Entitlement

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

No spoilers here, nor in the discussion, please.

After Mass Effect fans demanded that Bioware change the ending to ME3, a torrent of derogatory comments and overuse of the word "entitlement" have brought out adversarial relationships between games press, game fans, and game developers, with the fans on one side, alone. Who is right? To figure out, I decided to evaluate the acidic word that blows up Twitter feeds and forum boards even as I type.

What does it mean?

It is the belief that one is deserving of or entitled to certain privileges, according to the dictionary.

What are we entitled to?

When we buy a game (new), we are entitled to a good game. But if it isn't good, or just doesn't tickle our particular fancy, then we just learn our lesson. We get more critical about future purchases and we move forward, because that particular game didn't meet our expectations. If we don't like it, we should simply move on. To mindlessly bitch is unhealthy. Criticize, of course, but do it constructively.

The important thing is that quality is a matter of opinion.

Should they patch Mass Effect 3's story?

No. Mass Effect 3's story may be unsatisfactory (I haven't finished it, yet, but that's not the point), but that doesn't mean it should be changed. It's much different from patching a technical issue. A patch to fix matchmaking or a glitch should happen because that was unintentional. The story, whether you like it or not, is an artistic expression. It should be left to be what it is, and to change it because you don't like it, is effectively censorship. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censor)

If you consider video games as an artistic medium, you would understand this. If it's just a service and soulless product, then you won't.

Criticizing constructively should be the route taken, because a young, enterprising writer, or a seasoned veteran, could take well-reasoned criticism to heart and make future stories better.

Alternatively, think if you wrote a story that people felt had a lackluster ending. You mulled over it for weeks and felt that is the appropriate ending for your story. You published it, they bought it.Should you change it? Fuck no! It's your story, not theirs. You made it for them, maybe, but it is still your story, that you thought out. Shepherd's story in Mass Effect may be influenced by the player, and feel personal, but it is also the artistic expression of Bioware's writers that made it possible.

There is also a difference between marketing and honesty; when they market a game, they hype it up and deliver hyperbole. They can defend this by saying "these were our goals" or "this is our opinion." It's not a fact. It's also not a fact that the game sucked.

You can't petition filmmakers to change endings. You can't petition author's or TV writers, either. Why should games get this treatment?

It's immature, and it is the feeling that you are entitled to the game ending the way you want it to, which you aren't. Neither am I. Nobody is. If you don't like it, that's unfortunate. It sucks that you feel let down, but maybe you need to stop worrying about it so much. You got other shit in your life to occupy that feeling. Let it go.

If I am promised a product that does X, I'm entitled to a product that does X, otherwise I'm entitled to returning it for a refund. If I am promised a product that does not do Y, I am entitled to a product that does not do Y, otherwise I'm entitled to returning it for a refund.

Simple as, I'm entitled to what I was promised I'd get.

In any industry, no matter what product is concerned. And as a consumer, I have my rights. One of my rights is to not have to "suck it up and take it", I am entitled to standing up for myself and actively - and reactively - fight against being ripped off.

That said, this was a general statement, because frankly, I've talked about the specific case of ME3 long enough and I'm not continuing that charade.

Vegosiux:
If I am promised a product that does X, I'm entitled to a product that does X, otherwise I'm entitled to returning it for a refund. If I am promised a product that does not do Y, I am entitled to a product that does not do Y, otherwise I'm entitled to returning it for a refund.

Simple as, I'm entitled to what I was promised I'd get.

In any industry, no matter what product is concerned. And as a consumer, I have my rights. One of my rights is to not have to "suck it up and take it", I am entitled to standing up for myself and actively - and reactively - fight against being ripped off.

That said, this was a general statement, because frankly, I've talked about the specific case of ME3 long enough and I'm not continuing that charade.

Without going into spoiler territory, what were you specifically promised (with a link, preferably) that did not live up to said promise?

CaptOfSerenity:

Vegosiux:
If I am promised a product that does X, I'm entitled to a product that does X, otherwise I'm entitled to returning it for a refund. If I am promised a product that does not do Y, I am entitled to a product that does not do Y, otherwise I'm entitled to returning it for a refund.

Simple as, I'm entitled to what I was promised I'd get.

In any industry, no matter what product is concerned. And as a consumer, I have my rights. One of my rights is to not have to "suck it up and take it", I am entitled to standing up for myself and actively - and reactively - fight against being ripped off.

