What could bioware do to make up for mass effect 3?
- Thread starter 00slash00
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Have Dragon Age 3 kick a bunch of arse 
.
Dragon Age 2 was great, the combat was fantastic, but the leveling system wasn't as good as Origins (IMO).
.Dragon Age 2 was great, the combat was fantastic, but the leveling system wasn't as good as Origins (IMO).
They have nothing to make up for. As far as I'm concerned they took a creative decision (unless we later hear of any particular meddling from EA), and it didn't pay off.
The people demanding a rewrite purely to see an ending that fits what they perceive to be a thematically-fitting ending need to take their heads out of their own arse holes and understand that what they perceive to be the themes of the series are not necessarily what the creators perceive to be the major themes of the series.
The people demanding a rewrite purely to see an ending that fits what they perceive to be a thematically-fitting ending need to take their heads out of their own arse holes and understand that what they perceive to be the themes of the series are not necessarily what the creators perceive to be the major themes of the series.
I'm likely not going to play the game at all unless Bioware is able to release Mass Effect 3 without Origin. Although, if their future titles will use the same DRM solution, I might end up caving in. We'll see.
I hope they will keep releasing more quality games, and continue adding to the hundreds of hours they've already taken from me.
I hope they will keep releasing more quality games, and continue adding to the hundreds of hours they've already taken from me.
Commit hara-kiri? Publicly admit that they have no plans to ever make anything but generic cut and paste western RPGs with superficial continuity based mechanics and lots of cosmetic overpriced DLC because EA loves micro transactions? Offer me a free massage with a happy ending & a decent shrimp cocktail?
Those are the first 3 things that jump to mind.
Those are the first 3 things that jump to mind.
What if, say, I want the ending looked over again because of major plot holes, lack of closure, little weight in the "choices" we have to make and a general sense that in all the promotional stuff for the series, I was lied to about what to expect from the ending, something that was going to be the main focus of the game? I don't think Bioware would be obligated, but it'd be damn good of them.Woodsey said:
OT: Just make the "Extended Cut" good. Make it so the ending is satisfying, makes you feel like you accomplished something, and makes sense. Now the DLC is only meant to clarify the ending, so you got a mountain to climb already, but your writing has been great beforehand, Bioware, no reason it can't be again.
Calumon: Except they have to stop to eat cakes and answer e-mails from people. Seems they'd work faster if we just stayed quiet.
'major plot holes, lack of closure'Jack and Calumon said:
Both are entirely matters of perspective on a purely creative issue. That you even have to ask is bewildering.
'little weight in the "choices" we have to make'
Criticise them for it, make it clear that that's something they can do better in whatever their next game is. You know, the way things are normally done.
As for the ending, your choices do have an affect, not in the sense that you'd like perhaps, but they do alter things, which was pretty much what was said.
Again, criticise them for it so it can be worked on for the next game.
The addendum they're making for the ending is enough; any rewrites based on player suggestions would turn the whole thing into a fucking circus act.
1. Scrap the ending Entirely. Either go with Indoc Theory, or start way back at the Sword fight and add in more and better gameplay content, a reflection of your choices, more and better options and mechanics like those used in the ME2 Suicide Mission.
2. Learn from their mistakes in both DA2 and ME3 for DA3.
3. If DA3 is not botched, do not botch the next game either.
If all 3 points are ticked, then Bioware will be redeemed in my books. If point one is not kept, but point 2 and 3 are, then point one may be replaced by making a near perfect title.
2. Learn from their mistakes in both DA2 and ME3 for DA3.
3. If DA3 is not botched, do not botch the next game either.
If all 3 points are ticked, then Bioware will be redeemed in my books. If point one is not kept, but point 2 and 3 are, then point one may be replaced by making a near perfect title.
