bug_of_war said:
DioWallachia said:
And where this mystical "minority" is? how can you even know they are a minority? and even if they are (if you say that you judge this by looking how many people made the petition and how many bought the game) that still could mean that apathy had taken over the other ME3 players and did nothing except maybe return the games they bought, rather than complain because it would have been useless (specially for a company that was one of "the good ones" that did know how to write)
I know this wasn't directed at me, and the other person will probably also retort to this comment, but I disagree with both your belief that it was a majority of players and a minority. I personally have found an even split of people whom liked the game (Myself included) and people who vomit their own blood over Mass Effect 3. However, their is definately a minority of people whom even to this day, nearly a year after release are acting like the biggest cry babies and going on about how it ruined their life.
The "Gamer Entitlement" excuse that the journalist made it all worse. What could have ended a year ago, was magnified and extended longer because more people are dismissed as "entitled" or "whiny".
They are like that because the BW got away with its crap and now nobody believes them. Of course they will try and try and try to re-open discussion until someone listens. To the outsiders, most discussions look like this:
They get away with this bullshit and nobody does anything about it? HAS THE WORLD GONE MAD????
How dare anyone expect that a company change the story of it's product simply because you (not you personally) didn't like it. If you don't like something, that is fine, you are rightfully entitled to your opinion
How dare the customers for expecting the fridge they bought to ACTUALLY act like a fridge (keeping the food cold) that they thought it was going to act in the first place (instead, it emanates a cloud of Mustard Gas every 5 minutes)
Also, this may be a real shocker to you, but you can have opinions that are based on facts. (This water is wet, the sun is bright, these socks are cozy, etc.)
I can in fact argue that the opinion of the fans is factual, because I'm not actually making an argument: I'm making an observation. The developers themselves said that only the 3rd game would have ACTUAL branching on the narrative because doing so in the first game and building a narrative out of every single choice is a nightmare to code (apparently the other 2 didnt have enough to be even CONSIDERED by them as "branching narrative".) Of course, what the fans had was nothing diffent of what they already had before other than a bunch of meaningless cameos.
BW:Harbinger, say "hi" to the fans!
Harby: ...
Lets dismiss some of my arguments (or other arguments) while we are at it. The planned trilogy doesnt have a place here in the discussion because doing that shit before even the first game manages to sell anything is too risky. Ok, that is fine except that doesnt explain why BW would lie to the fans that already know and trust BW in doing just fine. But that doesnt explain why they couldnt even keep the same writers on the lead to make sure the shit is consistent in the long run.
And as for not having branching, well there IS branching but not what they said it WOULD have, it just the same as before. And even if this "technicallity" makes ALL promises automatically true, that would still be a bad move because the competition RPGs has more branching storytelling and more weight in the decitions, making ME3 a lackbuster product compared to others on sale.
But the tip of the iceberg is this: Your Paragon/Renegade score dictates what you character will AUTOMATICALLY say in the autodialog cutscenes. Let me reiterate: In a game that prides itself on choice and player agency, it decides to do the choices for you.
EDIT1: And now, with all this going against the game and the developers, you still think that the fans were asking "too much" by changing the ending? Ok, lets assume that it is too much and there is a "vision" to be had in the whole product. And to that i ask: "What is the vision or message that is contained on the ending or game? dont you think that the vision on the end contradicts what the author wanted to tell before?
Lets say i want to make a theatrical release of The King in Yellow and make everyone become insane by watching it (that is my vision after all), but then the people actually survive and find it enjoyable. I am not ENTITLED as an auteur to actually make sure that the work of art do what it was intented to do? if my work is broken, i am going to sit there and do nothing while everything falls appart because people are still alive and not chanting "IA IA CTHULHU FTHANG"? Same with ME3, if a part of my work doesnt fit with my vision (or the vision that was consistent with the rest of the narrative up to that point) i am not supposed to chance it for the better?
You say that the companies are getting worse, and that the only way it will change is if you tell them you don't like what they're doing. Now, while that will give an indication to what the consumer wants, the company needs to keep in mind that they need to make a profit, and that will overwrite fan input if the fans keep paying money. If you want a company to stop doing such practices, STOP PAYING FOR THE CONTENT. Speak with your wallet, and the business will listen.
The honest gamers cannot win this one, and i will elaborate in a few moments why.
The gaming community are, in my eyes, have the mindset of a child. They go out and spend there money without thinking, and then when something turns sour they get angry. If you don't like something, don't pay for it. If it is something such as how Mass Effect 3's ending, then simply say, I didn't like it, here are my reasons, that's the end of that. I see so many people saying "I HATE HOW THEY MADE DAY ONE DLC" and when I ask them if they'll buy it they say yes. THAT IS WHAT GIVES THE GAMING INDUSTRY INSENTIVE TO DO DAY ONE DLC.
Given the circunstances around DAY ONE DLC, where the fans thought that something as a Protean actually IS relevant to make the plot functional to begin with, AND the fans still thought that this will impact the "branching" of the narrative (this was before they played the rest of the game and noticed that it wasnt true.....and before the ending), it seems that buying it was the best choice for the full enjoyment of the game (unlike other DLCs that are just a bunch of skins of guns that dont bring anything new)
Now, i would have suggested to this people to just wait and watch Youtube to catch what the DLC will contain before purchasing it. It seemed like the ideal solution to me but then, i realised, that in this kind of looooooooooong game where some variables and gameplay are different for each player, most of the viewers will see the lackbuster presentation and branching of this DLC and say:
"Mnnn... maybe i am not seeing the good parts of the DLC and its impact on the plot BECAUSE the player here doesnt like Javik or he/she/it played differently of my super special awesome playthought that saved (and banged) everyone. I guess searching on Youtube for SPECIFIC decitions will take even more time and money than just purchasing the DLC already"
There is also the fact that most BW fans still thought that BW could still be redeemed after the Old Republic and Dragon Age 2 or that they are the last "bastion of innovation and creativity" in the industry (i am reminded of how Valve fans say that too) that they would have trusted this Day 1 DLC as long its THEM doing it (because they deserve the money)
A recent example of gamers acting like children is with EA making micro-transactions in games. Many people jumped up and down crying about EA being greedy, however they completely ignored the fact that the transaction is completely optional and that you do not HAVE to pay for anything if you don't want to. Yet when I pointed this out, they angrily shouted at me that EA is a greedy business, seeming to forget the whole point of a business is to make money. It is not greedy if they give you an option, which, in most cases is what companies do.
So yes, gamers are possesive people and it is NOT a good thing that they are. It stops the gaming industry from moving forward, and makes the term gamer a term that I prefer to steer clear of.
I will elaborate right now on what i left without answer up there: Yes, it is OPTIONAL........but it still preys on the weak willed, the kind of audience that a greedy entity needs, the audience that always falls on the trap of the marketing, and that audience is the one that doesnt have the mental capacity of having a fair fight, and that audience is somehow bigger than the rest of the gamer community combined.........and their wallet is bigger.
What we have here is the gaming equivalent of "The Prisoner's Dilemma": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma
Even when we choose the option that benefit us (both Gamer A and B) in the long run, Gamer B still betrays us for a quick gratification. The thrill of victory is just too tempting fot these asshole that now inhabit our community. There NOTHING optional here, is like handing The One True Ring and calling it "optional" to use it against their creators. Bullshit!!! you are going to place THAT thing here and expect EVERYONE to behave? its like having 10 people where 1 is Frollo and the other 9 are Gollums, of course they are going to jump to the oportunity to use it!! that thing shouldnt even exist in the first place because it manipulates people in ways that we cant even imagine!!
Also, you say that its just a bussiness and its not being greedy. Oh yeah? lets pretend i am a reviewer and a producer is not....happy with the score i gave to the game. Then, in a cartonish sort of way, he turns around (his back is in front of me now) and makes a 1000$ dollar bill (lets pretend it exist) fall down behind his back and says: "Oh man, i believe i lost money and it must be in the floor somewhere. I hope that NO ONE *WINK* notices it by the time i turn around to find it!"
Under your logic, the extortion attempt here is OPTIONAL and i CANT call out this man as "an extortionist" for even TRYING this because he is just doing what comes natural (trying to succed at the expense of others)
Even if i dont fall for it, that doesnt mean that this guy isnt doing something wrong in the first place (on both the cases where i dont fall or not for the extortion)