That said, this was a general statement, because frankly, I've talked about the specific case of ME3 long enough and I'm not continuing that charade.

Without going into spoiler territory, what were you specifically promised (with a link, preferably) that did not live up to said promise?

He's talking about the developer interviews that talked about choices in the games, as well as endings in the games, and how those developer interviews turned out to be false.

tendaji:

CaptOfSerenity:

Vegosiux:
If I am promised a product that does X, I'm entitled to a product that does X, otherwise I'm entitled to returning it for a refund. If I am promised a product that does not do Y, I am entitled to a product that does not do Y, otherwise I'm entitled to returning it for a refund.

Simple as, I'm entitled to what I was promised I'd get.

In any industry, no matter what product is concerned. And as a consumer, I have my rights. One of my rights is to not have to "suck it up and take it", I am entitled to standing up for myself and actively - and reactively - fight against being ripped off.

That said, this was a general statement, because frankly, I've talked about the specific case of ME3 long enough and I'm not continuing that charade.

Without going into spoiler territory, what were you specifically promised (with a link, preferably) that did not live up to said promise?

He's talking about the developer interviews that talked about choices in the games, as well as endings in the games, and how those developer interviews turned out to be false.

Can you get specific? Remember that people selling their games will have an optimistic view.

Again, no spoilers. Hate to be a hard on about it, but...

Also, don't judge an entire trilogy around 5 minutes of crap. I don't like a lot of the ME trilogy, but I'm still a fan. You have to consider everything.

If you buy a bag of crisps (chips to you americans) on the promise that these crisps (chips) are cheese flavour but find to your horror that they are infact onion you are entitled to complain.

That is entitlement.

Can we stop with analogies that make no sense?

EDIT: Ok, I'm looking at my Deus ex: Human Revolution box, and it says "a perfect mix of action and role play."

It is not perfect. Do I deserve my money back? No, because it's opinion.

And marketing. I think you guys are partially mad because your idealistic vision of Bioware was shattered when ME3 didn't live up to some expectations.

Movies do this all the time, are movie go-ers entitled because they don't want a bad/lazy ending?

Everyone is acting like gamers are whiny,(I do not support the extremist side, I support upset/rational fans) when people from other industries do this quite often. What is it about games that puts them in a different category. Yes, games are art. But they aren't made for art's sake.

They are made for a profit, that's the point. Without the user/consumer, these IP's do not exist. So, while a game developer is allowed to ignore all complaints, it isn't wise, seeing as they exist because of their user base.

If I buy a car and it breaks down 100 ft before I got to my destination, you could say it's technically functional and technically does everything it promised to, but that doesn't make it immune to a redesign or refund.

You know, after reading the OP, I can't help but think that a certain Forbes Article...or two seem very relevant to the claims made.

CaptOfSerenity:

Can you get specific? Remember that people selling their games will have an optimistic view.

Again, no spoilers. Hate to be a hard on about it, but...

Also, don't judge an entire trilogy around 5 minutes of crap. I don't like a lot of the ME trilogy, but I'm still a fan. You have to consider everything.

They promised that we wouldn't get a "Lost" style ending that raises more questions than it answered, which we ended up getting. They promised a variety of very different endings, we got a choice between at most three options which played out almost identically (Read: If viewed in greyscale they'd be nigh-indistinguishible). We were promised that our choices throughout the series would radically affect the outcome, which they did not. The options available to you at the end are solely dependent on your War Assets value rather than the decisions made to hit that value. We were told that an "A B or C" ending would essentially be anathema given the way the series had played...and then we get one of the more glaring "A B or C" ending choices in recent memory...and mind you, many of these claims were made late in development, some even after the game went 'Golden' (Meaning that it had been vetted for final review by that point).

And that's without getting into the various storytelling faux pas written into the conclusion...how to put it without spoilers...You ever hear of "One More Day" for Spiderman? Suffice to say that the criticisms of that plotline bear an uncanny resemblance to those of Mass Effect 3's ending. Alternatively, you could say that the ending of Mass Effect 3 read like something you'd see if someone wanted to parody the series.