Plot holes and lack of closure are not a matter of perspective. Whether they are Ok, or bad, is a matter of perspective, but what constitutes a plot hole is reasonably well defined, and if there are plot holes that gaping that nearly everyone picks up on them - then you've got a problem. Lack of closure is also quite obvious when no closure at all is given.Woodsey said:
We have made it clear. We have also made it clear that we don't trust Bioware to do it right in the next game. ME3 is their chance to prove us wrong. Currently they do not seem to be doing that, but we will see.
Actually, your choices have no effect: An arbitrary number does. You can say that your choices affect that number and thus affect the ending, but so does multiplayer - and to a larger extent. I have done polar opposite playthroughs, and gotten the exact same results - even without multiplayer. That is not your choices having an effect on the ending.
If, say, synthesis was impossible without having allies the Quarians and the Geth - then your choices would have an impact. As is, they don't.
What do you think we are doing?
We are criticising them for it, but we also maintain hope that they may work it into ME3 as well. I'll almost guarantee you: As soon as this DLC is released, give it 3 days to a week and a lot of the threads on it will have quietened down. People will have seen what Bioware is willing to offer, and either would be satisfied with it, or unsatisfied with it. If satisfied, good for them. If not, Bioware just lost a little more business.
The whole thing IS a circus act, and that's what fans are trying to get them to fix.
They throw away the main antagonist since 2 without so much as a whisper, replacing them with the side antagonist and a child-like AI. Their endings are a fireworks display in three colours, and rely on space magic to make any sense [Especially synthesis], from the sounds of things their directors cut will include even more space magic, they decided to leave everything to speculation, they destroy the Reapers for many in the last minute of the game, and for many too they destroy the character of Shepard. Their whole response to the issue is "You don't understand it, so we'll clarify it for you" and "Artistic Integrity", they ignore the majority of complaints made about the ending and focus on the two that fans have already fixed for them...
And even then, if following fan suggestions turns it into a circus act you must remember: The Closure and Clarifications were fan suggestions, so apparently it already is a circus act.
Joccaren said:
There's a particularly sound theory which is both thematically and narratively cohesive with the rest of the series, which invalidates the plot holes (that occur in the last 10 minutes or so, I'm sure there are others which crop up throughout the series). Whether you buy into it or not is up to you. So, perspective.
Some people feel the game had all the closure they need or wanted. So, perspective.
Could be said of any game where player-expectation is not met. Which, in case you hadn't noticed, is virtually every game ever made, in one way or another. You've made it clear you'll react like little children who want their way immediately, that's about it.
Yeah, which as you go on to correctly identify is changed by choices. If you feel that the conversion of your choices into a number is not the best way to do it, or makes your choices invalid, then fine. But it's not difficult to see that being explained as your choices having an affect; they're converted into a numerical value and then this has some affect on the ending.
Demanding re-writes and changes. Some people like the game the way it is. The creative process is not a democratic one (beyond the creative team, at any rate), majority rule shouldn't 'win' on something that's already done and released to the audience.
It's their story.
Your complaints are not illegitimate, but the reaction from people who share your view seems to be one devoid of reality.
If you want great things, then things have to fuck up. There have to be things that you don't like, that disappoint you. Why? Because hopefully it'll be the result of a developer or writer or director going out on a whim, trying something new, or something they think is interesting. Sometimes, they'll surprise you in a great way and blow your dick off, sometimes they'll surprise you in a fucking shit way.
But that's a metric fuck-tonne better than what you're proposing, in which people simply become too scared to bother attempting anything ballsy for fear they'll be bombarded with demands to change it immediately to give the majority the majority view of what constitutes a 'satisfying' ending.
So a rewrite of the story fills the plot holes eh? That's what we're asking for.Woodsey said:
And no, its not a case of 'Technically its not a rewrite, it was their plan all along'. They've made it clear that their plan was for what we got. The final hours app, Twitter feeds, press releases.
The story is what was given to us by the Devs. You can rewrite that with a sound theory to fill the plot holes, but the story as written by Devs is still plothole ridden. Not perspective.
