The Big Picture: Mutants and Masses

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 . . . 18 NEXT
 

I'm going to do my best to explain my views as clearly, and as respectfully as I can, so, if anyone feels like reading a wall of text 21 paragraphs long (I wont over board, typed a bit much) note there will be no bile below. Sorry for the length, feel free to not read...though I did put a lot of thought in to it.

Mass Effect 3's ending was bad, and I understand that Bob may make a note that people are allowed to complain, voice their opinion, but I think there's a problem with too many people generalizing displeasure with ME3's ending to fans just being fans, or fan boys. There are people who are passionate about it, and that's a good thing. Some need to tone it down a bit, I'm in favor of people letting Bioware know how they feel, they don't need to be so angry about it sure, but if Bioware doesn't get the feed back they can't use that to make the game better/different and/or use that information for their next game - not just ME but whatever game comes next.

I feel there are some things that they did, maybe not wrong, but failed to deliver in comparison to Mass Effect 2. I have no played Mass Effect 1, I played 2 and 3 on Playstation 3, so I don't know quite what to say as 1 to 3, but myself looking at 2 and 3 there are things that are not done as well. ME3 made a lot of improvements over 2, more levels for powers, added powers, I love the weight system, running around space with Reapers chasing you is great. But looking at the ending, the whole thing for me, from the touch down on Earth even, does not compare to 2's ending sequence in terms of player choice.

People are saying that having more options in 3's ending (because you get options through the game, characters live and die by your choices, the Krogan and Genophage, the Rachni, you get choice there, but the ending drops it) it would be too much, impossible, how many endings would there need to be fifty? But the choices in ME2, part of what makes that ending even worth talking about is the suicide run, where characters can die because of your actions. Characters who are not loyal put in situations that they are not meant for will die, even putting someone who is loyal in a bad situation can get them killed. There are so many mixes that you can do and see in the suicide run with different characters doing different things. I've had a loyal character as my biotic and they failed and another loyal character died because the barrier dropped too soon, that's interesting, that's something to talk about, those are stories to share. It's what people are praising in Skyrim in a way, because they do one thing in this area than someone else they get different stories, the Mass Effect series is good for that as well, and I think a bit more so when it comes to ME2's Suicide Mission.

Mass Effect 3 does not have that same feel, or choice on Earth. No matter how many play throughs you do the same things will happen on Earth the exact same way (other than characters deaths before hand). They had an opportunity to take ME2's last mission and expand upon it in a war, there's so many things they could have done. In 2 you choose a leader for your second team, you don't see what they do, you don't see them fight, but it has impact on the story, on the game, because that character may die or get someone on their team killed. It would have been great if during the war on Earth you were able to send squads that you gained through the game to certain points and based on themselves, and how you talked to them they might die, or lower the amount of enemies charging you by succeeding.

I'm thinking now of Jack, and her squad of bio-kids. What if when leaving Grissom when asked your opinion of the bio-kids you say they're ready for the front lines, Jack gets upset with you, later on Earth they have less kids because they died before hand on other battles, you then choose to send them to the front lines again and they, along with Jack just get over run, or you send them to the back for support, but because theirs too few of them they might die any ways. But it when leaving Grissom you said they were not ready, maybe that time they spent honing their skills as backup has lead them to be ready and now they can be a hard pressing force. And the outcomes, the play out of it, all it is, is a simple choice system like ME2's and a short ten second clip of the out come. And that's just Jack, and two out comes which would be easy to change up with short clips, what about Grunt and his squad, what about a second team of your people, what about the others having squads as well? It could have been so awesome.

That's just one aspect, one point, but the thing is to me is that with the ending it's not just one thing. Getting past that, and going to the ending part of the ending, I find a lack of closure, a lack of information, and a lack of choice, and input. By input I mean in 2 squad mates you brought to the end with you may voice an opinion, and that affected my choice of A or B. Shepard's talking to TIM and Tali was there for me, she voiced her concern that the Collector base and Reaper baby were dangerous, and should be destroyed, and that's one thing, but then the next, was TIM snapping at her and telling Shep not to listen to Tali that she has no idea what she's talking about, and I felt that make my choice for me, I blew that shit up. But on another play through, with Tali there, that conversation didn't happen, and so it felt different. On another play through I befriended Miranda had her with me, and she voiced concern that the base and reaper were too dangerous, and Miranda disagreeing with TIM in ME2? Boom, blew the base up. Now yes, at the start of ME3 Miranda has left Cerberus, even if at the end of 2 she doesn't say anything, but that's one of the benefits of 2 being 2 and not 3, 3 is supposed to be the end of the trilogy of Shepard and the Reapers, it doesn't have the benefit of cleaning stuff up in the next installment or at least it shouldn't.

In Mass Effect 3's end, you can talk with TIM, argue with him, try to convince him, and that conversation can change, and that's good, but that's one thing, no matter what Anderson says (I believe) doesn't change your thoughts through additional plays because it doesn't change he just says the same things over and over (I believe). At the end, you are in a room with Shep, Anderson, and TIM, no matter what, and that narrows the experience, as opposed to 2 where you could choose 2 squad mates out of 12 and each one might say something that affects your view, or TIM might say something right back that affects what you're going to do as well.

Then you are with just Shep and the VI, and people make great points about it being proven wrong about the created always rising against the creator. You can easily get into a situation where the Geth are allied with everyone else, even if the Quarians die, if the Quarians live and so do the Geth, well even more so then. But no matter what that scene plays out the same, there is no change, no difference, other than getting a third option based on Readiness.

And when it comes to the Reaper thought process of kill life so life isn't killed, it makes some sense. Intelligent being creates robot, robot attacks intelligent beings, robot attack all beings, all beings killed, only robot left, unless robot develops emotion and gains the ability to create life then life is pretty much over. So to prevent Robot from destroying all life, simply destroy robot? Intelligent Being just recreates robot, because they did it once they can do it again. New robot still attacks Intelligent Being. New Robot still kills all life. So, prevent Robot from killing all life by killing robot and Intelligent Being so no further robots can be made, at least until 50,000 years when simple beings become intelligent beings. The problem however is that with this cycle, with Humans, Geth, Turians, and so on, is Geth didn't attack anyone. According to ME3, the Geth were created, gained self awareness, were feared for being self aware and were then attacked, as to were any Quarian helping a Geth, or having sympathy for them. Geth defended themselves, Quarians left. Geth did not give chase. Where Shepard is told the created always attack the creator, the Geth did not, they did not seek out to attack anyone or anything for something around 300 hundred years? Until the Reaper came and lead a few indoctrinated Geth to attack life forms.