I hate to bust this out for the second time today but honestly :

So a single developer that has a very close relationship with its fans did a complete one 180 on it's promises and then caved on modifying their product when it failed to live up to promised features. Not hype but things that were blatantly publicly promised. That isn't entitlement, that's saying you fucked up we want this fixed. At this rate I don't want games to be considered art, I pretty much want them to be all entertainment. Calling them art won't suddenly make them better, not being art won't make them suddenly shitty and regardless of what they're called people with a vision will still make "Art games" whether they qualify as art or not. No matter what they are they will stay the same, some will be crap, some will be awesome and quite frankly the ability to make crappy ones into something awesome by bitching about them is pretty sweet. Fuck artistic integrity bring on the awesome games.

If I'm willing to pay for them to change their art, then yes I can petition them to change a movie/book/game/peice of art. I'm not forcing them to, I'm just providing incentive for them to change their minds. If they don't want to: then okay they can keep their original ending. If they decide to change it because of my offer, then goody for them too.

As long as they have the choice to do what they want with their creation they keep their integrity.

Any artist worth their chops will listen to criticism, and yes, even sometimes change their minds. You might think they are selling out or folding to the masses, but it is their choice to do so.

Heres the thing about entitlement. If someone thinks they are entitled to something it does not matter how much logic or reason you throw at them, they think they deserve it and nothing you say will change their feelings.

Its been made fairly clear. There are a large group of people who think they deserve a better/different ending for mass effect and nothing is going to deter them from that position, so it is a fruitless task to try to continue to talk to them and convince them to change their positions.

Honestly, best thing to do is let it go, its a waste of time to write it, its a waste of time to read it and the likelihood it will change anyones perspective with a barrage of analogies is fairly nominal at best.

Just...
image
cause its slightly less annoying and redundant.

We need the Fluttershy Skyrim mod for the reapers :)

Here's why people are angry: (and seriously you really shouldn't comment on this if you haven't played/seen the ending as you quite literally have no clue what you are talking about)

First off false advertisement: here's a thread with a collection of quotes from the developers while they were trying to hype up the game that they straight up lied about. http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10405204/1

Second, Anyone who has played the ending knows that the ending renders virtually all your choices throughout the game completely void. People aren't angry because the ending wasn't happy it was the fact that the ending was a giant deus ex machina turd sandwich. It has already been said multiple times that the ending doesn't have to be happy or even successful for that matter but it has to be coherent and provide closure as that is kinda the whole point of an ending.

Third, the art defense is weak at best. Are you implying that art doesn't get criticism? Art is critiqued just as much any other medium and to suggest otherwise is insulting to art in general. The fans are justifiably upset by the ending and they are petitioning Bioware to change the obviously rushed ending to something more coherent because the fans believe that leaving the ending in its current state is harmful to the series as a whole.

Fourth, the "the whole game was the ending" defense doesn't work either. In a series like Mass Effect where the entire premise of the series is the player's actions have consequences and impact to have an ending that renders all of that null and void is unacceptable. There are games that are all about the journey itself and not the destination but Mass Effect is not one of them as it is not some generic shooter/platformer where the story is purely an excuse for the character to run out and kill some enemies.

I feel I'm entitled to come to the Escapist to find threads that aren't all about bloody MASS EFFECT 3.

If I had a wish, I'd wish Mass Effect never existed, so we could finally stop seeing thread 1333: Mass Effect 3's ending wasn't wanted, followed by 1334: You don't deserve a better ending, followed by more Mass Effect 3 crap.

Honestly, Mass Effect 3 has engulfed this site more then My Little Pony ever did.

Wait 'till we get avatars about ME3's endings.

I always hear people defend themselves against accusations of undeserved feelings of self-entitlement with "If you bought a product because it was advertised as being one thing and it turned out to be someone else, you'd be angry!"

Which is funny, because I don't remember any of the advertisement being about the nature of the ending of the game. Simply that the trilogy was ending.

No, people seem to have imagined what they wanted the ending to be, and are upset because it didn't live up to their standards. Guess what? That's your fault, not Bioware's. And don't act like them building up some amount of hype about how big and epic this final game in the trilogy was going to be in any way entitles you to act personally insulted that it didn't live up to your expectations: Every single trilogy does this, ever. Whether or not it actually turns out to be good or not is pretty much luck. If you choose to get so personally invested in a game that people actually threaten to sue due to their expectations being let down, then there's no easy way to put this: you have a fucking problem.

I came for the title, I'm gonna stay for the drama -Pulls up feet-

Entitled is just a buzzword cooked up by the gaming corporations to demonize people who buy second hand.

