had modified my post to more accurately respond to what you had written.
So ME3 isn't just tainted by the ending, it's ruined. That still is a case for not liking that particular piece of art. Unless Bioware comes out with statements indicating that this is how they plan to do all future works. It still seems like an overreaction to say "I'm not going to buy anything else from them." If for no other reason than you DO have to purchase their art sight unseen, and they've produced some fantastic work before this stinker. Why is this piece weighted so heavily compared to their other works?
Because it is the end to a massive trilogy. It is an end that fails to deliver on the promises of 5 years. It is an end that trivializes or even undoes everything the players have accomplished. It is an end that completely taints the journey. You have to understand, some people have put in hundreds of hours over three games and multiple different characters. They have done this because they were promised, were sold, on the fact that they would be able to craft a story. That all of their decisions would mean something, have an effect. Instead they got an ending were the god from the machine descends, makes everything they have done(hundreds of hours) worthless, just handwaves it away, and then presents them with the same three options that everyone else gets. This is after they were assured that they would not get an A, B, or C ending.
*edit*
Imagine that you have been in a happy, committed relationship for 5 years. You are in love, and your partner is just your favorite thing ever. But then one day you find your beau balls deep in some chick. Not only does this spell an end to your relationship, but it probably also colors or changes your perspective on your relationship thus far. Odds are it won't be for the better.
Maybe we are all talking past each other here. I'm not saying that you can't be disappointed in this game, or that it doesn't suck to have high expectations for a Super Bowl win dashed away because they fumbled the ball at the 1 yard line with 10 seconds to go. What I'm saying is that the position "I'm not going to buy anymore Bioware games because of this", which is a position that I've seen mentioned a couple of different times, borders on the ridiculous.
I'm not going to buy Mass Effect - Not Shepard's Adventures 1 & 2.
I'm not going to buy Baldur's Gate 3.
I'm not going to buy another Neverwinter Nights, Dragon Age, or KOTOR game.
Maybe not petulant, but it certainly seems over the top. It would be like me boycotting Honda because I don't like the way they designed the dash of my Accord, even though I love everything else about it. A reason to not buy that specific car maybe, but to not purchase anything from that maker ever again regardless of the merit of those future vehicles? How does that make any sense?
So now we're talking about a product, and not art?
If the artist who's work I'm viewing decided that a sharpie smilie on an otherwise beautiful portrait was "his vision" and he was unwilling to remove that smilie because he felt it important, then it would call in to question all his other artwork for me. I would say, "look, I can't buy your work sight-unseen anymore. I need to know if the sharpie additions are now an intregral part of your work or not."
But if you want to make it a product analogy, we can make it a product analogy. A game isn't anywhere near as expensive as a car, though. It's more like my attitude towards Samsung. On three separate occasions, I bought Samsung DVD players. All three of them died after 6 months. I will not buy Samsung products anymore. Is this really that unreasonable?
From the perspective of art it makes even less sense. I didn't like "The Persistence of Memory" by Dali because of the color scheme, so I'm going to boycott the rest of his work? What?
As for products, if there is a pattern of it breaking, it makes sense to go elsewhere for products. This isn't how I view games generally, but I realize that others do. I guess I'm missing the part where Bioware has a history of promising the world to it's consumers and then giving them shitty endings, which would actually make boycotting them make sense. Or maybe the part where they told you where you could take your concerns and shove them, because insulting their customers would be another reason for you to go elsewhere.
I anticipate a game that is 99% great.
Bioware delivers one game that was 95% great and 5% terrible.
Therefore, I should never buy another Bioware game.
Do you see how that might seems unreasonable to people?
You can't look at a gestalt and say that only one part of it is bad, and so you should like the rest of it. If I try on a dress, and it's a gorgeous dress but it simply doesn't come in my size, I shouldn't "buy it anyway" because otherwise I'm just being petulant over "a problem of 5%". And "the colors are wrong" is not the complaint for this piece of artwork. It's that everything is well composed and beautiful, except there's one part of the picture that doesn't belong and doesn't even look like the same artist added it (like maybe the artist decided to let his 5 year old finger paint in the corner). As a gestalt image, you can't just ignore the bad part, no matter how much you might like to. It's too much part of the whole.
I'll agree with that, and I had modified my post to more accurately respond to what you had written.
So ME3 isn't just tainted by the ending, it's ruined. That still is a case for not liking that particular piece of art. Unless Bioware comes out with statements indicating that this is how they plan to do all future works. It still seems like an overreaction to say "I'm not going to buy anything else from them." If for no other reason than you DO have to purchase their art sight unseen, and they've produced some fantastic work before this stinker. Why is this piece weighted so heavily compared to their other works?
Because it is the end to a massive trilogy. It is an end that fails to deliver on the promises of 5 years. It is an end that trivializes or even undoes everything the players have accomplished. It is an end that completely taints the journey. You have to understand, some people have put in hundreds of hours over three games and multiple different characters. They have done this because they were promised, were sold, on the fact that they would be able to craft a story. That all of their decisions would mean something, have an effect. Instead they got an ending were the god from the machine descends, makes everything they have done(hundreds of hours) worthless, just handwaves it away, and then presents them with the same three options that everyone else gets. This is after they were assured that they would not get an A, B, or C ending.
*edit*
Imagine that you have been in a happy, committed relationship for 5 years. You are in love, and your partner is just your favorite thing ever. But then one day you find your beau balls deep in some chick. Not only does this spell an end to your relationship, but it probably also colors or changes your perspective on your relationship thus far. Odds are it won't be for the better.
Maybe we are all talking past each other here. I'm not saying that you can't be disappointed in this game, or that it doesn't suck to have high expectations for a Super Bowl win dashed away because they fumbled the ball at the 1 yard line with 10 seconds to go. What I'm saying is that the position "I'm not going to buy anymore Bioware games because of this", which is a position that I've seen mentioned a couple of different times, borders on the ridiculous.
I'm not going to buy Mass Effect - Not Shepard's Adventures 1 & 2.
I'm not going to buy Baldur's Gate 3.
I'm not going to buy another Neverwinter Nights, Dragon Age, or KOTOR game.
All because they botched the ending to ME3.
Well this isn't exactly the first screw up Bioware has had, though it is probably the largest. In the last few years they have done quite a lot that has upset people. For many this is the final straw, that Bioware has proven what kind of company they are. Even if it is based on one game, so what? How is it ridiculous to not like a product and thus no longer support the company who makes that product. If I go to a restaurant for the first time and their food is so bad it makes me vomit, is it ridiculous to not eat there anymore? If a girl has given you two great blow jobs before but came close to biting off the tip of your penis during the third, would you really be so eager to get a fourth from her?
You know they're making more Mass Effect games, right? This isn't the end of the series, yeah? They're going to make more, and not only are they making more, they're going to make them placed in the timeline after Mass Effect 3. You don't ask someone to hold onto their saves in order to make a prequel, y'know. You don't say "people don't need to know the secrets of the mass effect universe" if they're never going back to it.
I feel like some people aren't getting this.
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
You know they're making more Mass Effect games, right? This isn't the end of the series, yeah? They're going to make more, and not only are they making more, they're going to make them placed in the timeline after Mass Effect 3. You don't ask someone to hold onto their saves in order to make a prequel, y'know. You don't say "people don't need to know the secrets of the mass effect universe" if they're never going back to it.
I feel like some people aren't getting this.
If I'm not recalling it wrong, Casey Hudson pretty explicitly said there'd be no Mass Effect after this. It's in one of those quotes people keep throwing around... Casey said something to the effect that they can do all kinds of divergent endings to the game, because they're not planning any games after this so it leaves them free to do so. I'll try to find it.
Edit: Ok, he just says "this story arc" is coming to an end. I guess that could mean more Mass Effect games. I can't imagine why I'd want to play any more Mass Effect games, though.
Cambiata on
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
I'm not going to buy Mass Effect - Not Shepard's Adventures 1 & 2.
I'm not going to buy Baldur's Gate 3.
I'm not going to buy another Neverwinter Nights, Dragon Age, or KOTOR game.
What about the position "I'm no longer going to take part in 'day 1 pre-ordering' from Bioware because I believe the quality of some of their products (such as the questionable story and blatant re-use of assets in DA 2 and the absence of resolution in ME3 when compared to the statements made by developers of the game) is questionable. This leads me to no longer being able to justifiy a purchase without giving future games time to be properly reviewed by professional gaming sites as well as individual consumers."
Would that be a fair position to take? Cause it sure is mine at the moment. Whatever their next release is going to be (specifically in regards to DA3) there's no way I'm taking part in the pre-ordering jazz until the game has a little bit of time to breathe.