The VI says no matter what they will attack and kill all life, but the Geth didn't until the Reaper in ME1 came and became a fews' God, and lead them to attack life. Then says that the cycle of Robot destruction is always unchanging, but Shepard has arrived to the VI and so things are have changed, in that no one ever got to that room before, how does that part even matter? The cycle is broken, things have changed because someone made it to the VI. Not because of how AI has been acting in this cycle, which is the one things that matters in this twisted logic.

As to the plot holes, they're there, but it's not just the end, I would like to know what the hell happened to Liara's father? If anyone knows can you tell me? Because Liara and her Father were making nice, her Father making fun of her, then Cerberus attacked and Liara's father was gone, and that's it, I didn't see Liara mention her, and see her anywhere, just she's gone, Liara's father is just gone. Maybe it's a small part I missed somewhere else? But I would really like to know if Liara's father is alive or not.

The FTC thing is pretty dumb. The 'hate' is stupid, the anger isn't needed, and while some people have acted in the wrong, or stupidly, I'm fine with the idea of showing your displeasure by giving money to something other than Bioware, in this case charity. It can be seen as a little silly, maybe a better idea would have been letters to Bioware with a note saying they were displeased with the ending, the reasons why, stating they had money that Could have went to Bioware but instead they bought something else, enclosed is the receipt. Ex - "The ending to Mass Effect 3 felt rushed, I will not be buying your DLC, with the money that could have went to the DLC I bought a book, here's the receipt as proof." It's taking your business else where and showing Bioware such. Here though, the money went to people who need it, it's just a few people of the bunch who where stupid, who wanted their money back, or didn't read it, didn't understand, or represented themselves poorly. A new ending shouldn't be demanded, but what is everyone else saying?

"You don't like it? Don't buy it!" Too late, I played it, then found out I didn't like it, now what?

"Don't buy their stuff!" Okay, I wont, I'll buy something else...hey Bioware I bought some new shoes instead of your DLC, they're shiny.

I think that's all the Retake ME was really about, it's just a few ruined the idea. If anyone is wondering, I did not participate in Retake ME, or anything else like petitions, or hate mail, or hail bombing, or what ever.

There are better ways to show ones displeasure and I think that's what people are trying to say, but they are just failing at it so badly.

If you liked the ending, fine, that's good, nothing wrong with that. No snide comment, no remark of condescendence. If bioware improves the ending I will be happy, if they don't, I'll just move on, it's not going to kill me. It is the same for many others, but with the internet how It is in it's current state with the idea of twitter being the in thing, it's get your opinion out quick, and be decisive, people, on both sides, just take a moment to think, voice your opinion sure, but slinging insults just is not nice.

TMNT...

I love the turtles, they are in my heart always, I have five actual turtles in real life, and two of them are named after the TMNT, I have TMNT underwear, a shirt, and I still have some TMNT toys in the closet. I haven't read all the old comics, I read some, and the cartoon is different, each installment of TMNT is a little different, and that's a good thing, when it comes to their origin though it's mostly always the same, little turtles + ooze = mutant turtles -> Trianed by mutant rat = Mutant Ninja Turtles + age = Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. That's their Origin, their lore, they fight Shredder, their names are Raph, Leo, Donny, and Mike (okay nicknames, but whatever), they are from New York...changing those things, it is no longer TMNT, that is why people are complaining, it's the same reasons people complain about small little bit in super hero movies MOVIE BOB...or even the comics, MOVIE BOB.

Now if the title is changing to Ninja Turtles, okay, fine, whatever, taking it a new direction, making a clear statement that it's different, I can be fine, just don't bullshit me that it's the same thing as anything else TMNT, and I wont troll you about Transformers movies, or something of equal fan-problems to anyone else who feels passionate about things that make them happy. Yes Happy, that's what it's all about, finding stuff that makes you happy damn it, and sad endings do that too, sad ending make me happy, complete endings make me happy, weird randomness makes me happy (sometimes), the Mass Effect 3 ending does not, and that's okay.

PS -
Also, just to not wimp out, up there, where I typed "but slinging insults just is not nice." is my nice way of saying "but slinging insults just makes you look like a jackass."

PSS - forgive the ? marks everywhere, it's a copy paste and this thing doesn't like my ' from word documents or word processor or anything thing, and re-writing the whole thing would be a giant pain in the ass...damn you escapist post crap, maybe this is why I never post.

bahumat42:

All very good points
but its not false advertising because there are more than just the a b c choices.
As for "wrapping up all the important stuff" or whatever the damn quote was, surely you can see that on anything this scope its impossible to tie up all threads. So thats again down to personal opinion on what tied up is.

Theres was different than yours. Marketers are hired to embellish things, thats their job if you or anyone else for that matter got too bought in, thats your fault for not being a responsible consumer.

The fact of the matter is you all lined up and bought day 1 ignoring needs for reviews and such things, this is the downside to doing that. Again take responsibility for your own actions.

Someone being a marketer does not excuse them for lying about a product, however this goes well beyond marketing. If you head to the Bioware Social forums they had an entire thread dedicated to Bioware's promises about the game, which came from people in the development team who were all conveying a very specific message and making promises.

What's more the guys doing the writing for the ending, as revealed in the interviews from that app, mentioned specifically not allowing you to question "Starchild" and ask questions like "well, how long have you been reaping" deciding that the players did not need all those answers even if they could have given them. Making it clear that they could have done a much better job in fulfilling the promises that were made.

In the end a strong enough case can be made where Lawyers are apparently willing to represent this, and an FTC complaint has actually been filed. In the end, we'll see what the ruling is. Maybe the authorities will agree with you, maybe not. Making desicians like that is why such authorities exist... it's their job, and there have been sillier complaints made over the years. I think it's wrong to say that the game industry should be viewed as beyond criticism and that it's foolish to go to the authorities with a dispute. They are not beyond the law.

What's more, even if they are able to defend themselves on those grounds, I do think they needed to be called on the whole monetization of the ending which was just frakking ridiculous. The reason why "we can't have nice things" as Bob puts it, is because we constantly bend over and take it from the gaming industry as it pushes and pushes for more and more money. On those grounds alone this needed to be opposed, because if we didn't it would start a trend where every game would demand you pay a fee, pay for DLC, and then pay more money to actually see the endings of your game.

Not to mention the central issue here does come down to artwork somewhat, as the ending does not fit the game, and was motivated entirely by money. This is the gamers calling the company on selling out and sacrificing it's artistic integrity, rather than gamers pushing for creators to satisfy them specifically.

See, no one is saying that Mass Effect is obligated to have the most epic ending ever that satisfies everyone, that's impossible. No ending to something like this will satisfy everyone, and that's true. The thing is that normally you see people going away at most saying "well I would have done things differantly" content if not impressed, and perhaps a tiny minority of pepople raving. Mass Effect 3 stands out for managing to have an ending which everyone hates, as opposed to a minority of people, and part of that hatred comes because it's obvious that the game's conclusion was being sacrificed for business move.