Let me ask you who is more "entitled". The consumer who A.) Wants the product they were promised they would get B.) Wants the right to resell a game they paid for

OR:
The developers who want to dictate not only how you play your games (DRM, online passes ect...) but also who want to be the ONLY medium that bans second hand games. They even use the excuse that even though you paid for your very own copy of whatever you got, you don't reeeeally own it. Even though money exchanged hands and you were given a physical item in exchange.

Who is the entitled one?

idarkphoenixi:
Entitled is just a buzzword cooked up by the gaming corporations to demonize people who buy second hand.

Let me ask you who is more "entitled". The consumer who A.) Wants the product they were promised they would get B.) Wants the right to resell a game they paid for

OR:
The developers who want to dictate not only how you play your games (DRM, online passes ect...) but also who want to be the ONLY medium that bans second hand games. They even use the excuse that even though you paid for your very own copy of whatever you got, you don't reeeeally own it. Even though money exchanged hands and you were given a physical item in exchange.

Who is the entitled one?

Uh? "1.give a title to
2.dignify by an honorary designation.
3.give authority (to do something)
4.give rightful ownership
5.give a title to a book, film, play, etc.
"

From Wiktionary. To "Feel entitled" is to feel that they have the rightful authority on the subject to demand something. But that is just the thing, most people haven't.
Gamers don't have the right to demand a specific ending, no matter how much it sucks.
So you were promised a multiflavored spazzstastic ending? Well, development changes, and you can't take those "promises" seriously.
And no, you can't compare this to an actuall,physical product, since this is the matter of aesthetics.

I wrote a lengthy post in one of the Mass Effect 3 Ending threads where I said that people should get the fuck over it, and that maybe such an emotional response was what the writers were trying to accomlish. But I haven't played any of the games, and it might have been a mistake for me to think I could talk about the subject sensibly. The way I understand it now, after reading up about it, (Shamus Young's blog post) is that the ending sucks in a multitude of ways, of which the 'bittersweet without anything actually being sweet'-part is but the most rehashed one, because it is the one non-fans can most easily relate to without knowing about the universe. So now I think that Bioware deserves all the shit its getting, and I am glad I never sunk so many hours into the franchise as other people did, and I know I won't ever.

Well, now I realize I am not quite meeting the point of this thread, but it seems I can't delete this post (hi, I'm new). So to meet the criteria I will elaborate a bit on what I think about entitlement here.

The issue is a different one here than it would be if this were a movie. Games of course are an interactive medium, and player behaviour, choices etc. should make for most if not all of the experience. That means that on a most fundamental level, gamers are in-fucking-deed 'entitled' to a game that responds to the choices they make in a certain predictable way, to about the same degree a movie going audience is entitled to see actual moving pictures to go along with what could just as well be an audio play. That doesn't mean that you should always be able to tell how such a response will look like. You don't have a right to a happy ending, but you have a right to an ending that takes into account what you did, even if it puts a new spin on your actions and, for example, lets you know at the very end of the story that you were the bad guy all along. The way I understand it now, Mass Effect 3 just didn't deliver, and while it's true that other games didn't deliver before, the backlash now is determined by the franchises own previous insistence that it would. Bioware can suck it.

16 different endings, according to Casey Hudson in pre-release interviews. If you're willing to be gracious with the ending, there's about 6. Where are the other 10?

Mac Walters saying (as an example) whether you spared or killed the Rachni has a huge impact in ME3, especially the ending of the game. Spoiler: it doesn't.

One of the writers revealing that the ending was written solely by Mac Walters (the lead writer) and wasn't peer-reviewed like the entire rest of the game. It was just Walters and Hudson tucked away in a room writing together.

That's where the artistic integrity argument falls short for me. If the entire rest of the game was written as a collaborative effort by the team and went through peer review, why is it acceptable for the ending to be hijacked by 2 people? Doesn't that short-change the entire rest of the writing team and compromise their artistic values? There's a reason things take a sudden turn at the end - and if you haven't gotten there and don't know what happens, OP, you'll be able to tell where the sudden shift happens. If anything changing things from a collaborative work (full writing team) into a 2-man job is what's compromised the artistic integrity of Mass Effect, not the fan outcry.

And BioWare has stated that they aren't changing the endings, they're just adding more info to flesh them out. That's it. So it's not like they're compromising their ideals or anything.

you people have absolutely no sense of risk. Buying a video game has the same risk you had when buying a music album in the 70's, and the same risk when you watch a movie today. no one is adventurous anymore.