You know they're making more Mass Effect games, right? This isn't the end of the series, yeah? They're going to make more, and not only are they making more, they're going to make them placed in the timeline after Mass Effect 3. You don't ask someone to hold onto their saves in order to make a prequel, y'know. You don't say "people don't need to know the secrets of the mass effect universe" if they're never going back to it.
I feel like some people aren't getting this.
Well right now we don't really know what they mean by that. More than likely this is just PR moves to help control the ebb and flow of the discourse and their comments will have to do with future DLC. Now sure they might have a big plan to add to ME3 and continue with the ME universe and it certainly isn't something that I would discount, but I also wouldn't hold my breath on it.
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
I'm not going to buy Mass Effect - Not Shepard's Adventures 1 & 2.
I'm not going to buy Baldur's Gate 3.
I'm not going to buy another Neverwinter Nights, Dragon Age, or KOTOR game.
What about the position "I'm no longer going to take part in 'day 1 pre-ordering' from Bioware because I believe the quality of some of their products (such as the questionable story and blatant re-use of assets in DA 2 and the absence of resolution in ME3 when compared to the statements made by developers of the game) is questionable. This leads me to no longer be able to justifiy a purchase without giving future games time to be properly reviewed by professional gaming sites as well as individual consumers."
Would that be a fair position to take? Cause it sure is mine at the moment. Whatever their next release is going to be (specifically in regards to DA3) there's no way I'm taking part in the pre-ordering jazz until the game has a little bit of time to breathe.
Pretty much this is my position as well. Although at the moment I can't see myself buying DA3 at all unless I hear really good things about it after release.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
What we have learned from this whole debacle appears to be merely the open secret that, in the literary world and out, the Author (capital A) is not an inviolate glorious being with a perfect and complete artistic vision. Yea, though it is widely portrayed this way, the Author is not a resolute guardian of the gates of Divine Inspiration, for it is a craven beast and often given to flights of beastly fancy. Indeed, it is a mere mortal- unlike, as we all know, the One True Source of Actually Good Shit. Yea, though it is forbidden to speak It's name in vain (lest It hasten the deadline) I amongst all men shall speak it without fear:
The Editor.
The Editor!
Harbinger of Death to literary sacred cows, stalwart defender of the Holy Trinity of Internal Logic, Grammar, and Marketability, the Editor stands ever vigilant. As we all know, it has been recently discovered that the origin for the Inviolate-Otherwordly-Grace myth of the Author comes from the almost imperceptible touch of the Editor, for It is indeed something beyond the ken of mortals. Where It has been considered thoughtfully, one might not even know it was there. Where It and It's Divine Edict has been disregarded, only chaos reigns. For the Author, as a base creature, often finds itself succumbing to its nature. A weakness of character in the face of A Popular Series Coming To An End and the hubris this often engenders can cause the un-Graced mind to nearly go mad.
In this hour, the Author thinks to itself: "Self, you got some hot shit. Errybody just be ridin' your nuts. You don't need all them haters." This is, of course, pure insanity.
Increasingly long, rambling stories fill every piece of media produced, even while whole subplots disappear into thin air. Character deaths happen out of sheer spite for the fandom. Finally, if this is allowed to continue for long enough and still people keep buying its bullshit, the Author will commit that most grievous and infamous of sins: Declaring THIS to be the Goddamn End and Shut UP Steve THIS is my Perfect Vision you can't edit THIS I DON'T KNOW WHY I EVEN PAY YOU.
The results are disastrous. An ending that is abrupt is the best that one might hope for. Failing that, we can only expect an ending that is thematically incoherent, often outrageous, and apparently written by an altogether different person. This is more true than one might think, for though it may still be the Author's hand on the pen, only the Devil would ignore his Editor.
Viktor Walters on
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
Heh, can't tell which side you're lampooning, Viktor.
Not too long ago I heard about certain self-publishing authors who sell their wares 1 chapter at a time. This is good for the author because it means someone can pay a small amount to get a sample of the artist's ware and that gives them exposure they wouldn't have otherwise. It's good for the consumer in that the consumer can just stop buying if the writing quality every falls short. Additionally, they can give the artists direct, immediate feedback as to what they like or dislike. Good for everybody!
The idea that the artist is free from criticism and is somehow working in a vacuum (or at least that he should be) seems pretty cray cray to me. I like the world we're living in now, where we have a far more direct connection to our artists, and they to us.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
Well this isn't exactly the first screw up Bioware has had, though it is probably the largest. In the last few years they have done quite a lot that has upset people. For many this is the final straw, that Bioware has proven what kind of company they are. Even if it is based on one game, so what? How is it ridiculous to not like a product and thus no longer support the company who makes that product. If I go to a restaurant for the first time and their food is so bad it makes me vomit, is it ridiculous to not eat there anymore? If a girl has given you two great blow jobs before but came close to biting off the tip of your penis during the third, would you really be so eager to get a fourth from her?
Those examples seem a bit over the top as well. I've never gotten ill to the point of vomiting because of what I ate at a restaurant. Even if I had, comparing that to botching the ending to what otherwise was an amazing series of games seems unduly harsh. Not sure how I feel about sex as an analogy, but not wanting to get a blowjob (play ME3) again does not necessarily mean that I don't want to have sex (play another Bioware game) with her.
Ok, I haven't played ToR or dragon age 2, so they have a history of good games with (serious?) flaws. I would then ask, what gaming producer HASN'T had missteps. Did you boycott all of them as well? What is the message that even sends to a creator? "If you try to make an amazing game, you had better not fuck up or that will be the end of your business." Would it not be more reasonable to just have lessened expectations when their next game rolls around? Maybe don't buy it if it looks like rubbish, just like you would do with every other game?
In other words, what is so special about this situation that it requires such drastic action?
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
@Sticks Essentially what happened here, for me, is that Bioware spent five years making me care about specific things. Doing a really excellent job of it, too. Then they spent the last five minutes telling me that none of that mattered and I was a fool for caring about any of it. And I don't mean that in a "I hated the ending so it makes me not care about it" sense of things. I mean that specific themes and persons are held up as important to the player, and then we're told in the endings that those things are actually wrong to care about. We told you diversity working together towards a common goal was a good thing? Suckerrsssss! Only racial homogeny could ever bring peace!
The funny thing is, from what I've heard, the "failure" ending is far less contradictory of the overall themes of the game, and far more emotionally satisfying than the Ice Cream Reapers win ending. I've considered replaying the game in an attempt to get that ending instead. But.. Bioware was really successful in getting me to not care anymore. I can't seem to get myself motivated do it.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
Also: The idea that every game manufacturer has made serious missteps is moot with me. I rarely buy any games at all. When I do, it's usually games that are pretty old (by game standards) and are acclaimed as 'must play' by a lot of people. All except for Bioware games. Well, now Bioware games are no longer going to be on my list of 'buy new' anymore, either. Simple as that.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
That is reasonable to me. I typically buy a lot of games. Usually, it's when they are on sale on steam for pennies on the dollar. What you are advocating is not boycotting Bioware, but no longer treating them as special.
The problem I've repeatedly stated that I have is the hyperbolic "Bioware is not getting another dime of my money" type comments.
Heh, can't tell which side you're lampooning, Viktor.
I really just don't agree with the "you aren't the author" thing being a core component to pretty much any argument. I see it all the time in art classes. Especially first year ones. Just because someone likes what they made doesn't make it good. If that person continues to ignore criticism or comes up with excuses like "oh, well this part was INTENTIONALLY shitty, that's part of my VISION" or "well, I know it looks bad but I like it that way", you probably won't see them in class near the end of the semester. The argument shouldn't go "you aren't the author", it should go "you aren't the editor". Of course, in art class, the teacher is your editor.
The counter-argument could be made that if Bioware likes to encourage so much fan feedback and participation as it claims perhaps we indeed qualify as the editor. As you say, we are a lot closer to our authors nowadays.
The only other meaningful comment I can think of for this discussion right now is that if someone discourages giving to a legitimately good charity, I discourage listening to that someone. I really like Checkpoint though so I'm going to give them the benefit of a doubt here. THE benefit of a doubt, y'hear?! That's the ONE. You're on notice, Graham.
I don't think anyone is discouraging giving to Child's Play. You don't have to attach some ulterior motive to it though, just go to the child's play site and click the nice big "donate via paypal" button.
I don't think anyone is discouraging giving to Child's Play. You don't have to attach some ulterior motive to it though, just go to the child's play site and click the nice big "donate via paypal" button.