This isn't a series of events that's going to discourage risk taking in the gaming media, plenty of people have done that and it's paid off. At the very worst this represents how things can go wrong (which is why it's a risk). Overall though I think the message the industry should be getting (and probably will get) is that gamers will only be pushed so far by their profiteering. The industry was probing for how far it could go, and it just slammed face first into that wall and got their answer.

bahumat42:

All very good points
but its not false advertising because there are more than just the a b c choices.
As for "wrapping up all the important stuff" or whatever the damn quote was, surely you can see that on anything this scope its impossible to tie up all threads. So thats again down to personal opinion on what tied up is.

Theres was different than yours. Marketers are hired to embellish things, thats their job if you or anyone else for that matter got too bought in, thats your fault for not being a responsible consumer.

The fact of the matter is you all lined up and bought day 1 ignoring needs for reviews and such things, this is the downside to doing that. Again take responsibility for your own actions.

I haven't played any of the mass effect games myself, but i think what they mean is that the series had plot points the series failed to address in the ending/later part of the game (which they promised to do)

I don't think it's fair to blame us, considering they're the ones who embellished. People trust Bioware enough because they have given a lot of people reason to trust them. Instead of saying "that's just the way marketing is". Wouldn't it be better to tell them that we don't like being lied to, and tell them that in future they should avoid such practices?.

Your third paragraph could be given the same response as above. ME and ME2 were very well received and people trusted Bioware enough to put a shiny button on the series with ME3. That didn't happen and after spending over $100 and having a lot of emotional investment in the story, it's not hard to see why some fans might feel a bit angry when Bioware doesn't follow through what they promised.

wootsman:


This best explains the whole Mass Effect 3 controversy.

That was actually pretty good.

I don't often disagree with you, and your argument makes sense but, it completely tosses aside our main reason for complaining and what not, false advertising, 5 minutes of looking on the internet would show anyone who disagrees with us that Bioware said one thing and gave us another, I probably would not of cared about the ending if they had not said they would not give us a A B C ending, but they did say that and then we got one, and it pisses me as a consumer off.

bz316:
I've generally been supportive of the "Retake" movement, but now that my initial disbelief and anger has cooled, I have to admit, Bob makes some good points. After all this time and effort we as gamers have dedicated to trying to make mainstream society accept that video games are an art form, we need to treat them as any other art. I may loath the ending that Bioware gave us with every fiber of my being (especially the ending cut-scenes; goddamn talk about being lazy), but I cannot any longer, in good conscience, continue to demand changes to the ME3 ending while simultaneously demanding that the medium be treated with the respect due to any other artistic medium, and that includes allowing the creators to end it in whatever fashion they choose, regardless of how stupid I (or indeed, everyone) feels it might be.

But other media have had this happen before. Buffy. Dallas. Sherlock Holmes. What does this have to do with being accepted as mainstream, unless a double standard is in effect. Was TV artistically lessened by the retcons of B:tS or Dallas? Was the written word irrevocably diminished because Holmes came back?

why should this be any different? Give me one freaking reason that Video Games need to not be the subject of retcon to be considered art, when you can find this everywhere. Shakespeare had a freaking patron, and he's considered one of the greatest writers in the English language!

That's just a surprisingly dumb argument from you Bob. You're allowed to be upset about things that are not the worst thing to ever happen to you. Anything to increase your views lately.

Sure, the FTC complaint and dragging Child's Play through the mud with elaborate conspiracy theories is a significant amount of overkill, but games=/=movies or any other art for that matter. The interaction and sheer amount of hours invested into a franchise makes it unlike anything else, and comparisons all fall short.

If you buy a car, drive it 30,000 miles, and it blows up, people wouldn't say "well, did you enjoy the journey?". It should not happen in the first place, and several people along an elaborate production and screening process failed miserably at their jobs.

To get the full Mass Effect experience, fans have paid 200+ dollars and given nearly 100 hours for the promise of an ending. It's not just a bad ending, it's a destructive one. One that obliterates all of your progress and insults the player.

Lunar Templar:

Gigatoast:
Can we just establish a new rule here? If you have no idea why fans are upset then you have no right to critisize them for being upset.

If anyone here understood that then this wouldn't even be an issue.

not true
i've been read into the major reasons this thing is happening, and i still think 'the retake' thing has gone to far.

You sure? The 'retakers' aren't really as absurdly over-zealous and disrespectful as you might think. We have ligitimate reasons and most of us are very polite to Bioware and their staff.

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10662944

Fwee:
Just so you know:
Bioware and EA don't owe you a goddamn thing. They came out with a game and you bought it, played it, finished it, and either walked away from it or started crying all over my internet.

Internet quotes and press releases from anyone working on the Mass Effect series are not legally binding.

You should have rented it and saved yourself $55.

Plus you're detracting from real issues in modern entertainment, such as DRM control, DLC flooding, and mandatory Origin signups.

So gamers cannot express their ire at the shoddy ending of a series and we should get over it?

Well then to address your 'burning issues' in the same vein. If you don't like the DRM control attached to a game..don't buy it. If you don't like DLC flooding...don't buy the DLC and if you don't want to patronise the distributor then don't buy from them..even if that means you don't get the game.

Gaming as art is much like food as art. Certainly a chef is an artist but the eating experience is interactive; which means the customers appreciation of the chef's art is a key part of the experience.

If a restaurant's menu has 90% of it's customers throwing up, then they would probably see lawsuits...would likely offer refunds and almost certainly would change the menu. Assuming said restaurant wished to stay in business.

The idea that consumers have no right to complain because it's art is rediculous. The artist can of course stand by their creative vision but the consumer has the right to a refund if unhappy and they can also inform other potential consumers about the poor quality of the work.

Warachia:

bahumat42:

All very good points
but its not false advertising because there are more than just the a b c choices.
As for "wrapping up all the important stuff" or whatever the damn quote was, surely you can see that on anything this scope its impossible to tie up all threads. So thats again down to personal opinion on what tied up is.

Theres was different than yours. Marketers are hired to embellish things, thats their job if you or anyone else for that matter got too bought in, thats your fault for not being a responsible consumer.

The fact of the matter is you all lined up and bought day 1 ignoring needs for reviews and such things, this is the downside to doing that. Again take responsibility for your own actions.

Except there aren't more than 3 choices, you make one of three choices, and watch what happens, the makers of the game decided to cut it up slightly, and only paste some of it over certain choices, then they claim the game has 17 endings or whatever, and honestly, I can live with that, what I can't accept from them is when you can find interviews before this came out talking about the different kinds of endings you will get, that according to them at the time, were in the game, only to buy the game yourself and find that they aren't there. That is lying, not embellishing, and that review thing falls completely flat, obviously reviews aren't going to talk about the ending, and who would wait around long enough before buying the game to read a plot synopsis and spoil everything for themselves?

Also before you reply I'd highly recommend you watch this video from a guy who explains in far better detail why the ending(s) are bad without any fan boy BS that was never there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4H_A7SeawU4&feature=g-all-u&context=G2d94660FAAAAAAAAQAA

A good reviewer can tell you something sucks without spoiling it. Sure you have to trust his opinion on the matter, but if you dont trust the opinion of the guy you shouldn't read it in the first place.

And yes the endings aren't all massively different. But id aruge thats a constraint of wanting to have all those choices, none of them could hope to shine as good as one singular thread could of.

I hate the way the press has handled this. I also hated the Mass Effect 3 ending. I don't want anyone to pick sides of either fans or creators, but ultimately people all across the press have largely ignored and disrespected the medium of games themselves. I'm just sick of this, that outlets are assuming that just because something disappointed me I want it changed (and without sounding too self-centered, I'm also referring to people who share my beliefs). Yeah, the ending sucked and it was obviously rushed, but I'm not demanding a new ending. I wanted new content, but now I don't care because if Mass Effect 3 all ends in the same place, why would I buy any DLC that they immediately tried to sell me on after I just witnessed ten minutes of nonsense. What can Bioware offer to get my $10? New weapons that get destroyed by the giant laser?

An analogy...

Person who has never seen Star Wars:
"I don't know what all this bickering about the prequels is about, sounds like a bunch of angry nerds whining about something that isn't even important. Who cares? Get over it. You know, I bet they weren't even that bad. I think George Lucas knows how to write a better story than you, he's the artist here, not you. Star Wars is his, he can do whatever with it that he wants."

Person who has only seen the prequels:
"I don't see what's so bad about the prequels. I bet you people would've never been happy with any new Star Wars movies because your perception of how good the originals were is warped by nostalgia. Face it, no movie could ever live up to your distorted expectations. The prequels were good movies in their own right, it's just impossible to please the fanbase, they'd whine over anything."

Person who has seen all the movies:
"The prequels were awful. Not only were they awful, but the awfulness spilled over and retroactively tainted the original movies. Fix them or declare them non-canon, but keeping them the way they are is a blemish on the entire series."

Now...
Whose opinion do we trust?

Zachary Amaranth:

bz316:
I've generally been supportive of the "Retake" movement, but now that my initial disbelief and anger has cooled, I have to admit, Bob makes some good points. After all this time and effort we as gamers have dedicated to trying to make mainstream society accept that video games are an art form, we need to treat them as any other art. I may loath the ending that Bioware gave us with every fiber of my being (especially the ending cut-scenes; goddamn talk about being lazy), but I cannot any longer, in good conscience, continue to demand changes to the ME3 ending while simultaneously demanding that the medium be treated with the respect due to any other artistic medium, and that includes allowing the creators to end it in whatever fashion they choose, regardless of how stupid I (or indeed, everyone) feels it might be.

But other media have had this happen before. Buffy. Dallas. Sherlock Holmes. What does this have to do with being accepted as mainstream, unless a double standard is in effect. Was TV artistically lessened by the retcons of B:tS or Dallas? Was the written word irrevocably diminished because Holmes came back?

why should this be any different? Give me one freaking reason that Video Games need to not be the subject of retcon to be considered art, when you can find this everywhere. Shakespeare had a freaking patron, and he's considered one of the greatest writers in the English language!

This isn't about a retcon, this is about the fans trying to force Bioware to change something they don't want to change. It's about Bioware maintaining artistic control over their work. Retcon, is often something that is changed by the author of the original work or by the studio who made the work to begin with. It is not done at the behest of fans.

Also, I'd be interested to hear what retcons Buffy received, if your talking about the changes between the movie and the show, the movie changed a lot of Joss Whedon's script and made it worse, so retconning it out of existence was something the original author wanted to do. Buffy's Sister is technically a retcon, but for VERY specific reasons, there is a perfectly fine explanation to why she was there that subverts the whole retcon thing.

as with Sherlock Holmes, it was my understanding that he wrote subsequent novels as prequels to avoid retconning his own work. Even if he did, it still bares little resemblance to this argument, as he was the one who made the decision.

Not familiar with Dallas so i won't comment on it.

Gonna have to disagree about the Mass Effect part.
Well, not all of it. But speaking as a Mass Effect fanboy, I completely get why all the fans are so pissed about the ending.

That said, the retake movement did perhaps get a little overzealous. Transforming from the Alliance into Cerberus, as it were. But I still support it on the whole.

Videogames are an artistic medium unlike film, books, paintings etc... Video Games are constantly being changed, whether through DLC, patches, what have you. Games are not a static medium and the product that's initially launched is often not what the product will end up being all things said and done.

And if fans are unhappy, I think it was perfectly OK for them to complain about it and rally to get the ending changed. Demanding to get the ending changed crossed the line, and then after it was announced more content was going to be added, asking Bioware to "meet their demands" as to what kind of content, was waaaay over the line. But it was Bioware's choice to react. They could've simply said no, and that would've been the end of it. They chose to react to the fans.

So Mass Effect 3 is going to have content attached to the ending, we don't know what, just yet. But it's not going to be the end of the world, and it doesn't mean that games can't be taken seriously as an art form, and it certainly isn't setting a bad precedent. After all, this is not the first time this happened, or does everyone forget that Fallout 3 was in the very same boat 4 years ago? And in my opinion, what's happening with Mass Effect 3 is no different than what happened with Fallout 3.

And as for the quality of the ending, it's not just that it's bad. It's bad, but it also completely goes against most of what the series stands for. And, though I think the "broken promises" arguments and the whole consumers rights issues are a bit of an overstep. The ending does go against what it was promised to be.

Mcoffey:

ryo02:
"This story arc is coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot more different. At this point we're taking into account so many decisions that you've made as a player and reflecting a lot of that stuff. It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C." - Casey Hudson, ME3 Project Director

ending A B or C is exactly what we got.

we were lied to why wouldnt we have a problem with that? why wouldnt we ask for ending options we were promised I.E. not A B or C.

Technically you got ending A(1), A(2), B (1), B(2), or C. Just different enough to be true. Don't like it? Tough. Learn to not trust marketing people.

Hell you can go a lot deeper than that depending on how you look at it.

Let's say you only consider the "ending" to be everything after your final choices. So that means there are 7 endings that are different, right?
1) Destroy - Very Bad
2) Destroy - Bad
3) Destroy - Good
4) Destroy - Good + Shepard lives
5) Control - Bad
6) Control - Good
7) Synthesis

But wait! The people who get out of the Normandy at the end aren't always the same. So the Synthesis ending would have 7 distinct variations (Joker + Edi + 1 of the seven other squadmates). Just including that we already on 13 different endings. Adding just the other two(three) "good" version of the ending where it's Joker + 2 squadmates, we get 56 different possibilities each (8 potential people stepping out first, 7 potential people stepping out second). I think the bad versions have only 1 person step out, so that's about 8 variations for them. So now it's:

Ending 1: Destroy - Very Bad
Endings 2-9: Destroy - Bad (EDI can't step out so it's only 7 variations)
Endings 8-50: Destroy - Good
Endings 50-92: Destroy - Good + Shepard lives
Endings 92-100: Control - Bad
Endings 100-156: Control - Good
Endings 156-162: Synthesis

Holy crap, that's a lot of endings. Then if move the marker for the "beginning" of the "ending" to the conversation with the starchild (it's different' based on your EMS and if you destroyed the collector base in ME2) you have even more! Holy crap!

Now, taking it one (large) step even further. If you consider the entirety of Mass Effect 3 as the ending to the Mass Effect series, then you have a incredible amount of "endings."

Okay, there you go people. BioWare didn't lie about how many endings there were. :P

Please no one assume I'm defending the ending or the "promise" that was made. I'm simply pointing out that it's very silly to attach to one statement and use that as a basis for being "lied" to.

Edit: did some math wrong. I think it's right now.

It boggles my mind just how many people still miss the point. You'd figure that with the millions of posts and threads about this, someone would get it.

I'm on the side that claims false advertising. It doesn't matter who you are, if you make promises and claims regarding your product then fail to deliver, people should complain about it and the company should answer for it.

Therumancer:

This guy gets it and it's mindblowing that Bob can't be bothered to do any research before coming off as a loud ignorant dolt. I should stop before I get into a rant about society being trained by the corporations to be increasingly complacent and submissive.

Therumancer:

bahumat42:

All very good points
but its not false advertising because there are more than just the a b c choices.
As for "wrapping up all the important stuff" or whatever the damn quote was, surely you can see that on anything this scope its impossible to tie up all threads. So thats again down to personal opinion on what tied up is.

Theres was different than yours. Marketers are hired to embellish things, thats their job if you or anyone else for that matter got too bought in, thats your fault for not being a responsible consumer.

The fact of the matter is you all lined up and bought day 1 ignoring needs for reviews and such things, this is the downside to doing that. Again take responsibility for your own actions.

Someone being a marketer does not excuse them for lying about a product, however this goes well beyond marketing. If you head to the Bioware Social forums they had an entire thread dedicated to Bioware's promises about the game, which came from people in the development team who were all conveying a very specific message and making promises.

What's more the guys doing the writing for the ending, as revealed in the interviews from that app, mentioned specifically not allowing you to question "Starchild" and ask questions like "well, how long have you been reaping" deciding that the players did not need all those answers even if they could have given them. Making it clear that they could have done a much better job in fulfilling the promises that were made.

In the end a strong enough case can be made where Lawyers are apparently willing to represent this, and an FTC complaint has actually been filed. In the end, we'll see what the ruling is. Maybe the authorities will agree with you, maybe not. Making desicians like that is why such authorities exist... it's their job, and there have been sillier complaints made over the years. I think it's wrong to say that the game industry should be viewed as beyond criticism and that it's foolish to go to the authorities with a dispute. They are not beyond the law.

What's more, even if they are able to defend themselves on those grounds, I do think they needed to be called on the whole monetization of the ending which was just frakking ridiculous. The reason why "we can't have nice things" as Bob puts it, is because we constantly bend over and take it from the gaming industry as it pushes and pushes for more and more money. On those grounds alone this needed to be opposed, because if we didn't it would start a trend where every game would demand you pay a fee, pay for DLC, and then pay more money to actually see the endings of your game.

Not to mention the central issue here does come down to artwork somewhat, as the ending does not fit the game, and was motivated entirely by money. This is the gamers calling the company on selling out and sacrificing it's artistic integrity, rather than gamers pushing for creators to satisfy them specifically.

See, no one is saying that Mass Effect is obligated to have the most epic ending ever that satisfies everyone, that's impossible. No ending to something like this will satisfy everyone, and that's true. The thing is that normally you see people going away at most saying "well I would have done things differantly" content if not impressed, and perhaps a tiny minority of pepople raving. Mass Effect 3 stands out for managing to have an ending which everyone hates, as opposed to a minority of people, and part of that hatred comes because it's obvious that the game's conclusion was being sacrificed for business move.

This isn't a series of events that's going to discourage risk taking in the gaming media, plenty of people have done that and it's paid off. At the very worst this represents how things can go wrong (which is why it's a risk). Overall though I think the message the industry should be getting (and probably will get) is that gamers will only be pushed so far by their profiteering. The industry was probing for how far it could go, and it just slammed face first into that wall and got their answer.

Well if thats the message you wanted them to get your going to be disappointed. What people should of done was paid attention and seen what was going on, people knew these things were coming and smart people boycotted it (ala totalbiscuit) i would include myself in that but honestly i just hate how those games play and refused to play them again. The reason why thats not the message the industry will get is because theres no unison in your camp

some people want a happy ending
some people want free shit to clear things up
other people are demanding their money back

with the massive spread of opinions no real singular message can be got accross other than "unhappy people are getting angry".

What people should have done (and as a fact probably wont ever do) was not buy the actual thing, thats our right, thats proving what is good and isn't.

Short of the game not working once that money is paid their responsibilities to you have ended.

TsunamiWombat:

Why is it when "artists" exercise their rights to ignore US they're just being artistic, when we exercise our right to tell them they're full of shit and ignore THEM we're entitled and whiny? This is how product to consumer works. You produce a product for the consumer and make them happy to take said product, whether that product is an actual item or an artistic work or a video you make for some website once a week. If consumers don't like that product for ANY reason they have every right to say "well, your full of shit bye" and take their time and money elsewhere. You of course are perfectly well within your rights to ignore these people and double down. How much this affects your business is dependent on the number of customers you fail to serve.

No. No. No. The problem isn't fans being upset about the ending or criticizing BioWare for, what they feel, was a lackluster or poor send-off for the series. The problem is that fans went so far as to petition the company to change the ending of THEIR game and brought the issue up with the FTC. That's the issue.

When people talk about entitlement, they're talking about that kind of snotty, ridiculous, childish behavior. As a consumer of media, including games, movies, music, etc., you are entitled to a FUNCTIONAL product. Not a good product. Not a fun product. A product that works. A movie that can be watched or a game that can be played. If you don't like it, you're free to criticize and critique the game and/or company, and you can also go the extra step and not purchase future products from said company. But you don't DESERVE the ending that you want, and no amount of whining will ever change that.

The silliest part of this whole debacle is the deluded notion that some of these people have that their claims of "false advertising" actually hold water. False advertising means that a company willfully cut or fabricated features or services from their product in order to effect consumer choice. If cutting promised features from a game qualified as false advertising, Peter Molyneux would have be fined into oblivion by now. Plus, what these fans are inadvertently saying by invoking the false advertising claim is that if BioWare hadn't made certain statements about the ending of their game, these fans wouldn't have purchased it. Really? You wouldn't have bought ME3 if they hadn't made those statements? You do realize that that HAS to be the case for BioWare to be guilty of material misrepresentation, right?

The people making petitions and talking about legal action aren't heroes fighting for the little guy. They're whiners who need to learn how to deal with disappointment. Welcome to the real world.

Should be interesting to hear what Bob has to say if Avengers doesn't live up to his expectations or makes alterations to the lore.

Not saying the whole Retake ME movement is something I totally get in with, but Bob has already proven how hypocritical he is with this sort of stuff.

Bob.... You don't have the voice for being in the 'complaining' role of media.
Urg... it sounds so whinney and terrible, like a fat kid denied the last piece of deep fried chicken in a family meal from KFC.

Now ME3's ending IS terrible. It's the majority of people who believe it's terrible, and it's also a minority of people trying to change it most because more people don't care enough or are busy.

Let me say it again. The Endings were TERRIBLE. Why not fix it?

The fact that you think if people complain about everything then game developers won't take risks is fine by me. Because... uh, why are they taking risks anyway? It's a big game not some indie thing that represents the artistic integrity of coal miners during the civil war... or some crap like that.

It's a trader. There are businesses and there are consumers. The fans are the consumers.

This is a step FORWARD for video games not a step back. We're evolving, just like any other medium. How the problem is dealt with doesn't matter the fact is we're having a problem and we're also finding a solution.

(PS: Bob your voice.. urge, your voice Bob. Omg your voice Bob, omg!)

Frank_Sinatra_:
Bad move Bob, very, very, very, very bad move.

It's apparent that you really haven't researched into the whole Mass Effect 3 debacle, so be prepared to hear that the Mass Effect series is a special case, BioWare didn't deliver on ANY of their promises, and they pretty much slapped their own IP in the face in the last 5 minutes of their game.

Remember: BioWare has stated that their fans are equal creators in the story along with their actual writing staff.

EDIT: Before you go crying about how you're sick of people complaining, I think I should point you to THIS.

I was going to say a ton of rude things, however your incredibly cute Fluttershy/Angel.gif has calmed me down. Seriously, where can you get one of those and how can you use it?

Anyways, I still go by the "Indoctrination" theory for the ending, which still doesn't make it all that much better as it indicates that the "ending" is going to be DLC. Still it makes the "ending" a whole lot better than what I originally thought as "shitty writing". I just love using "quotes".

I will say one thing, however: there has been a shit-ton of whining like little school girls in the forums about this lately. There is criticism and learning from mistakes and then there is bitching about how something is "unfair" and don't actually give constructive reasoning behind it other than bitching and moaning. I am not saying you are doing this or many others, I am just saying I have been noticing this quite a bit more than normal.

Buying something does contain some inherent risk, that doesn't mean complaining about poor quality isn't justified. Getting a fly in your soup justifies wanting a refund, some people have just gone overboard with the vitriol.

Also, I got the impression (as an outside observer who hasn't played the game) that the complaints were less about the artistic direction and more about the perceived laziness of the limited nature of the game's ending, coupled with the whole stock image / Tali portrait debacle.

Nergy:

bahumat42:

All very good points
but its not false advertising because there are more than just the a b c choices.
As for "wrapping up all the important stuff" or whatever the damn quote was, surely you can see that on anything this scope its impossible to tie up all threads. So thats again down to personal opinion on what tied up is.

Theres was different than yours. Marketers are hired to embellish things, thats their job if you or anyone else for that matter got too bought in, thats your fault for not being a responsible consumer.

The fact of the matter is you all lined up and bought day 1 ignoring needs for reviews and such things, this is the downside to doing that. Again take responsibility for your own actions.

I haven't played any of the mass effect games myself, but i think what they mean is that the series had plot points the series failed to address in the ending/later part of the game (which they promised to do)

I don't think it's fair to blame us, considering they're the ones who embellished. People trust Bioware enough because they have given a lot of people reason to trust them. Instead of saying "that's just the way marketing is". Wouldn't it be better to tell them that we don't like being lied to, and tell them that in future they should avoid such practices?.

Your third paragraph could be given the same response as above. ME and ME2 were very well received and people trusted Bioware enough to put a shiny button on the series with ME3. That didn't happen and after spending over $100 and having a lot of emotional investment in the story, it's not hard to see why some fans might feel a bit angry when Bioware doesn't follow through what they promised.

Marketers have always and will always be out to do that, its kind of in the role, im surprised that anyone over 18 wouldn't understand that. You can blame them all you want their just doing their job to maximise sales.

Morally and ethically it may be wrong but if we are going to be throwing those sticks around then go chase up big pharma, their doing far worse than ea in this regard.

Its really saddening that this is the only kind of thing our subculture does that gets media attention and its showing us in such a bad light.

I can only re-iterate that being displeased at the endings fine, but the way people are handling it definitely isn't. Write an angry letter or email. Vow to never by a ME, bioware or ea game again. Because all it looks like to the outside world is people kicking and screaming because they couldn't have their way.

Enough mass effect, now is the time to talk of turtles.( yay alliteration)

Anyhow, we all remember how Bayformers has "Ruined" transformers forever, but really that's a stupid arguement. Whether or not Bayformers was a good movie is completely beside the point. It's an alterverse story. Transformers is mostly the same as it was before.

The same can be said for "turtles". Yes, bay said that the turtles are alien. Yes, that does go against canon, that's how alterverse stories work. nobody ever said the "Red Son" series "ruined" superman. Now, though, because this isn't in the same medium as the comics, or in most fans case, the animation, it shouldn't somehow be expected to be more loyal to the series than any other alterverse story. Now, if bayturtles were to somehow change the original canon, then you can go ahead and whine. But, until that happens, you're can go ahead and Avoid bayturtles, or give it some negative reviews, but you can't truthfully go about saying that bayturtles is "ruining" TNMT until it actually changes TMNT.

Zhukov:
Personally, I see no reason to apologise for pointing at a broken thing and saying, "Hey, that thing is broken!"

Honestly, "artistic freedom" is turning into "freedom from all criticism".

No Bob, corporate greed is the reason we can't have nice things.

And BOB still doesn't have the slightest idea why people were upset in the first place.

To me it is baffling how clearly intelligent people fail to see... well, the big picture. And I'm just getting tired to link the same articles and repeat the same arguments. This is not a precedent to nothing, it happened several times already and it is not even problem of artistic integrity (or at least not the biggest one - if companies are not taking chances you must first blame the suits, not the consumers).

But at this point it appears that everyone has formed his opinion and locked themselves in their own little world.

Yeah, Bob's points are valid but they are just tangential to a much bigger problem and the center issue of the Mass Effect debate: Yes, "demanding" a better ending - and I say "demanding" in quotes because most people understand that it means adding or clarifying the ending instead of completely erasing this one - might be a strong reaction, but it is not a reaction because the ending was bad (although it helped).

The reaction was fierce because it is not OK to lie to or mislead the consumers in order to sell a product - this leads to this kind of outrage.

If the press continues to insist on the artistic integrity thing, Bioware executives might believe in them and not take a second look of the integrity of the company itself. Coverage like this is doing more harm to the industry than any fan rage, because fans are expected to rage but journalists need to be smarter than that.

If you still want to see a valid, unbiased opinion from some journalists that manage to get what's happening from the outside I urge you to follow the issue on the Forbes website. Here is an example:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/03/27/mass-effect-3-and-corporate-influence-over-commercial-art/

animehermit:
Not familiar with Dallas so i won't comment on it.

Dallas had a whole season retconned to a dream because of fan outcry over the death of a character.

Also, you ARE wrong about Holmes, the post-Reichenbach falls material with one exception takes place after that event chronologically. The argument of it being his choice doesn't change the huge reader outcry, or the fact that there's a strong chance this influenced his decision.

If Bioware changes the ending, it will be of their own choice, as was the case with Dallas. And so did Arthur Conan Doyle, whether or not the fans were outraged.

Edited to fix two sentences I somehow merged.

But to put a more specific end to this post, all such retcons are the end result of choice. And people didn't complain that bringing Sherlock back from the dead or the Dallas "Dream Season" or accuse people of setting back the media.

Calls back to his snug little accusations- even down to the same terms- I stop watching

This may have just possibly thrown bob over the soapbox ignorant profanity line and landed him with lil jimmy as something the site doesn't need

"...or a videogame might end in a way you don't like very much."
You must not really know much about this. Its not just an ending that some people don't like - its an ending that comes as close as possible to being objectively bad. If you need an explanation, look at Seamus Young's blog. He's got a pretty thorough explanation that even people who haven't played the game can understand.

Actually Bob, the reason we can't have nice things is because some folks like Casey Hudson can't put some decent effort into wrapping up his three volume trilogy in a way that makes a modicum of sense. At the end of the game choice did not matter and no resolution was granted the player. This was not due to some vaguely defined artistic integrity, which as others have mentioned is becoming a shield against criticism. It's because they did not put the effort or money into making it coherent. It breaks continuity in too many ways and introduces without any foreshadowing at all a key character in the last 5 minutes. You. Just. Don't. Do. That. Even the Greeks would have thought that this was going too far and they invented the bloody Deus Ex Machina. An ending to the third game of a trilogy like the one Mass effect has is like eating a superb 3 course meal. Everything about it was wonderfully done and after dessert you decide to have a coffee to just let the dessert settle in. You take a sip of the coffee and find that it is actually piss. That is what the ending of Mass Effect 3 is. Would you be upset?

I refuse to get behind a lot of the malarkey associated with the fan rage but saying that artistic integrity is some kind of impervious bastion is just plain idiotic. If they can explain it, and fix the numerous continuity errors then fine. Otherwise I'll live.

bahumat42:

Warachia:

bahumat42:

All very good points
but its not false advertising because there are more than just the a b c choices.
As for "wrapping up all the important stuff" or whatever the damn quote was, surely you can see that on anything this scope its impossible to tie up all threads. So thats again down to personal opinion on what tied up is.

Theres was different than yours. Marketers are hired to embellish things, thats their job if you or anyone else for that matter got too bought in, thats your fault for not being a responsible consumer.

The fact of the matter is you all lined up and bought day 1 ignoring needs for reviews and such things, this is the downside to doing that. Again take responsibility for your own actions.

Except there aren't more than 3 choices, you make one of three choices, and watch what happens, the makers of the game decided to cut it up slightly, and only paste some of it over certain choices, then they claim the game has 17 endings or whatever, and honestly, I can live with that, what I can't accept from them is when you can find interviews before this came out talking about the different kinds of endings you will get, that according to them at the time, were in the game, only to buy the game yourself and find that they aren't there. That is lying, not embellishing, and that review thing falls completely flat, obviously reviews aren't going to talk about the ending, and who would wait around long enough before buying the game to read a plot synopsis and spoil everything for themselves?

Also before you reply I'd highly recommend you watch this video from a guy who explains in far better detail why the ending(s) are bad without any fan boy BS that was never there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4H_A7SeawU4&feature=g-all-u&context=G2d94660FAAAAAAAAQAA

A good reviewer can tell you something sucks without spoiling it. Sure you have to trust his opinion on the matter, but if you dont trust the opinion of the guy you shouldn't read it in the first place.

And yes the endings aren't all massively different. But i'd arGUe that'S a constraint of wanting to have all those choices, none of them could hope to shine as good as one singular thread could of.

Yes, a single ending would probably be much better than several different endings as it almost always is and it would work, IF this was not a series based entirely around player choices, IF they didn't keep hammering out that your choices have several different consequences and IF they decided from the start to do a single ending rather than hammer one out at the last minute (which I don't know for certain but it really feels like it), but this series is about choices, which as the video mentions, means they really should have (at the very least) put more work into the endings to at least give us some closure on what happened.

Although I do agree with your point that a good reviewer can tell you that an ending is terrible without spoilers, which is what the reviewer I linked to does, although for the most part, you have no idea how terrible an ending is without finding out exactly what it is or experiencing it.

RaikuFA:

370999:

RaikuFA:

Considering people are demanding donations back, making death threats and making BBB complaints over it, hes a bit justified. Hes just saying those above three make all fans of something look bad.

That is an extreme fringe and accompanies anything which is emotional. Bob is not a man to chide others for childish outbursts, remember the whole comparison between the Transformers movies and his dogs skeleton being dug out, covered in shit and views of it sold? I do.

Also he mentions the FTC without paying any attention to why that happened. That is not about the ending being bad, that is about Bioware outright lying in interviews. They said it wouldn't be an ABC affair and it was.

OK? And? I was promised a demo of MML3 and the sales of said demo would determine if it was gonna be cancelled or not. It got canceled before the demo was released and I can't make a BBB complaint over it cause it will be thrown out, just like your ME3 complaints.

Jaebird:
Geez. Haven't seen this much of an outcry over fictional media since... Lost?

And it wasn't even this bad.

Well, you could make a BBB complaint, The Better Business Bureau is a private consumer watch organization with a lot of influance. Whether they would choose to pursue it and promote them on it's blacklist, and put pressure on the company as they sometimes do is debatable. All told being private the BBB can wind up doing some odd things... and depending on the roll of the dice they might actually represent someone over that demo thing... which is neither here nor there.

What we're looking at with EA/Bioware is the FTC.. Federal Trade Comission. The question here comes down to wheher EA/Bioware made promises and then intentionally chose not to keep them. With the Demo thing it could be argued that they never had the funding to consider making the game or any of a number of other situations. In the end there really isn't a product being judged, but rather the question of whether one was ever going to be created. With "Mass Effect 3" there is a product, and there are statements made by members of the Dev team including managers and writers, along with those interviews taken from that $3 ending app that shows that EA/Bioware deliberatly made promises and then chose not to keep them.

In the end a lot comes down to whether or not your going to find lawyers willing to take a case before the FTC or into civil court. I could be wrong but "Mass Effect 3" seems to be going to both. Lawyers have their own careers to worry about and generally won't take cases they have no chance of winning as it can affect their overall ratings (win/loss rate on cases) and so on. The FTC complaints and such here are noteworthy both because fans are angry enough to spend the money, and because there are lawyers willing to take the case, which means that they expect to be able to win it during a hearing.... and that says a lot all on it's own. See if this was just a case of some people yelling "lawsuit" in forums it wouldn't even be noteworthy, that happens all the time. This one is noteworthy because it's apparently actually been filed as I understand things... which means it's actually going to happen this time, real lawyers are apparently taking real money to make this a real case. Agree or not, this means it's a real issue. Any claims about how ridiculous it sounds, or other "ridiculous" cases that might be made are irrelevent at this point. In the end most of those "analogies" to what is going on fall apart because you couldn't get the funding or a lawyer willing to stake themselves on the case.

At least that's how I understand things.

As far as "Lost" goes, understand that with "Lost" there was no real investment on the part of the people watching it. "Lost" was free, all you have to do was subject yourself to commercials. With "Mass Effect 3" people have invested $60 in this product, and in many cases over $200 in the series (well over counting DLC, collector's editions, etc...). This means there is a larger, direct stake.

A better analogy than lost would be movies that dissatisfy viewers, in cases where everyone winds up hating a movie crowds of people tend to demand... and received, their money back. A theater giving a single customer a refund for not liking something is minimal, but if a full theater of people come banging on the manager's door, it happens. This is the equivilent of pissing everyone off in a theater, except nobody is getting a refund. A defense of EA/Bioware could be made if they were offering to buy back all of the Mass Effect merchandise they sold up until this point at the full retail value... sort of like a ticket refund, but for obvious reasons that's not happening.

One also must remember that "Lost" and other media with bad endings, also did not have the producers running around with a cash register trying to hit them up for money to see the finale. Not only does the ME3 ending suck, it's also one where it's impossible to see the entire thing just by playing the campaign. The degree to which you see the craptastic ending is influanced by "War Assets" of which there are not enough in the game to see all the options. Right now the only way to see those endings is to raise your "readiness rating" by playing the multiplayer mode, which is an intentionally frustrating grind fest, that happens to include a "pay to win" function where you can buy weapon packs to make it less of a frustrating grind fest... something targeted at those who might want to see the ending but have no real tolerance for the multiplayer or want to potentially put dozens of hours into it. EA/Bioware are also in a position where they can add more War Assets via DLC to make the ending an incentive to buy the DLC, and of course they planned to sell an app called "Mass Effect: Infiltrator" or something like that which would provide another way of gaining the needed points to see all of the ending.

Basically, Bioware/EA charges you $60 for a game with a crappy ending, but then tries to get you to pay money to fully experience that crappy ending. This is a point people overlook in this entire equasion... it's more than people just hating the ending, it's a matter of people hating the way this entire thing was motivated by trying to gouge money out of people... and that's beyond sacrificing the integrity of the triology for franchise purposes (which is also a factor... contributing to why the ending is such a mess, and why EA/Bioware wanted people to be talking about it... they aren't concerend with wrapping it up like promised, they want it to effectiely be a giant advertisement for the NEXT game... a cliffhanger or sorts added to what should be the end of the story... I have no issue with sequels, but feel they really needed to tie this game up as they promised. I bought a trilogy, end the story in chapter 3. Do another trilogy in the same universe later if you want, but don't turn the trilogy's end into a bloody marketing ploy).

bahumat42:

Nergy:

bahumat42:

All very good points
but its not false advertising because there are more than just the a b c choices.
As for "wrapping up all the important stuff" or whatever the damn quote was, surely you can see that on anything this scope its impossible to tie up all threads. So thats again down to personal opinion on what tied up is.

Theres was different than yours. Marketers are hired to embellish things, thats their job if you or anyone else for that matter got too bought in, thats your fault for not being a responsible consumer.

The fact of the matter is you all lined up and bought day 1 ignoring needs for reviews and such things, this is the downside to doing that. Again take responsibility for your own actions.

I haven't played any of the mass effect games myself, but i think what they mean is that the series had plot points the series failed to address in the ending/later part of the game (which they promised to do)

I don't think it's fair to blame us, considering they're the ones who embellished. People trust Bioware enough because they have given a lot of people reason to trust them. Instead of saying "that's just the way marketing is". Wouldn't it be better to tell them that we don't like being lied to, and tell them that in future they should avoid such practices?.

Your third paragraph could be given the same response as above. ME and ME2 were very well received and people trusted Bioware enough to put a shiny button on the series with ME3. That didn't happen and after spending over $100 and having a lot of emotional investment in the story, it's not hard to see why some fans might feel a bit angry when Bioware doesn't follow through what they promised.

Marketers have always and will always be out to do that, its kind of in the role, im surprised that anyone over 18 wouldn't understand that. You can blame them all you want their just doing their job to maximise sales.

Morally and ethically it may be wrong but if we are going to be throwing those sticks around then go chase up big pharma, their doing far worse than ea in this regard.

Its really saddening that this is the only kind of thing our subculture does that gets media attention and its showing us in such a bad light.

I can only re-iterate that being displeased at the endings fine, but the way people are handling it definitely isn't. Write an angry letter or email. Vow to never by a ME, bioware or ea game again. Because all it looks like to the outside world is people kicking and screaming because they couldn't have their way.

Yeah, some comapnies do it worse, but Bioware got caught. I say let them squirm a little.

Actually, we are only being put in a bad light by the gaming press. Other media are being much more forgiving to the fans and in some cases clearly pointing out that Bioware must have done something really wrong.

Wow people love to complain. Just let it go, get on with your lives. Maybe do something constructive?

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 . . . 18 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here