Deshara:
Which is funny, because I don't remember any of the advertisement being about the nature of the ending of the game. Simply that the trilogy was ending.

MY GOD THANK GOD SOMEONE BESIDES ME NOTICED.
and theres another thing. at no point did any of the advertise if the ending would be affected by the choices in-game. so far no one has been able to provide evidence. or a link.

42:
you people have absolutely no sense of risk. Buying a video game has the same risk you had when buying a music album in the 70's, and the same risk when you watch a movie today. no one is adventurous anymore.

Deshara:
Which is funny, because I don't remember any of the advertisement being about the nature of the ending of the game. Simply that the trilogy was ending.

MY GOD THANK GOD SOMEONE BESIDES ME NOTICED.
and theres another thing. at no point did any of the advertise if the ending would be affected by the choices in-game. so far no one has been able to provide evidence. or a link.

I'm guessing it was mentioned by the dev at some point, and then cut because I don't think who you stuck your dick in is going to affect how you bring down the universe-slaying monsters.

Short note from an artist: sometimes the argument is raised that because games are art, you can't ask to change the ending.

Art is a form of communication between maker and receiver. Artists are not deaf and giving feedback can be valuable.

Second: about the 'you don't ask for a movie to change its ending', movies don't have a system in place to deliver DLC and if they did, it would devalue the strongest way to experience them: in a theater.

CaptOfSerenity:
Can you get specific? Remember that people selling their games will have an optimistic view.

Again, no spoilers. Hate to be a hard on about it, but...

Also, don't judge an entire trilogy around 5 minutes of crap. I don't like a lot of the ME trilogy, but I'm still a fan. You have to consider everything.

I don't have links handy, as I can't be fucked to find them again (if you want them, look up the compilation threads on BSN about it), but what he's referring to is the multiple instances Hudson or Walters said "There won't be a rote ending that everyone gets, you won't get an A, B, C choice ending". That's not an exact quote, but that's the gist of what they said. In the 2-3 months leading up to the game's release, there were explicit promises of how the game would end, but those promises turned out to be blatant lies.

From that perspective, there very much valid legal reasons to demand either changes to the game or full refunds to everyone who asks.

dunam:
Second: about the 'you don't ask for a movie to change its ending', movies don't have a system in place to deliver DLC and if they did, it would devalue the strongest way to experience them: in a theater.

Actually, they already do that. Case in point, "Director's Cut" editions and the like. The best example is Blade Runner, because each different version is dramatically different in themes.

Whoever first used the "entitlement" word to get the entire gamer community bitching at each other while holding guns at each others heads, bravo.

That man needs a cookie.

Deshara:
I always hear people defend themselves against accusations of undeserved feelings of self-entitlement with "If you bought a product because it was advertised as being one thing and it turned out to be someone else, you'd be angry!"

Which is funny, because I don't remember any of the advertisement being about the nature of the ending of the game. Simply that the trilogy was ending.

No, people seem to have imagined what they wanted the ending to be, and are upset because it didn't live up to their standards. Guess what? That's your fault, not Bioware's. And don't act like them building up some amount of hype about how big and epic this final game in the trilogy was going to be in any way entitles you to act personally insulted that it didn't live up to your expectations: Every single trilogy does this, ever. Whether or not it actually turns out to be good or not is pretty much luck. If you choose to get so personally invested in a game that people actually threaten to sue due to their expectations being let down, then there's no easy way to put this: you have a fucking problem.

Actually, the devs said explicitly several times in pre-release interviews and whatnot (hint: this is advertisement) that the end of the game would not be exactly what it was. These interviews played a not-insignificant part in many people's purchase. Thus, it's perfectly reasonable to be upset about false advertising or whatever.

The biggest part of the outrage is simply because the endings did not meet the quality established in the rest of the series, and most of that complaining needs to die down tbph, but the BBB suit against EA/Bioware is actually perfectly valid and I hope they win.

CaptOfSerenity:

tendaji:

CaptOfSerenity:

Without going into spoiler territory, what were you specifically promised (with a link, preferably) that did not live up to said promise?

He's talking about the developer interviews that talked about choices in the games, as well as endings in the games, and how those developer interviews turned out to be false.

Can you get specific? Remember that people selling their games will have an optimistic view.

Again, no spoilers. Hate to be a hard on about it, but...