*Shrug* But if I can donate to Child's Play, a charity that I like, while also adding my voice to a campaign I like, why wouldn't I?
Lots of charity donations probably have some ulterior motive. Even if the motive is just, "so that I can live with myself." I can't imagine being on the recieving end of a charitable donation and thinking, "The person who gave this had bad thoughts when they gave it, the money is tainted! I can't accept it!"
Cambiata on
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
To me, the only reasonable reactions to that Child's Play campaign are:
1) That's a pretty cool idea. Great way to show you have money you are willing to spend if Bioware will give you something to spend it on.
2) Ha ha, those people are idiots. Glad Child's play is getting something out of their idiocy!
The idea that someone's reaction could be: "How DARE they give money to Child's Play!" Strikes me as pretty odd.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
I don't think anyone is discouraging giving to Child's Play.
I hope not, hence the benefit of a doubt I'm lacking now. The way it has often been worded is that giving to Child's Play for this is "underhanded" or "manipulative". It discourages the people who are doing it from doing it because they are doing it for that "manipulative" reason. I don't care why someone is giving to charity, if they have the mental acuity, financial stability, and willingness to do it then let them do it. You can donate to Child's Play for Hitler for all I care, money for sick children is money for sick children. If anything the Retake Mass Effect thing is just encouraging Bioware. Every time they make a pointedly shit ending, people will give $70k in charity to sick children. I don't think that hurts Bioware one tiny bit.
Well this isn't exactly the first screw up Bioware has had, though it is probably the largest. In the last few years they have done quite a lot that has upset people. For many this is the final straw, that Bioware has proven what kind of company they are. Even if it is based on one game, so what? How is it ridiculous to not like a product and thus no longer support the company who makes that product. If I go to a restaurant for the first time and their food is so bad it makes me vomit, is it ridiculous to not eat there anymore? If a girl has given you two great blow jobs before but came close to biting off the tip of your penis during the third, would you really be so eager to get a fourth from her?
Those examples seem a bit over the top as well. I've never gotten ill to the point of vomiting because of what I ate at a restaurant. Even if I had, comparing that to botching the ending to what otherwise was an amazing series of games seems unduly harsh. Not sure how I feel about sex as an analogy, but not wanting to get a blowjob (play ME3) again does not necessarily mean that I don't want to have sex (play another Bioware game) with her.
Ok, I haven't played ToR or dragon age 2, so they have a history of good games with (serious?) flaws. I would then ask, what gaming producer HASN'T had missteps. Did you boycott all of them as well? What is the message that even sends to a creator? "If you try to make an amazing game, you had better not fuck up or that will be the end of your business." Would it not be more reasonable to just have lessened expectations when their next game rolls around? Maybe don't buy it if it looks like rubbish, just like you would do with every other game?
In other words, what is so special about this situation that it requires such drastic action?
Well of course they are a bit over the top, they are examples used to prove a point. I'll never understand "well that isn't the exact same situation" response to analogies and examples(dramatic or otherwise). Believe me, you can be quite a fan of a restaurant, but it only takes one spoiled scallop to make you lose your appetite for the place.
As for the drastic response or action, well I'll quote a previous statement of mine:
"Because it is the end to a massive trilogy. It is an end that fails to deliver on the promises of 5 years. It is an end that trivializes or even undoes everything the players have accomplished. It is an end that completely taints the journey. You have to understand, some people have put in hundreds of hours over three games and multiple different characters. They have done this because they were promised, were sold, on the fact that they would be able to craft a story. That all of their decisions would mean something, have an effect. Instead they got an ending were the god from the machine descends, makes everything they have done(hundreds of hours) worthless, just handwaves it away, and then presents them with the same three options that everyone else gets. This is after they were assured that they would not get an A, B, or C ending.
*edit*
Imagine that you have been in a happy, committed relationship for 5 years. You are in love, and your partner is just your favorite thing ever. But then one day you find your beau balls deep in some chick. Not only does this spell an end to your relationship, but it probably also colors or changes your perspective on your relationship thus far. Odds are it won't be for the better. "
People(myself among them) have put in literally hundreds of hours in to these games, and in a span of 5 poorly written(oh by the gods is it poorly written) minutes, all of that was undone. It wasn't that people didn't just didn't like the ending, it's that the ending actually took away from their work, from their progress. It made it all for naught. Why play through a game series that is all about your choices, your story, having an effect on things, having you Shepard, when you know that all of it is for nothing. That no matter what you do it is all going to be done away by a god from the machine who doesn't even so much as give you the option to ask the questions that your character would ask. Instead we are left with broken promises, hundreds of wasted hours, and a single ending that has 3 different colors. And we don't even get the satisfaction that this is an artistic move that adds depth, meaning, or quality to the story. It is so poorly written and filled with holes that I damn near had an aneurism, and the "behind the scenes" stuff proves that this ending was chosen at the last minute and was being desperately rushed out at the last minute. They didn't even start recording TIM's final dialogue until last November because they were still rushing around trying to finish things. And this is after who knows how many official statements that this would not be the case.
I don't think anyone is discouraging giving to Child's Play.
I hope not, hence the benefit of a doubt I'm lacking now. The way it has often been worded is that giving to Child's Play for this is "underhanded" or "manipulative". It discourages the people who are doing it from doing it because they are doing it for that "manipulative" reason. I don't care why someone is giving to charity, if they have the mental acuity, financial stability, and willingness to do it then let them do it. You can donate to Child's Play for Hitler for all I care, money for sick children is money for sick children. If anything the Retake Mass Effect thing is just encouraging Bioware. Every time they make a pointedly shit ending, people will give $70k in charity to sick children. I don't think that hurts Bioware one tiny bit.
Really the sentiment among the movement really hasn't shown any manipulative or nefarious intent. I was on the forums when this was starting and the general idea was that it gives people a bit of a channel, in that it allows people to console themselves by thinking that "at least something good game from this", it might get some more attention and show Bioware that people are serious about this, and if not than at least some sick kids get video games. Is it a bit misguided? Maybe, even probably. I just don't get how many people are calling them out on this, almost as if they are doing something wrong. I mean I hope to high heavens that this catches on. Every time the internet get's its panties in a bunch(so about ever 4 seconds) it doesn't just bitch on forums but also gives thousands of dollars to charity. Where is the freakin' downside to that?
Corrik on
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
I don't think anyone is discouraging giving to Child's Play.
I hope not, hence the benefit of a doubt I'm lacking now. The way it has often been worded is that giving to Child's Play for this is "underhanded" or "manipulative". It discourages the people who are doing it from doing it because they are doing it for that "manipulative" reason. I don't care why someone is giving to charity, if they have the mental acuity, financial stability, and willingness to do it then let them do it. You can donate to Child's Play for Hitler for all I care, money for sick children is money for sick children. If anything the Retake Mass Effect thing is just encouraging Bioware. Every time they make a pointedly shit ending, people will give $70k in charity to sick children. I don't think that hurts Bioware one tiny bit.
Really the sentiment among the movement really hasn't shown any manipulative or nefarious intent. I was on the forums when this was starting and the general idea was that it gives people a bit of a channel, in that it allows people to console themselves by thinking that "at least something good game from this", it might get some more attention and show Bioware that people are serious about this, and if not than at least some sick kids get video games. Is it a bit misguided? Maybe, even probably. I just don't get how many people are calling them out on this, almost as if they are doing something wrong. I mean I hope to high heavens that this catches on. Every time the internet get's its panties in a bunch(so about ever 4 seconds) it doesn't just bitch on forums but also gives thousands of dollars to charity. Where is the freakin' downside to that?
Seriously! Imagine all the fan raging that goes on about a ton of things... imagine if every time nerds got outraged, they gave massive amounts to charity. It would be beautiful.
Someone tell me again why they are trying to discourage this??
Cambiata on
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
Again, 'Retake Mass Effect' is not a literal name, it just uses the terminology the game used in its adverts. In the end all it is, is a charity that allows us to show our dissatisfaction with the american dollar, and nothing else. Don't get so hung up on the name.
It's not because it's called "Retake", it's because I can't follow their insistence on demanding a change. When you go from complaining about an ending, and slide into demanding a change to it, you lose my sympathy. And yeah, that's where you start getting called "entitled".
Whenever I see a gaming news outlet or a forum post talk about "gamer entitlement" in regards to ME3 and the complaints about the endings I'm reminded of the tactics Fox News would use when bashing the "liberal media" whenever a news story crops up that they don't like either.
This article from Forbes is a nice take on why making that comparison is a little bit of a fallacy.
That Forbes article is misleading, and in a couple cases outright wrong, however.
Games are cheaper, but only the top 5% of games make a profit.
The same technology is cheaper, but gaming companies are pushed into using even newer technology instead of reaping the benefits of the lower costs of old tech.
Also, Colin Moriarty isn't calling gamers entitled for being dissatisfied, he's calling the movements that "demand" new endings entitled.
He calls the people who tank scores, petition to change the ending, and attack people on twitter entitled.
Also, again, the concept of expanding content in games is used. The Day One DLC argument was ended by Bioware in several statements pointing out that while DLC can add content to a game, it cannot overwrite it. So while Kasumi and other DLC characters were added to the game in Mass Effect 2, they were not added in whole cloth. They were present before hand in the game code. Javik is no different. He was present in the game code because Bioware cannot re-write that code to add him in later completely.
It's entirely possible that Bioware cannot rewrite or change the endings.
It's even more likely that DLC like Broken Steel's ending change were already present in the game's code but unused.
I don't think anyone is discouraging giving to Child's Play.
I hope not, hence the benefit of a doubt I'm lacking now. The way it has often been worded is that giving to Child's Play for this is "underhanded" or "manipulative". It discourages the people who are doing it from doing it because they are doing it for that "manipulative" reason. I don't care why someone is giving to charity, if they have the mental acuity, financial stability, and willingness to do it then let them do it. You can donate to Child's Play for Hitler for all I care, money for sick children is money for sick children. If anything the Retake Mass Effect thing is just encouraging Bioware. Every time they make a pointedly shit ending, people will give $70k in charity to sick children. I don't think that hurts Bioware one tiny bit.
Really the sentiment among the movement really hasn't shown any manipulative or nefarious intent. I was on the forums when this was starting and the general idea was that it gives people a bit of a channel, in that it allows people to console themselves by thinking that "at least something good game from this", it might get some more attention and show Bioware that people are serious about this, and if not than at least some sick kids get video games. Is it a bit misguided? Maybe, even probably. I just don't get how many people are calling them out on this, almost as if they are doing something wrong. I mean I hope to high heavens that this catches on. Every time the internet get's its panties in a bunch(so about ever 4 seconds) it doesn't just bitch on forums but also gives thousands of dollars to charity. Where is the freakin' downside to that?
Seriously! Imagine all the fan raging that goes on about a ton of things... imagine if every time nerds got outraged, they gave massive amounts to charity. It would be beautiful.
Someone tell me again why they are trying to discourage this??
I think you just made that point yourself. The "Retake Mass Effect 3" movement has gone from a simple movement to have the ending changed, to a bulletproof statement just because it's giving to charity. Now anyone who attempts to point out problems in either their argument or any argument is getting shouted down as someone who "hates charity". Giving to charity has nothing to do with the argument, and it's being used as a shield to deflect and derail the entire conversation.
Dedwrekka on
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
Again, 'Retake Mass Effect' is not a literal name, it just uses the terminology the game used in its adverts. In the end all it is, is a charity that allows us to show our dissatisfaction with the american dollar, and nothing else. Don't get so hung up on the name.
It's not because it's called "Retake", it's because I can't follow their insistence on demanding a change. When you go from complaining about an ending, and slide into demanding a change to it, you lose my sympathy. And yeah, that's where you start getting called "entitled".
* That it is the right of the writers and developers of the Mass Effect series to end that series however they see fit
We therefore respectfully request additional endings be added to the game which provide:
* A more complete explanation of the story events
* An explaination of the outcome of the decisions made, especially with regard to the planets, races, and companions detailed throughout the series
* A heroic ending which provides a better sense of accomplishment
To this end, we donate to the "Retake Mass Effect 3" Child's Play Charity drive in lieu of our signature to this petition, in order to establish our sincerity, our love for these games, and for the Mass Effect universe.
We thank you for your consideration.
Doesn't sound very demanding to me. Requesting? Sure. But not demanding at all.
Cambiata on
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
“But!” the hypothetical critics cry. “Those changes are driven by the developers, not the fans!” Okay, if we’re going to ignore Broken Steel entirely, then yes, changes to stories have only ever been prompted by the content creators themselves. Except for that time in 1903 when Sir Arthur Conan Doyle brought Sherlock Holmes back to life in the short story The Adventure of the Empty House. See, fans were so pissed off that Holmes had died in the previous story, The Final Problem, that they canceled their subscriptions to the magazine that had carried the story. Doyle first released The Hound of the Baskervilles as a sort of “lost adventure” that took place before Holmes’ demise, but fans weren’t happy with a hero that was already dead. Following enormous pressure from the public and his publishers, Doyle revived his protagonist and continued the series.
Or there was that time that Firefly fans played a significant role in getting the movie Serenity greenlit. Or that time that Community was pulled back from the brink of cancellation because fans kicked up a ruckus. Or that time — look, my point is that people have every right to disagree with the reasons for disliking the ending to ME3, and no one can reasonably suggest that BioWare is obligated to do exactly what the public demands, but chiding the fans for doing what fans have always done is not only unfair, but it seems a little ignorant of the way that art actually works. Art is malleable. It is impermanent. It evolves. I’m a creator myself, so I do consider creative authority to be something sacred, but I also recognize that there reaches a point in which a story becomes so big that no one is quite sure who it belongs to anymore
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
Again, 'Retake Mass Effect' is not a literal name, it just uses the terminology the game used in its adverts. In the end all it is, is a charity that allows us to show our dissatisfaction with the american dollar, and nothing else. Don't get so hung up on the name.
It's not because it's called "Retake", it's because I can't follow their insistence on demanding a change. When you go from complaining about an ending, and slide into demanding a change to it, you lose my sympathy. And yeah, that's where you start getting called "entitled".
* That it is the right of the writers and developers of the Mass Effect series to end that series however they see fit
We therefore respectfully request additional endings be added to the game which provide:
* A more complete explanation of the story events
* An explaination of the outcome of the decisions made, especially with regard to the planets, races, and companions detailed throughout the series
* A heroic ending which provides a better sense of accomplishment
To this end, we donate to the "Retake Mass Effect 3" Child's Play Charity drive in lieu of our signature to this petition, in order to establish our sincerity, our love for these games, and for the Mass Effect universe.
We thank you for your consideration.
Doesn't sound very demanding to me. Requesting? Sure. But not demanding at all.
They're attempting to put pressure on Bioware through peititon and by trying to portray themselves as the moral high ground. You can call it whatever you like, they're still telling Bioware to change the ending.
The difference is, if Bioware doesn't change the ending, do you think that "respectful request" will be quite as respectful? Will the movement simply melt away if Bioware says "no, and here's why"? The movement doesn't even account for Bioware saying no. It's still a demand, they just avoided that word directly
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
Again, 'Retake Mass Effect' is not a literal name, it just uses the terminology the game used in its adverts. In the end all it is, is a charity that allows us to show our dissatisfaction with the american dollar, and nothing else. Don't get so hung up on the name.
It's not because it's called "Retake", it's because I can't follow their insistence on demanding a change. When you go from complaining about an ending, and slide into demanding a change to it, you lose my sympathy. And yeah, that's where you start getting called "entitled".
* That it is the right of the writers and developers of the Mass Effect series to end that series however they see fit
We therefore respectfully request additional endings be added to the game which provide:
* A more complete explanation of the story events
* An explaination of the outcome of the decisions made, especially with regard to the planets, races, and companions detailed throughout the series
* A heroic ending which provides a better sense of accomplishment
To this end, we donate to the "Retake Mass Effect 3" Child's Play Charity drive in lieu of our signature to this petition, in order to establish our sincerity, our love for these games, and for the Mass Effect universe.
We thank you for your consideration.
Doesn't sound very demanding to me. Requesting? Sure. But not demanding at all.
They're attempting to put pressure on Bioware through peititon and by trying to portray themselves as the moral high ground. You can call it whatever you like, they're still telling Bioware to change the ending.
The difference is, if Bioware doesn't change the ending, do you think that "respectful request" will be quite as respectful? Will the movement simply melt away if Bioware says "no, and here's why"? The movement doesn't even account for Bioware saying no. It's still a demand, they just avoided that word directly
So it's demanding because you say so? And your opinon is the only one that matters?
To be honest, you sound like the most 'self-entitled' gamer in this thread. At least Sticks is willing to admit that it's the right of the consumer to not buy from a company if that company is making products the consumer doesn't like.
Cambiata on
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
Corrik, The problem with your analogies is that you keep personalizing the Mass Effect series as something made specifically for/about you, when in fact mass effect has more in common with a can of risotto that some risotto company made than a restaurant that serves risotto, or whatever odd analogy you've moved on to since. You're demanding that the company change its risotto to add water chestnuts to their "french onion" line and discontinue regular french onion without water chestnuts.
Analogies are terrible.
Also, do you really think EA is going to just let a game franchise that shipped 3.5 million at launch go to waste? Why do you think they made Kotor online?
Corrik, The problem with your analogies is that you keep personalizing the Mass Effect series as something made specifically for/about you, when in fact mass effect has more in common with a can of risotto that some risotto company made than a restaurant that serves risotto, or whatever odd analogy you've moved on to since. You're demanding that the company change its risotto to add water chestnuts to their "french onion" line and discontinue regular french onion without water chestnuts.
Analogies are terrible.
Also, do you really think EA is going to just let a game franchise that shipped 3.5 million at launch go to waste? Why do you think they made Kotor online?
They are only terrible is you use a terrible analogy such as that. I use the analogies because people like to get caught up with the sentiment that it is a "art" or a "game" and so therefore is not subject to the same scrutiny and standards that other products are held to. Which is of course simply not true.
I'm doing that because that was a huge selling point of the Mass Effect series. That you, as the player, would be able to change things. Not only in that there are choices to make in the game that will have consequences and outcomes, but also that Bioware would really listen to the fans. The entire point was the co-development that would lead to greater and more personalized stories. Bioware themselves have stated this
"Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”
Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with
the fans. We use a lot of feedback.” "
That was one of the major reasons why the series was so popular and why people put so much investment in it, emotional, financial, etc. This is why people feel this way, and they are not entirely wrong to do so. If I bought a can "french onion" that was supposed to come with water chestnuts, I want my water chestnuts. It is really rather simple. Now how Bioware really feels about this, we can only assume. They haven't really made much of a statement other than your usual PR responses. They haven't come out with any "No it's ours and you don't have a say in the matter!" lines yet and based on previous statements I have to think that at least some of them understand where the fans are coming from, if not agree with them. But as I said we have no way of knowing, we will have to wait and see.
Again, 'Retake Mass Effect' is not a literal name, it just uses the terminology the game used in its adverts. In the end all it is, is a charity that allows us to show our dissatisfaction with the american dollar, and nothing else. Don't get so hung up on the name.
It's not because it's called "Retake", it's because I can't follow their insistence on demanding a change. When you go from complaining about an ending, and slide into demanding a change to it, you lose my sympathy. And yeah, that's where you start getting called "entitled".
* That it is the right of the writers and developers of the Mass Effect series to end that series however they see fit
We therefore respectfully request additional endings be added to the game which provide:
* A more complete explanation of the story events
* An explaination of the outcome of the decisions made, especially with regard to the planets, races, and companions detailed throughout the series
* A heroic ending which provides a better sense of accomplishment
To this end, we donate to the "Retake Mass Effect 3" Child's Play Charity drive in lieu of our signature to this petition, in order to establish our sincerity, our love for these games, and for the Mass Effect universe.
We thank you for your consideration.
Doesn't sound very demanding to me. Requesting? Sure. But not demanding at all.
They're attempting to put pressure on Bioware through peititon and by trying to portray themselves as the moral high ground. You can call it whatever you like, they're still telling Bioware to change the ending.
The difference is, if Bioware doesn't change the ending, do you think that "respectful request" will be quite as respectful? Will the movement simply melt away if Bioware says "no, and here's why"? The movement doesn't even account for Bioware saying no. It's still a demand, they just avoided that word directly
So it's demanding because you say so? And your opinon is the only one that matters?
To be honest, you sound like the most 'self-entitled' gamer in this thread. At least Sticks is willing to admit that it's the right of the consumer to not buy from a company if that company is making products the consumer doesn't like.
I don't see where he said it wasn't.
also the most damning quote here is
in order to establish our sincerity, our love for these games, and for the Mass Effect universe
... we're giving money to a charity for sick kids because we are just that nice of people.
If it were so "sincere" then they wouldn't be standing around and mentioning how nice they were while in midst of asking for things from the developers. Suppose someone came and asked to borrow your car, but prefaced it with a tally of how much they gave to charity that week. Or the real kicker here, suppose a child asks her parent for a toy and points out how good she's been all week. How can you claim that that's not manipulative? Because it doesn't fit into your argument and demolishes what you've continually insisted is a benign request rather than an imperious demand. Your whole argument is predicated on convincing people that your sense of entitlement is not actually a sense of entitlement.
You asked me why I keep quoting wikipedia. it's because I don't think you (and others) are aware of what some of the words involved here mean.
This is said without anger or vitriol, by the way. It would be more way more condescending if I tried to placate you, and frankly there's no non-pejorative synonym for entitlement.
Corrik, The problem with your analogies is that you keep personalizing the Mass Effect series as something made specifically for/about you, when in fact mass effect has more in common with a can of risotto that some risotto company made than a restaurant that serves risotto, or whatever odd analogy you've moved on to since. You're demanding that the company change its risotto to add water chestnuts to their "french onion" line and discontinue regular french onion without water chestnuts.
Analogies are terrible.
Also, do you really think EA is going to just let a game franchise that shipped 3.5 million at launch go to waste? Why do you think they made Kotor online?
They are only terrible is you use a terrible analogy such as that. I use the analogies because people like to get caught up with the sentiment that it is a "art" or a "game" and so therefore is not subject to the same scrutiny and standards that other products are held to. Which is of course simply not true.
I'm doing that because that was a huge selling point of the Mass Effect series. That you, as the player, would be able to change things. Not only in that there are choices to make in the game that will have consequences and outcomes, but also that Bioware would really listen to the fans. The entire point was the co-development that would lead to greater and more personalized stories. Bioware themselves have stated this
"Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”
Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with
the fans. We use a lot of feedback.” "
That was one of the major reasons why the series was so popular and why people put so much investment in it, emotional, financial, etc. This is why people feel this way, and they are not entirely wrong to do so. If I bought a can "french onion" that was supposed to come with water chestnuts, I want my water chestnuts. It is really rather simple. Now how Bioware really feels about this, we can only assume. They haven't really made much of a statement other than your usual PR responses. They haven't come out with any "No it's ours and you don't have a say in the matter!" lines yet and based on previous statements I have to think that at least some of them understand where the fans are coming from, if not agree with them. But as I said we have no way of knowing, we will have to wait and see.
Problem is, it's still about as personal as a choose your own adventure novel. You can't, say, decide to become a slaver in Mass Effect 2 and help the collectors. Your adventure is only as unique as until you find the next person who made all the same choices and read the same pages as you.
All of these "promises" constantly quoted were in the midst of development, and thus have about as much weight as a WoW expansion promising a dance studio or a runic path system as a supplement for talents.
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
But @Thejakeman nobody is saying that gamers have a right to a better ending! Or that Bioware has to make a change! Saying that if you "read between the lines" then that's what the campaign is really saying just makes you looke like a goose.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
Corrik, The problem with your analogies is that you keep personalizing the Mass Effect series as something made specifically for/about you, when in fact mass effect has more in common with a can of risotto that some risotto company made than a restaurant that serves risotto, or whatever odd analogy you've moved on to since. You're demanding that the company change its risotto to add water chestnuts to their "french onion" line and discontinue regular french onion without water chestnuts.
Analogies are terrible.
Also, do you really think EA is going to just let a game franchise that shipped 3.5 million at launch go to waste? Why do you think they made Kotor online?
They are only terrible is you use a terrible analogy such as that. I use the analogies because people like to get caught up with the sentiment that it is a "art" or a "game" and so therefore is not subject to the same scrutiny and standards that other products are held to. Which is of course simply not true.
I'm doing that because that was a huge selling point of the Mass Effect series. That you, as the player, would be able to change things. Not only in that there are choices to make in the game that will have consequences and outcomes, but also that Bioware would really listen to the fans. The entire point was the co-development that would lead to greater and more personalized stories. Bioware themselves have stated this
"Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”
Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with
the fans. We use a lot of feedback.” "
That was one of the major reasons why the series was so popular and why people put so much investment in it, emotional, financial, etc. This is why people feel this way, and they are not entirely wrong to do so. If I bought a can "french onion" that was supposed to come with water chestnuts, I want my water chestnuts. It is really rather simple. Now how Bioware really feels about this, we can only assume. They haven't really made much of a statement other than your usual PR responses. They haven't come out with any "No it's ours and you don't have a say in the matter!" lines yet and based on previous statements I have to think that at least some of them understand where the fans are coming from, if not agree with them. But as I said we have no way of knowing, we will have to wait and see.
Problem is, it's still about as personal as a choose your own adventure novel. You can't, say, decide to become a slaver in Mass Effect 2 and help the collectors. Your adventure is only as unique as until you find the next person who made all the same choices and read the same pages as you.
All of these "promises" constantly quoted were in the midst of development, and thus have about as much weight as a WoW expansion promising a dance studio or a runic path system as a supplement for talents.
And that doesn't change a single thing about the mission statement, nor does it make the story or games less personal. It was never about making a D&D type adventure where you could do whatever you wanted. It was about being able to have a say and/or an impact on the narrative. I've played premade adventure paths for table top RPGs, overall the story was very similar to the story that so many others played, maybe even exactly the same as a few. That doesn't mean that I didn't impact my version of the story, that it wasn't a personal experience. These were things that were promised from day one. They were repeated in interviews before, during, and after development cycles. And yes, when you give information in an official interview you are speaking on behalf of a company, these things do hold weight. They are not blog posts about ideas the team is tossing around. If you think that what you say in an interview has no weight, you are sadly mistaken.
Posts
From the perspective of art it makes even less sense. I didn't like "The Persistence of Memory" by Dali because of the color scheme, so I'm going to boycott the rest of his work? What?How about I actually respond to what you said. If that is indeed the artist's vision for all future work, and it bothers you badly, then you SHOULD go elsewhere. However, I've seen no evidence that Bioware's vision of the future is nothing but shitty ending all the way down. I don't consider the refusal to modify that one particular painting (which we aren't even sure they are refusing to do) to be indicative of future intent. Being more wary makes sense, particularly if they have another bad ending in the near future. Saying "I'm not going to buy anything from Bioware because of this one game" is stupid.
As for products, if there is a pattern of it breaking, it makes sense to go elsewhere for products. This isn't how I view games generally, but I realize that others do. I guess I'm missing the part where Bioware has a history of promising the world to it's consumers and then giving them shitty endings, which would actually make boycotting them make sense. Or maybe the part where they told you where you could take your concerns and shove them, because insulting their customers would be another reason for you to go elsewhere.
Do you see how that might seem unreasonable to people?
edit: added to the part re: art because I didn't really fully read your argument there
You can't look at a gestalt and say that only one part of it is bad, and so you should like the rest of it. If I try on a dress, and it's a gorgeous dress but it simply doesn't come in my size, I shouldn't "buy it anyway" because otherwise I'm just being petulant over "a problem of 5%". And "the colors are wrong" is not the complaint for this piece of artwork. It's that everything is well composed and beautiful, except there's one part of the picture that doesn't belong and doesn't even look like the same artist added it (like maybe the artist decided to let his 5 year old finger paint in the corner). As a gestalt image, you can't just ignore the bad part, no matter how much you might like to. It's too much part of the whole.
People were playing towards a conclusion. Mass Effect was about choice and consequence. You made the tough choices and worked hard in order to get the best possible outcome. It was like that all series, people loved replaying the game to see different results to actions as well. People were looking forward to an ending they were promised, one where their tough choices made them an ending they deserved but got a literary train wreck instead.
Up until that last 5% people left the game longing for more. After that 5% people felt disappointed, betrayed and utterly unwilling to play the game again. I've actively told a few people to stop watching the ending past a certain point so their Mass Effect experience isn't ruined.
Haven't succeeded yet, the Mass Effect ending has become like Pandora's box. It contains something terrible but people now know it's so terrible their curiosity forces them to see it... to their endless regret. At least people thank me for trying.
If this community believes that hating someone based soley upon their gender is acceptable and understandable, I have no interest in being a part of it.
I'm sorry but no, that is not true. Many of the quotes I listed are from interviews, this means that they are acting and speaking on behalf of the company. These are not their private twitter feeds, or opinions they posted on their own blog. These are official statements about the game, and as such they hold weight. The only reason I bought ME3 was because of statements such as the ones I listed. Ones that assured me this and told me that. Especially the one from Mr. Hudson which states we will not get an A, B, or C ending. These claims(several of them quantifiable) fell flat and thus it is my right as a consumer to a refund or a fixed product which accurately reflects their claims. Just the same as if it were any other product. The "art" shield is not something you can so easily hide behind. Is it art, sure but that isn't some magic shield that protects you from scrutiny. It also isn't a shield Bioware can hide behind since we have evidence that this ending was rushed at the last minute(they were working to change it in November).
An example for you, film is art. This means that the Green Lantern film was art(bad art). Now many of the advertisements made it appear that the film would focus on the Green Lantern Corp and that was one of the major reasons I wanted to see the film. It quickly became apparent that this was not true and that the film was horribly godawful. Now sure it might have been the 'artistic vision' to majorly change Hal Jordan's character and deviate so much from the source, but that is not the product I came to see nor the one I was sold on. I left the theater, asked for a refund, and was promptly given one. Now does that make me a "petulant child"?
It isn't that the ending was dissatisfying(at least for me) it's that it flew in the face of previous official statements about the game, the ending, and the impact the player would have. It doesn't matter if the rest of the car drives awesome. If you advertise, claim, make official statements that the air conditioner can make cotton candy flavored snow, well than it had better do that or we have an issue.
They probably just assumed that people wouldn't take things so seriously and would educate themselves both on the movement and ME3.
I'll agree with that, and I had modified my post to more accurately respond to what you had written.
So ME3 isn't just tainted by the ending, it's ruined. That still is a case for not liking that particular piece of art. Unless Bioware comes out with statements indicating that this is how they plan to do all future works. It still seems like an overreaction to say "I'm not going to buy anything else from them." If for no other reason than you DO have to purchase their art sight unseen, and they've produced some fantastic work before this stinker. Why is this piece weighted so heavily compared to their other works?
Because it is the end to a massive trilogy. It is an end that fails to deliver on the promises of 5 years. It is an end that trivializes or even undoes everything the players have accomplished. It is an end that completely taints the journey. You have to understand, some people have put in hundreds of hours over three games and multiple different characters. They have done this because they were promised, were sold, on the fact that they would be able to craft a story. That all of their decisions would mean something, have an effect. Instead they got an ending were the god from the machine descends, makes everything they have done(hundreds of hours) worthless, just handwaves it away, and then presents them with the same three options that everyone else gets. This is after they were assured that they would not get an A, B, or C ending.
*edit*
Imagine that you have been in a happy, committed relationship for 5 years. You are in love, and your partner is just your favorite thing ever. But then one day you find your beau balls deep in some chick. Not only does this spell an end to your relationship, but it probably also colors or changes your perspective on your relationship thus far. Odds are it won't be for the better.
Thank you for that acknowledgment, anyway.
Yeah, Bioware actually has a history at this point. Take the last single player game Bioware released, Dragon Age 2. Now I actually kind of liked where they went with that; I thought it was an interesting and experimental way to end the series (essentially that the choices that you make don't matter in the end, that you are an observer in history, not it's master). But that's because in that series, "choices are paramount" was never the driving theme behind the series, not the way it is with Mass Effect. Moreover, even if you accept the "nothing you do matters" ending, like I did, it's still noticble that they rolled the game out with an extremely short delelopment time (something around 9 months, I believe), which shows in the game. There's an insane amount of map reuse, for example. But I think I didn't mind Dragon Age 2 so much because, like I said, it wasn't themed so much towards choice, but also because I probably am not as big a fan of Dragon Age as I am of Mass Effect. Other people were not nearly so charitable as I was with my reaction; many fans absolutely despise Dragon Age 2.
Additionally, there have been issues, and continue to be issues with SWTOR. Things that I've basically glossed over in my mind and didn't bother to feel angry about, because I was (and still am, frankly) a huge Bioware fan, and at the time my thought was: "I don't mind giving them more money, because they are doing things in gaming that no one else is doing for me." Like for example, I bought the collector's edition for SWTOR, because the collector's edition had special in-game stores that no one else got. I wasn't expecting anything game-breaking from those stores, I figured it would all be visual stuff (like maybe getting to dress your smuggler in something exactly like Han Solo, or getting an outfit exactly like Obi Wan's. Something like that). But the stores ended up containing virtually nothing. What was in there was often broken, or sometimes cheaper versions of the wares were available at regular vendors. That's just a minor complaint, though, compared to the bugs and balance issues in the game. About all of which I've been constantly saying, "give them time, they'll fix it." And again, many other fans are far less forgiving about the problems with SWTOR than I am. Many have already quit the game and consider it a joke.
So it's not as if this is Bioware's first ever misstep, nor is this even the first game where they decided to completely ignore player choice in order to give a single ending. So yeah, at this point, I'm wary of Bioware. Less expecting them to be able to 'get it right'. More concerned that whatever they create in the future is going to be hopelessly broken.
Maybe we are all talking past each other here. I'm not saying that you can't be disappointed in this game, or that it doesn't suck to have high expectations for a Super Bowl win dashed away because they fumbled the ball at the 1 yard line with 10 seconds to go. What I'm saying is that the position "I'm not going to buy anymore Bioware games because of this", which is a position that I've seen mentioned a couple of different times, borders on the ridiculous.
I'm not going to buy Mass Effect - Not Shepard's Adventures 1 & 2.
I'm not going to buy Baldur's Gate 3.
I'm not going to buy another Neverwinter Nights, Dragon Age, or KOTOR game.
All because they botched the ending to ME3.
Well this isn't exactly the first screw up Bioware has had, though it is probably the largest. In the last few years they have done quite a lot that has upset people. For many this is the final straw, that Bioware has proven what kind of company they are. Even if it is based on one game, so what? How is it ridiculous to not like a product and thus no longer support the company who makes that product. If I go to a restaurant for the first time and their food is so bad it makes me vomit, is it ridiculous to not eat there anymore? If a girl has given you two great blow jobs before but came close to biting off the tip of your penis during the third, would you really be so eager to get a fourth from her?
I feel like some people aren't getting this.
If I'm not recalling it wrong, Casey Hudson pretty explicitly said there'd be no Mass Effect after this. It's in one of those quotes people keep throwing around... Casey said something to the effect that they can do all kinds of divergent endings to the game, because they're not planning any games after this so it leaves them free to do so. I'll try to find it.
Edit: Ok, he just says "this story arc" is coming to an end. I guess that could mean more Mass Effect games. I can't imagine why I'd want to play any more Mass Effect games, though.
What about the position "I'm no longer going to take part in 'day 1 pre-ordering' from Bioware because I believe the quality of some of their products (such as the questionable story and blatant re-use of assets in DA 2 and the absence of resolution in ME3 when compared to the statements made by developers of the game) is questionable. This leads me to no longer being able to justifiy a purchase without giving future games time to be properly reviewed by professional gaming sites as well as individual consumers."
Would that be a fair position to take? Cause it sure is mine at the moment. Whatever their next release is going to be (specifically in regards to DA3) there's no way I'm taking part in the pre-ordering jazz until the game has a little bit of time to breathe.
Well right now we don't really know what they mean by that. More than likely this is just PR moves to help control the ebb and flow of the discourse and their comments will have to do with future DLC. Now sure they might have a big plan to add to ME3 and continue with the ME universe and it certainly isn't something that I would discount, but I also wouldn't hold my breath on it.
Pretty much this is my position as well. Although at the moment I can't see myself buying DA3 at all unless I hear really good things about it after release.
The Editor.
The Editor!
Harbinger of Death to literary sacred cows, stalwart defender of the Holy Trinity of Internal Logic, Grammar, and Marketability, the Editor stands ever vigilant. As we all know, it has been recently discovered that the origin for the Inviolate-Otherwordly-Grace myth of the Author comes from the almost imperceptible touch of the Editor, for It is indeed something beyond the ken of mortals. Where It has been considered thoughtfully, one might not even know it was there. Where It and It's Divine Edict has been disregarded, only chaos reigns. For the Author, as a base creature, often finds itself succumbing to its nature. A weakness of character in the face of A Popular Series Coming To An End and the hubris this often engenders can cause the un-Graced mind to nearly go mad.
In this hour, the Author thinks to itself: "Self, you got some hot shit. Errybody just be ridin' your nuts. You don't need all them haters." This is, of course, pure insanity.
Increasingly long, rambling stories fill every piece of media produced, even while whole subplots disappear into thin air. Character deaths happen out of sheer spite for the fandom. Finally, if this is allowed to continue for long enough and still people keep buying its bullshit, the Author will commit that most grievous and infamous of sins: Declaring THIS to be the Goddamn End and Shut UP Steve THIS is my Perfect Vision you can't edit THIS I DON'T KNOW WHY I EVEN PAY YOU.
The results are disastrous. An ending that is abrupt is the best that one might hope for. Failing that, we can only expect an ending that is thematically incoherent, often outrageous, and apparently written by an altogether different person. This is more true than one might think, for though it may still be the Author's hand on the pen, only the Devil would ignore his Editor.
Not too long ago I heard about certain self-publishing authors who sell their wares 1 chapter at a time. This is good for the author because it means someone can pay a small amount to get a sample of the artist's ware and that gives them exposure they wouldn't have otherwise. It's good for the consumer in that the consumer can just stop buying if the writing quality every falls short. Additionally, they can give the artists direct, immediate feedback as to what they like or dislike. Good for everybody!
The idea that the artist is free from criticism and is somehow working in a vacuum (or at least that he should be) seems pretty cray cray to me. I like the world we're living in now, where we have a far more direct connection to our artists, and they to us.
Those examples seem a bit over the top as well. I've never gotten ill to the point of vomiting because of what I ate at a restaurant. Even if I had, comparing that to botching the ending to what otherwise was an amazing series of games seems unduly harsh. Not sure how I feel about sex as an analogy, but not wanting to get a blowjob (play ME3) again does not necessarily mean that I don't want to have sex (play another Bioware game) with her.
@Cambiata
Ok, I haven't played ToR or dragon age 2, so they have a history of good games with (serious?) flaws. I would then ask, what gaming producer HASN'T had missteps. Did you boycott all of them as well? What is the message that even sends to a creator? "If you try to make an amazing game, you had better not fuck up or that will be the end of your business." Would it not be more reasonable to just have lessened expectations when their next game rolls around? Maybe don't buy it if it looks like rubbish, just like you would do with every other game?
In other words, what is so special about this situation that it requires such drastic action?
The funny thing is, from what I've heard, the "failure" ending is far less contradictory of the overall themes of the game, and far more emotionally satisfying than the Ice Cream Reapers win ending. I've considered replaying the game in an attempt to get that ending instead. But.. Bioware was really successful in getting me to not care anymore. I can't seem to get myself motivated do it.
The problem I've repeatedly stated that I have is the hyperbolic "Bioware is not getting another dime of my money" type comments.
I really just don't agree with the "you aren't the author" thing being a core component to pretty much any argument. I see it all the time in art classes. Especially first year ones. Just because someone likes what they made doesn't make it good. If that person continues to ignore criticism or comes up with excuses like "oh, well this part was INTENTIONALLY shitty, that's part of my VISION" or "well, I know it looks bad but I like it that way", you probably won't see them in class near the end of the semester. The argument shouldn't go "you aren't the author", it should go "you aren't the editor". Of course, in art class, the teacher is your editor.
The counter-argument could be made that if Bioware likes to encourage so much fan feedback and participation as it claims perhaps we indeed qualify as the editor. As you say, we are a lot closer to our authors nowadays.
The only other meaningful comment I can think of for this discussion right now is that if someone discourages giving to a legitimately good charity, I discourage listening to that someone. I really like Checkpoint though so I'm going to give them the benefit of a doubt here. THE benefit of a doubt, y'hear?! That's the ONE. You're on notice, Graham.
*Shrug* But if I can donate to Child's Play, a charity that I like, while also adding my voice to a campaign I like, why wouldn't I?
Lots of charity donations probably have some ulterior motive. Even if the motive is just, "so that I can live with myself." I can't imagine being on the recieving end of a charitable donation and thinking, "The person who gave this had bad thoughts when they gave it, the money is tainted! I can't accept it!"
1) That's a pretty cool idea. Great way to show you have money you are willing to spend if Bioware will give you something to spend it on.
2) Ha ha, those people are idiots. Glad Child's play is getting something out of their idiocy!
The idea that someone's reaction could be: "How DARE they give money to Child's Play!" Strikes me as pretty odd.
I hope not, hence the benefit of a doubt I'm lacking now. The way it has often been worded is that giving to Child's Play for this is "underhanded" or "manipulative". It discourages the people who are doing it from doing it because they are doing it for that "manipulative" reason. I don't care why someone is giving to charity, if they have the mental acuity, financial stability, and willingness to do it then let them do it. You can donate to Child's Play for Hitler for all I care, money for sick children is money for sick children. If anything the Retake Mass Effect thing is just encouraging Bioware. Every time they make a pointedly shit ending, people will give $70k in charity to sick children. I don't think that hurts Bioware one tiny bit.
Woops, missed this in the kerfuffle.
I had Conor Oberst himself stitch together a thumbnail-sized version for me. Which I then scanned. Because I demand quality.
Well of course they are a bit over the top, they are examples used to prove a point. I'll never understand "well that isn't the exact same situation" response to analogies and examples(dramatic or otherwise). Believe me, you can be quite a fan of a restaurant, but it only takes one spoiled scallop to make you lose your appetite for the place.
As for the drastic response or action, well I'll quote a previous statement of mine:
"Because it is the end to a massive trilogy. It is an end that fails to deliver on the promises of 5 years. It is an end that trivializes or even undoes everything the players have accomplished. It is an end that completely taints the journey. You have to understand, some people have put in hundreds of hours over three games and multiple different characters. They have done this because they were promised, were sold, on the fact that they would be able to craft a story. That all of their decisions would mean something, have an effect. Instead they got an ending were the god from the machine descends, makes everything they have done(hundreds of hours) worthless, just handwaves it away, and then presents them with the same three options that everyone else gets. This is after they were assured that they would not get an A, B, or C ending.
*edit*
Imagine that you have been in a happy, committed relationship for 5 years. You are in love, and your partner is just your favorite thing ever. But then one day you find your beau balls deep in some chick. Not only does this spell an end to your relationship, but it probably also colors or changes your perspective on your relationship thus far. Odds are it won't be for the better. "
People(myself among them) have put in literally hundreds of hours in to these games, and in a span of 5 poorly written(oh by the gods is it poorly written) minutes, all of that was undone. It wasn't that people didn't just didn't like the ending, it's that the ending actually took away from their work, from their progress. It made it all for naught. Why play through a game series that is all about your choices, your story, having an effect on things, having you Shepard, when you know that all of it is for nothing. That no matter what you do it is all going to be done away by a god from the machine who doesn't even so much as give you the option to ask the questions that your character would ask. Instead we are left with broken promises, hundreds of wasted hours, and a single ending that has 3 different colors. And we don't even get the satisfaction that this is an artistic move that adds depth, meaning, or quality to the story. It is so poorly written and filled with holes that I damn near had an aneurism, and the "behind the scenes" stuff proves that this ending was chosen at the last minute and was being desperately rushed out at the last minute. They didn't even start recording TIM's final dialogue until last November because they were still rushing around trying to finish things. And this is after who knows how many official statements that this would not be the case.
Really the sentiment among the movement really hasn't shown any manipulative or nefarious intent. I was on the forums when this was starting and the general idea was that it gives people a bit of a channel, in that it allows people to console themselves by thinking that "at least something good game from this", it might get some more attention and show Bioware that people are serious about this, and if not than at least some sick kids get video games. Is it a bit misguided? Maybe, even probably. I just don't get how many people are calling them out on this, almost as if they are doing something wrong. I mean I hope to high heavens that this catches on. Every time the internet get's its panties in a bunch(so about ever 4 seconds) it doesn't just bitch on forums but also gives thousands of dollars to charity. Where is the freakin' downside to that?
Seriously! Imagine all the fan raging that goes on about a ton of things... imagine if every time nerds got outraged, they gave massive amounts to charity. It would be beautiful.
Someone tell me again why they are trying to discourage this??
It's not because it's called "Retake", it's because I can't follow their insistence on demanding a change. When you go from complaining about an ending, and slide into demanding a change to it, you lose my sympathy. And yeah, that's where you start getting called "entitled".
That Forbes article is misleading, and in a couple cases outright wrong, however.
Games are cheaper, but only the top 5% of games make a profit.
The same technology is cheaper, but gaming companies are pushed into using even newer technology instead of reaping the benefits of the lower costs of old tech.
Also, Colin Moriarty isn't calling gamers entitled for being dissatisfied, he's calling the movements that "demand" new endings entitled.
He calls the people who tank scores, petition to change the ending, and attack people on twitter entitled.
Also, again, the concept of expanding content in games is used. The Day One DLC argument was ended by Bioware in several statements pointing out that while DLC can add content to a game, it cannot overwrite it. So while Kasumi and other DLC characters were added to the game in Mass Effect 2, they were not added in whole cloth. They were present before hand in the game code. Javik is no different. He was present in the game code because Bioware cannot re-write that code to add him in later completely.
It's entirely possible that Bioware cannot rewrite or change the endings.
It's even more likely that DLC like Broken Steel's ending change were already present in the game's code but unused.
I think you just made that point yourself. The "Retake Mass Effect 3" movement has gone from a simple movement to have the ending changed, to a bulletproof statement just because it's giving to charity. Now anyone who attempts to point out problems in either their argument or any argument is getting shouted down as someone who "hates charity". Giving to charity has nothing to do with the argument, and it's being used as a shield to deflect and derail the entire conversation.
http://retakemasseffect.chipin.com/retake-mass-effect-childs-play
Doesn't sound very demanding to me. Requesting? Sure. But not demanding at all.
They're attempting to put pressure on Bioware through peititon and by trying to portray themselves as the moral high ground. You can call it whatever you like, they're still telling Bioware to change the ending.
The difference is, if Bioware doesn't change the ending, do you think that "respectful request" will be quite as respectful? Will the movement simply melt away if Bioware says "no, and here's why"? The movement doesn't even account for Bioware saying no. It's still a demand, they just avoided that word directly
So it's demanding because you say so? And your opinon is the only one that matters?
To be honest, you sound like the most 'self-entitled' gamer in this thread. At least Sticks is willing to admit that it's the right of the consumer to not buy from a company if that company is making products the consumer doesn't like.
Analogies are terrible.
Also, do you really think EA is going to just let a game franchise that shipped 3.5 million at launch go to waste? Why do you think they made Kotor online?
They are only terrible is you use a terrible analogy such as that. I use the analogies because people like to get caught up with the sentiment that it is a "art" or a "game" and so therefore is not subject to the same scrutiny and standards that other products are held to. Which is of course simply not true.
I'm doing that because that was a huge selling point of the Mass Effect series. That you, as the player, would be able to change things. Not only in that there are choices to make in the game that will have consequences and outcomes, but also that Bioware would really listen to the fans. The entire point was the co-development that would lead to greater and more personalized stories. Bioware themselves have stated this
"Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”
Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with
the fans. We use a lot of feedback.” "
That was one of the major reasons why the series was so popular and why people put so much investment in it, emotional, financial, etc. This is why people feel this way, and they are not entirely wrong to do so. If I bought a can "french onion" that was supposed to come with water chestnuts, I want my water chestnuts. It is really rather simple. Now how Bioware really feels about this, we can only assume. They haven't really made much of a statement other than your usual PR responses. They haven't come out with any "No it's ours and you don't have a say in the matter!" lines yet and based on previous statements I have to think that at least some of them understand where the fans are coming from, if not agree with them. But as I said we have no way of knowing, we will have to wait and see.
I don't see where he said it wasn't.
also the most damning quote here is
... we're giving money to a charity for sick kids because we are just that nice of people.
If it were so "sincere" then they wouldn't be standing around and mentioning how nice they were while in midst of asking for things from the developers. Suppose someone came and asked to borrow your car, but prefaced it with a tally of how much they gave to charity that week. Or the real kicker here, suppose a child asks her parent for a toy and points out how good she's been all week. How can you claim that that's not manipulative? Because it doesn't fit into your argument and demolishes what you've continually insisted is a benign request rather than an imperious demand. Your whole argument is predicated on convincing people that your sense of entitlement is not actually a sense of entitlement.
You asked me why I keep quoting wikipedia. it's because I don't think you (and others) are aware of what some of the words involved here mean.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entitlement
This is said without anger or vitriol, by the way. It would be more way more condescending if I tried to placate you, and frankly there's no non-pejorative synonym for entitlement.
Problem is, it's still about as personal as a choose your own adventure novel. You can't, say, decide to become a slaver in Mass Effect 2 and help the collectors. Your adventure is only as unique as until you find the next person who made all the same choices and read the same pages as you.
All of these "promises" constantly quoted were in the midst of development, and thus have about as much weight as a WoW expansion promising a dance studio or a runic path system as a supplement for talents.
And that doesn't change a single thing about the mission statement, nor does it make the story or games less personal. It was never about making a D&D type adventure where you could do whatever you wanted. It was about being able to have a say and/or an impact on the narrative. I've played premade adventure paths for table top RPGs, overall the story was very similar to the story that so many others played, maybe even exactly the same as a few. That doesn't mean that I didn't impact my version of the story, that it wasn't a personal experience. These were things that were promised from day one. They were repeated in interviews before, during, and after development cycles. And yes, when you give information in an official interview you are speaking on behalf of a company, these things do hold weight. They are not blog posts about ideas the team is tossing around. If you think that what you say in an interview has no weight, you are sadly mistaken.