I'll repeat: Whether a lack of closure is ok or not is up to perspective. However, there is a definitive lack of closure in the fact that there is no closure. Not perspective. You can headcanon and speculate some closure, but that ain't what we're told or shown, and is not canon to the story.
We'll act like intelligent consumers: Bioware stops making products we like and shows little to no indication of changing, we stop buying Bioware products. Thing is, we care about Bioware, so we tell them exactly what they need to do to make us happy - surprisingly not that hard in all reality, most have agreed on a rather simple set of points - and ask them to make us happy or they walk. They decide they don't care about us, we decide we don't like their attitude towards their fanbase, nor the products they are putting out, so we leave.
Thereby Multiplayer also has an effect on the ending, and due to the magnitude of an affect it has comparatively, it is the defining factor of the ending. Your multiplayer amount decides the ending. Your choices are secondary by a fair shot.
Three things:
1. We are not demanding changes. We are telling Bioware what they need to do to keep our business. They don't do that, they lose our business.
2. Those who like the game the way it is don't have to download the DLC. That's the beauty of it: Its entirely freaking optional. You get your option, and we would like ours.
As for the whole creative process thing: Sold out to EA anyway. Bioware as an independent studio? Sure. Bioware with EA, who if they don't like something will force a change, not so much.
Bioware made ME3 to make money, not for the love of art or W/E. We are simply telling them how they can help it achieve its purpose.
And they're story is a circus act.
In general: Sure. But do it with a new IP, not an established franchise.
Had they done that with a new IP, people wouldn't have minded so much, but they might not hae liked the IP.
Instead, Bioware took the fanbase of an established game, took their big risk there, and basically played us so that their risk would make money no matter what. If they hadn't played us, raising our expectations by telling us statements that - when taken at face value - where ultimately not true, telling us what we wanted to hear so that we would buy ME3 and their risk would turn a profit, tricked us into buying something different to what we thought we were - and instead either put it out on a new franchise, or come straight out and told us what the risk they were taking was, we probably wouldn't have minded so much.
Instead, they manipulated their fanbase to ensure that even if the risk was a bad idea, it would pay of for them anyway. That's not a good way to treat fans, and I don't think we're 'entitled' for feeling played.
You assume, like so many others, that this would set a precedent for all games.
Wrong.
It would set a precedent for non-linear story driven games where the player has a lot of input and choice as to how things play out, who's ending does not reflect this in the slightest, and who made promises that it would.
The closest you could probably come to that is Fallout or the Witcher. Both changed for the fans.
Fans want choice, and that is something most people don't seem to get. Releasing optional DLC with an alternate set of endings doesn't force anyone to play the new endings - they like the old endings they can keep them, and likely save money too. We aren't demanding that the only ending be sunshine and rainbows, we're asking that an option for sunshine and rainbows be added. Something like this isn't going to change Bioshock, Arkham Whatever, Skyrim or CoD. None of them have the players actions change the story [Bioshock reflects the players choices in the ending, but in a broad way and in such a way that most wouldn't even notice if it wasn't there].
In a game where player choice changes the story, however, I think players should be allowed a choice, and to change the story, as opposed to being shoehorned into an ending that doesn't fit the story they created. If you're going to allow players to change the story, you allow them to change the story. Taking that away at the end so you can put your own fantasy in isn't going to make people happy.
It doesn't change games where players have no impact on the story - there the story is 100% the devs, and nothing the player does can affect it in the slightest. In ME though, the story is both mine and the devs. My story saved the Rachni, cured the Genophage, killed the council. Not everyone's will have. My Shepard is non religious, and values his own life more than others. He doesn't care if someone dies, its just another casualty in the war. Bioware forces him to become somewhat religious, to sacrifice his own life for others, to care about those he has lost. My character and my choices are manipulated for Bioware's fantasy, and that is a big part of what people don't like.
Bioware can keep their Crucible endings. We want an option for another ending though. We want an option for our Shepards, not just Bioware's one.