Also, don't judge an entire trilogy around 5 minutes of crap. I don't like a lot of the ME trilogy, but I'm still a fan. You have to consider everything.

http://social.bioware.com/318304/blog/212060/

42:
you people have absolutely no sense of risk. Buying a video game has the same risk you had when buying a music album in the 70's, and the same risk when you watch a movie today. no one is adventurous anymore.

Deshara:
Which is funny, because I don't remember any of the advertisement being about the nature of the ending of the game. Simply that the trilogy was ending.

MY GOD THANK GOD SOMEONE BESIDES ME NOTICED.
and theres another thing. at no point did any of the advertise if the ending would be affected by the choices in-game. so far no one has been able to provide evidence. or a link.

I put a link to a thread with a collection of links to quotes from interviews... obviously you didn't read it.

CaptOfSerenity:

Without going into spoiler territory, what were you specifically promised (with a link, preferably) that did not live up to said promise?

We were promised our choices would matter.

We were promised an end to a story.

We were promised answers.

We were promised multiplayer wouldn't affect single player.

Without spoiling any plot points (unless you ask).....

Not one single choice made in previous games actually made a difference. The only thing that changed was a small scene, nothing actually affected the story. The story hasn't ended, we didn't get any answers.

As for multiplayer, you can screw up your game royally and fix it all with a few hours in multiplayer to get your war assets. In fact, if you follow a certain path then the only way to get enough war assets is to dabble with multiplayer.

As for this whole "games are art so you shouldn't complain, it kills artistic integrity", bollocks.

I'm not paying for art i'm paying for a product. If that product turns out to be shite then i'm going to complain.

Uhh. No. Artistic Integrity defence is BS. I don't think those words mean what you think they mean.

Any good artist shows their work to others, and when they get negative reactions ask 'What can I do to fix it?'
Arrogant artists who care more about themselves than their work get negative reactions and say 'Well, I don't want to sacrifice my artistic integrity. Why are you bullying me?'

Artistic Integrity is basically saying that the final decision on what happens with an artists work lies with that artist - and that is still 100% true, even if they change the endings. They decided to accept the feedback and change the endings.
Believe it or not, a LOT of famous artistic works have been rewritten or edited to appeal to different audiences, because the artists cared about their work and how others saw it, and wanted people to like it. Shakespeare had multiple versions of some of his plays for different groups of people. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle retconed one of his books, and bought Sherlock Holmes back to life due to fan demand.

The next thing is, ME is commissioned art. That means certain expectations are placed upon it. If it does not deliver, the purchaser is more than entitled to ask for it to be changed, or to walk away with their money. In this case, its a bit different - EA is the funding for it, but we fund EA. The final say of how successful the product is lies with the audience.

Now, if I want art, I'll go to the National Art Gallery. I want entertainment, and a game, and I didn't get that with ME3s ending. I'm more than entitled to tell Bioware where to shove it, and return my copy until they change the ending.
Their artistic integrity is still intact, but they'll lose my - and others - business. That is what they care more about - the business. We haven't strongarmed anything by saying we won't buy more Bioware games, and will return ME3. If you say we have, you're saying Bioware is entitled to our sales, and that is wrong on so many levels.

You actually can petition film makers, authors, and TV writers to change their story. It has happened in the past and it has worked.

And it is extremely naive to think that the writers have some kind of set vision that is immune to change from outside factors. Writers are already affected by things like deadlines, production costs, suggestions from producers, advertisers, and publishers long before they even release their product to the audience.

Movie studios have test screenings and game developers have beta/play testers. For example, the test audience didn't like the ending of Terminator 2 so James Cameron shot a new ending. How is it that different for the writer to change their work because of reactions from test audience compared to the writer changing their work because of reactions from the general audience? Heck, the whole point of the test audience is that they're a small sample of the general audience.

Also, the problem with Mass Effect 3's ending isn't just that it's stupid or that it doesn't make any sense or that it's full of plot holes. It completely runs counter to the entire franchise structurally and artistically.

Look at Planescape: Torment, it is a very layered and nuanced game that was always meant to be open to interpretation. The players are supposed to speculate about the true identity of The Nameless One and the crime he committed. There are hints and clue that support many different theories about The Nameless One's identity. So it wouldn't make any sense for Chris Avellone to change the ending to reveal The Nameless One's original identity, even if everyone wanted it, because that runs counter to everything else in the game.

Mass Effect is not like that. Mass Effect is a very straightforward series that is all about fantasy fulfillment for the audience. The story is written to play out more or less the way that the fans want. Mass Effect's plots, themes, characters, and intentions that are not very layered or obscured and they are not very open to interpretation. The developers even said that the ending would be conclusive and not leave lingering questions. It doesn't make any sense for 99% of the series to be like Flash Gordon and then suddenly last 1% clumsily morphs into Blade Runner.

CaptOfSerenity:
You can't petition filmmakers to change endings. You can't petition author's or TV writers, either. Why should games get this treatment?

Sure you can; it's been done before.

There are plenty of movies out there with alternate endings, television shows with plot changes based around fan appeasement and going against long-held story plans.

In this day and age fans are part of the creative process, if Bioware takes fan input during production and story (which they do), what's the difference to them changing the story pre-release to post?

CaptOfSerenity:
Can we stop with analogies that make no sense?

They make perfect sense. Bioware promised the fans at the end they'd have options not limited to ___ ___ & ___. Those were exactly the options we got. If you're promised you'll get one thing, then given something entirely different, you have a right to question it.

Sucking it up and accepting something that so blatantly goes against every promise, every statement and even the very essence of what a game has been to that point is not acceptable.

Artistic integrity is one thing, but if we all shut down and ignore the fact the ending was so off base, who's to say Bioware/EA won't pull this stunt again? They have to be held accountable. You build a reputation, make promises, create a fantastic series, then blow it all back in our faces at the most pivotal moment? You're damn sure we have a right to make ourselves heard. If not in order to change things, just to ensure this sort of nonsense isn't allowed to go unchecked in the future.

It'd be like ignoring the fact your soup has a host of dead flies at the bottom, just because the rest of it was great, the resturant has a good reputation, and you can just 'suck it up' and move on. So either you bring it up with the waiter to ensure it doesn't become a recurring problem, or you ignore it. You choose to ignore it? So does everyone else. So the restaurant eventually comes to the conclusion that nobody cares if there are bugs in the food.

It's another 'nonsensical analogy', but it proves a point. Mass Effect was made for us, it was made to be enjoyed and appreciated by us, the fans. It's artistic visually, the story is beautiful, the characters are full of life. I don't know what the hell counts as art anymore, but demanding higher quality from a company that proved they can handle the task for 98% of the game isn't out of line.

It's their choice to change it, but it's our right to say they should.

Xenedus:

42:
you people have absolutely no sense of risk. Buying a video game has the same risk you had when buying a music album in the 70's, and the same risk when you watch a movie today. no one is adventurous anymore.

Deshara:
Which is funny, because I don't remember any of the advertisement being about the nature of the ending of the game. Simply that the trilogy was ending.

MY GOD THANK GOD SOMEONE BESIDES ME NOTICED.
and theres another thing. at no point did any of the advertise if the ending would be affected by the choices in-game. so far no one has been able to provide evidence. or a link.

I put a link to a thread with a collection of links to quotes from interviews... obviously you didn't read it.

that isn't advertising. those were a bunch of interviews. Interviews fall under PR. the reason being is because they would make sure the interviewers would be provided with information that would be relevant to the topic of the interview. Advertising is showing it.

Gamer entitlement is a false term made by publishers to try and make gamers feel bad for complaining when they don't like the 60-120$ purchase they made. It specifically targets fanboys so they get on the defensive and continue purchasing their products. "Oh well you didn't like that issue because it was bad, but because you have entitlement issues. Yeah. So keep buying our DLC"

It doesn't exist. People are entitled to a properly made product that is properly advertised, when it doesn't they have the full right to complain about it and not purchase more from that company. If they are stupid and continue to buy from that company then they have entitlement issues, but if they are smart and don't then they are enacting their proper rights as consumers. It's how capitalism works.

People don't call film critics "film entitlests" when they don't like a movie that they paid for just because it had a big glaring issue or it was shoddily made, when the trailer said otherwise.

Also as to the argument of artistic integrity it's bullshit. Bethesda did this with Fallout 3 when they made Broken Steel, no one swore at them and called them sellouts. People have made alternate ending DLC before and it has always been seen with approval. The only reason it isn't now is because of how bad Mass Effect 3's endings were and how much support the DLC has.

I'm not even going to get into the argument of "this is a business first and an art form second."

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked