Well, Retake Mass Effect 3 is pretty much over. What have we learned from this experience?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4
 

Jarek Mace:
I love how people keep saying 'fans'. How about consumers, because we're the ones PAYING for their product?

this is also true, which is why it's hard to compare it to some other mediums, such as music/tv, as music you don't need to pay for it to listen to it, and same goes for tv series (people bring up the LOST ending)

when you pay for something, you expect coherent quality.

MC1980:

Archer666:
Well, gaming journalism is really corrupt and has a horrible relationship to the games industry which causes them to lose objectivity. Compare "gaming journalism" coverage of this entire mess with the coverage that Forbes did. Forbes actually called EA and Bioware out on the shit they were/are pulling while the "gaming journalism" just ate up whatever press release they were given.

This entire mess taught me:
1. A lot of people take video games waaaaaay too seriously.
2. People spent money on silliest things when they think it can help.
3. Gaming Journalists cant handle criticism and turn into crybabies when pushed.
4. When the hell did Forbes turn into a reliable news outlet for video games?

Erik Kain is the guy writing for the Games department of Forbes.

I'm out of the loop on the whole Arendt/Kain thing, could you please clarify it? I'd much appreciate it.

Off-topic: Also, you wouldn't happen to be hungarian, would you?

As far as I know, this is the only exchange they had. Erik Kain has been extremely critical of Bioware and EA, and of gaming journalism as a whole ever since the Retake movement started getting big. The tweet that Arendt did may be in regards to this article, which points out some shady business in regards to "gaming journalism". It's a very interesting read.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/03/23/do-positive-mass-effect-3-reviews-reveal-a-conflict-of-interest-in-gaming-journalism/

Also, I'm not Hungerian, but Dutch. :P

Edit: Just gonna reply to this here as well:

Fappy:

Archer666:
Well, gaming journalism is really corrupt and has a horrible relationship to the games industry which causes them to lose objectivity. Compare "gaming journalism" coverage of this entire mess with the coverage that Forbes did. Forbes actually called EA and Bioware out on the shit they were/are pulling while the "gaming journalism" just ate up whatever press release they were given.

This entire mess taught me:
1. A lot of people take video games waaaaaay too seriously.
2. People spent money on silliest things when they think it can help.
3. Gaming Journalists cant handle criticism and turn into crybabies when pushed.
4. When the hell did Forbes turn into a reliable news outlet for video games?

Erik Kain is the guy writing for the Games department of Forbes.
image

To be fair I think Susan may have been reacting to an overwhelming implication that was being magnified by the Retake movement. I have read a lot of the Forbes articles and agree with most of what they have covered but its no secret that they have been getting FAR too much attention simply because they are outside the realm of video game journalism and people are agreeing with them. Yeah, its easy to point out the fact that they don't rely on game ad revenue but that doesn't automatically invalidate those who do. I think Susan may have been confusing Forbe's intentions with how readers/the Retake movement have been interpreting their stories.

The reason that Forbes stands out is because they're an outsider and a respectable publication, I think. The fact that people agree with them is something that gaming journalism should take note of, instead of attacking them like she did. Whether it was because of misinterpretation or implications, firing off a tweet like that is hardly professional. It gives a bad impression of the outfit she's affiliated with and, since gaming journalism is superbad, serves as an example of the state of the industry.

It may not invalidate them, but it lessens them. Game journalism has a horrible, parasitic relationship with the games industry and that causes everyone in it to be seen as untrustworthy. That's pretty much a fact. Therefore, its kind of hard for people to take what they say seriously without thinking "I wonder how much money it took for x to say y?". The only way to change it is to change gaming journalism somehow.

I have learned that Bioware are dicks for not changing the ending only trying to explain plot holes that could be fixed by putting in a better ending, FUCK YOU CASEY HUDSON.

Adam Jensen:
I leaned to never trust EA and Bioware and to never under any circumstances buy any of their games ever again.

A bit harsh don't you think?

I learned that even things that can seem unfuckupable can be fucked up at the last minute.
Oh, and never underestimate how much damage you can do in 10 minutes to a 100 plus hour saga.

Archer666:

MC1980:

Archer666:
Well, gaming journalism is really corrupt and has a horrible relationship to the games industry which causes them to lose objectivity. Compare "gaming journalism" coverage of this entire mess with the coverage that Forbes did. Forbes actually called EA and Bioware out on the shit they were/are pulling while the "gaming journalism" just ate up whatever press release they were given.

This entire mess taught me:
1. A lot of people take video games waaaaaay too seriously.
2. People spent money on silliest things when they think it can help.
3. Gaming Journalists cant handle criticism and turn into crybabies when pushed.
4. When the hell did Forbes turn into a reliable news outlet for video games?

Erik Kain is the guy writing for the Games department of Forbes.

I'm out of the loop on the whole Arendt/Kain thing, could you please clarify it? I'd much appreciate it.

Off-topic: Also, you wouldn't happen to be hungarian, would you?

As far as I know, this is the only exchange they had. Erik Kain has been extremely critical of Bioware and EA, and of gaming journalism as a whole ever since the Retake movement started getting big. The tweet that Arendt did may be in regards to this article, which points out some shady business in regards to "gaming journalism". It's a very interesting read.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/03/23/do-positive-mass-effect-3-reviews-reveal-a-conflict-of-interest-in-gaming-journalism/

Also, I'm not Hungerian, but Dutch. :P

Thanks for info, it was very interesting to read an unbiased opinion on gaming journalism.

Also, I assumed you were hungarian because that twitter picture had hungarian text on it, seems I was mistaken.

Here's what I learned:

People will look for any reason to be a condescending bully towards others. I've seen so many god damn strawmans over the retake Mass Effect movement. Implying that people who support it:

-Are spoiled children
-Dislike the ending specifically because it wasn't what they imagined.
-Want complete control over art.
-Are pulling their hair out over video games.

I have seen very few people who actually took the time to try and understand what the retake Mass Effect movement was all about. And it is discouraging to say the least.

The reason why people are mad is NOT because they want a fairy tale ending. It's NOT because they want complete control over the series.

It's because the ending was clearly rushed (One of the clearest signs of a rushed ending is when plotpoints are introduced out of nowhere at the last second.) , it betrayed a lot of series themes, deus ex machina, killing any potential future for the Mass Effect series after the Reaper Invasion, ignoring all the choices you made up to this point and the endings were all the same.

And despite it only being like 10 minutes long, there are so many plotholes.

It's a shit ending to an otherwise fantastic series.

AnythingOutstanding:
Here's what I learned:

People will look for any reason to be a condescending bully towards others. I've seen so many god damn strawmans over the retake Mass Effect movement. Implying that people who support it:

-Are spoiled children
-Dislike the ending specifically because it wasn't what they imagined.
-Want complete control over art.
-Are pulling their hair out over video games.

I have seen very few people who actually took the time to try and understand what the retake Mass Effect movement was all about. And it is discouraging to say the least.

The reason why people are mad is NOT because they want a fairy tale ending. It's NOT because they want complete control over the series.

It's because the ending was clearly rushed (One of the clearest signs of a rushed ending is when plotpoints are introduced out of nowhere at the last second.) , it betrayed a lot of series themes, deus ex machina, killing any potential future for the Mass Effect series after the Reaper Invasion, ignoring all the choices you made up to this point and the endings were all the same.

And despite it only being like 10 minutes long, there are so many plotholes.

It's a shit ending to an otherwise fantastic series.

Very true.

And also that some folks will always think "The complainer is always wrong"

What I mean is this.
How many times have we heard "Why don't you take that energy and do something positive?"
Which, ironically, is what the Retake thing TRIED to do. "You're upset? Instead of just complaining online, let's give money to a charity."

So what's the response from many "How dare you sully a charity's name. You're just trying to make yourself look good."

So in other words.
Be upset and complain online without doing any good for mankind? You should try to do good for mankind.
Be upset AND try to do good for mankind. Well you're doing good for mankind for the wrong reasons so you still suck.

*facepalm*

The debate of "rights of the creator vs rights of the consumer/fan" will never reach consensus unless very specific conditions are met.

AnythingOutstanding:

I have seen very few people who actually took the time to try and understand what the retake Mass Effect movement was all about. And it is discouraging to say the least.

The reason why people are mad is NOT because they want a fairy tale ending. It's NOT because they want complete control over the series.

It's because the ending was clearly rushed (One of the clearest signs of a rushed ending is when plotpoints are introduced out of nowhere at the last second.) , it betrayed a lot of series themes, deus ex machina, killing any potential future for the Mass Effect series after the Reaper Invasion, ignoring all the choices you made up to this point and the endings were all the same.

This. I've seen too many straw-man tactics used against either side.

myself:

You didn't like the ending? This means you must be a ignorant plebeian cry baby who can't understand art and is demanding changes to a finished product so you can have a sparkly marriage space waifu ending.

You liked the ending? This means you're a Biodrone sheeple that will buy anything as long as it has Mass Effect written on it and you are EVERYTHING wrong with videogaming.

And if you've taken part in any of this argument you are a child who can't get over the fact that "it's just a game."

imahobbit4062:

canadamus_prime:
I learned that there are a great many gamers that need to go die in a fire.

EDIT: Or at the very least get a 2X4 (as in a plank of wood) to the upside of the head.

This. So much this.
This entire ME3 ending outrage was beyond pathetic.

Indeed. I still haven't even played ME3 and TBH I don't care how bad ME3 ending is, the general response to the endings made me ashamed to call myself a gamer!

canadamus_prime:

imahobbit4062:

canadamus_prime:
I learned that there are a great many gamers that need to go die in a fire.

EDIT: Or at the very least get a 2X4 (as in a plank of wood) to the upside of the head.

This. So much this.
This entire ME3 ending outrage was beyond pathetic.

Indeed. I still haven't even played ME3 and TBH I don't care how bad ME3 ending is, the general response to the endings made me ashamed to call myself a gamer!

Let's see of you still feel that way when you get there.

Archer666:

MC1980:

Archer666:
Well, gaming journalism is really corrupt and has a horrible relationship to the games industry which causes them to lose objectivity. Compare "gaming journalism" coverage of this entire mess with the coverage that Forbes did. Forbes actually called EA and Bioware out on the shit they were/are pulling while the "gaming journalism" just ate up whatever press release they were given.

This entire mess taught me:
1. A lot of people take video games waaaaaay too seriously.
2. People spent money on silliest things when they think it can help.
3. Gaming Journalists cant handle criticism and turn into crybabies when pushed.
4. When the hell did Forbes turn into a reliable news outlet for video games?

Erik Kain is the guy writing for the Games department of Forbes.

I'm out of the loop on the whole Arendt/Kain thing, could you please clarify it? I'd much appreciate it.

Off-topic: Also, you wouldn't happen to be hungarian, would you?

As far as I know, this is the only exchange they had. Erik Kain has been extremely critical of Bioware and EA, and of gaming journalism as a whole ever since the Retake movement started getting big. The tweet that Arendt did may be in regards to this article, which points out some shady business in regards to "gaming journalism". It's a very interesting read.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/03/23/do-positive-mass-effect-3-reviews-reveal-a-conflict-of-interest-in-gaming-journalism/

Also, I'm not Hungerian, but Dutch. :P

Edit: Just gonna reply to this here as well:

Fappy:

Archer666:
Well, gaming journalism is really corrupt and has a horrible relationship to the games industry which causes them to lose objectivity. Compare "gaming journalism" coverage of this entire mess with the coverage that Forbes did. Forbes actually called EA and Bioware out on the shit they were/are pulling while the "gaming journalism" just ate up whatever press release they were given.

This entire mess taught me:
1. A lot of people take video games waaaaaay too seriously.
2. People spent money on silliest things when they think it can help.
3. Gaming Journalists cant handle criticism and turn into crybabies when pushed.
4. When the hell did Forbes turn into a reliable news outlet for video games?

Erik Kain is the guy writing for the Games department of Forbes.
image

To be fair I think Susan may have been reacting to an overwhelming implication that was being magnified by the Retake movement. I have read a lot of the Forbes articles and agree with most of what they have covered but its no secret that they have been getting FAR too much attention simply because they are outside the realm of video game journalism and people are agreeing with them. Yeah, its easy to point out the fact that they don't rely on game ad revenue but that doesn't automatically invalidate those who do. I think Susan may have been confusing Forbe's intentions with how readers/the Retake movement have been interpreting their stories.

The reason that Forbes stands out is because they're an outsider and a respectable publication, I think. The fact that people agree with them is something that gaming journalism should take note of, instead of attacking them like she did. Whether it was because of misinterpretation or implications, firing off a tweet like that is hardly professional. It gives a bad impression of the outfit she's affiliated with and, since gaming journalism is superbad, serves as an example of the state of the industry.

It may not invalidate them, but it lessens them. Game journalism has a horrible, parasitic relationship with the games industry and that causes everyone in it to be seen as untrustworthy. That's pretty much a fact. Therefore, its kind of hard for people to take what they say seriously without thinking "I wonder how much money it took for x to say y?". The only way to change it is to change gaming journalism somehow.

It certainly doesn't help when some of the larger game-journalism outfits do something ridiculously transparent. The whole IGN Chobot in ME3 thing is a disgrace to journalism... even if she barely qualifies as one, she represents IGN with her presence.

Kahunaburger:
Ah, but throwing hissy fits does get results. See also: politics.

No arguing with that. I might just pout and stomp my feet until you change your mind though. :P

Abedeus:

tensorproduct:
I've learned that I share a hobby with a surprisingly large number of people who will throw a temper tantrum to satisfy their entitlement complexes. The best thing that Bioware could have done would be to ignore everyone. Not because of "artistic integrity", but because the world would be a marginally better place if a few thousand people learned that throwing a hissy fit won't get results.

Frankly, I'm embarrassed to even know about this controversy.

The world is where it is thanks to people like you.

Don't complain, don't say anything, just be quiet and enjoy the shit they throw at you. At least they're not Hitler, right?! Whoops, Godwin'd myself.

Wish I were such a model customer. Always content with whatever crap I get and never demand better. Unless you never actually bought anything you wanted and were disappointed with.

Jumping right to comparisons with appeasement, huh? Classy. In fairness, I started off with a pretty insulting post, I was prepared for a lot more but I can't see the benefit in it. So, my apologies.

My point is, just because you want something, or just because you feel you deserve it, or even if you've been promised it doesn't mean you get it. It's perfectly reasonable to feel hurt, or betrayed or to want more than you got. That's a natural response to things not going your way. Letting people know that you're unhappy is totally okay. Never wanting to associate with whoever hurt you is fine. Raising money for charity is awesome (and the thing with the cupcakes was fucking hilarious).

However, demanding that things go your way is childish. We're not talking about human rights abuses, or the Nazis, or rape. This is the ending to a story. If you didn't like it, go find more stories, there are plenty out there. Pretend that this one didn't happen (personally, I believe that there were only three Indiana Jones movies and nothing can convince me otherwise) and write your own fanfic ending. Hell, make up your own tale from scratch. Tell the story that you think Bioware couldn't.

I don't want this to sound like "it's just a video game" (I love video games and I think they're a great medium for story-telling) and I certainly don't want to jump on the "you're killing art!!!" argument (that's just silly). I just can't see that anybody's time was best spent in petitioning Bioware to change their story, when all of that time and energy could have been spent elsewhere.

Adam Jensen:
I leaned to never trust EA and Bioware and to never under any circumstances buy any of their games ever again.

Don't Hate Bioware!!! Ea, yeah, sure, I genuinelly think there is a club, if not I'm starting one, but Bioware have ALWAYS done right by the fans before the SPECTACULAR FAILIURE of ME3s ending. I work on the principle of Giving devs two chances before I totally disregard them. So, If Bioware cocks up again THEN I'm with ya, but don't hate them just because of this.

BreakfastMan:
9. I agree that devs should be able to take risks, but they honestly cannot at this point. See your example of the backlash against DA2, the backlash against Windwaker when it first came out, etc.

As bad as the backlash against Windwaker was, it stood the test of time and is now looked back on fairly well by many people. Taking risks is fine, so long as the end result is good, and history is what decides that. I don't think history has had a long enough time to judge the Mass Effect series' ending, but I also don't think that the ending was a "risk" per-se. It was an overly cerebral look at only a single characteristic of the game's major plot points, and was intended to give people room to interpret. I choose to interpret it via the Indoctrination Theory. Others refuse to interpret it at all. Either way, a lot of people are very unhappy with the ending, mostly due to the major plot holes that it opened up. (Why is the Normandy going through the Mass Relay? What the heck is with the color changing space magic? How is the Star Child the "catalyst" if no one knew about him before? Ect.)

tensorproduct:

Abedeus:

tensorproduct:
I've learned that I share a hobby with a surprisingly large number of people who will throw a temper tantrum to satisfy their entitlement complexes. The best thing that Bioware could have done would be to ignore everyone. Not because of "artistic integrity", but because the world would be a marginally better place if a few thousand people learned that throwing a hissy fit won't get results.

Frankly, I'm embarrassed to even know about this controversy.

The world is where it is thanks to people like you.

Don't complain, don't say anything, just be quiet and enjoy the shit they throw at you. At least they're not Hitler, right?! Whoops, Godwin'd myself.

Wish I were such a model customer. Always content with whatever crap I get and never demand better. Unless you never actually bought anything you wanted and were disappointed with.

Jumping right to comparisons with appeasement, huh? Classy. In fairness, I started off with a pretty insulting post, I was prepared for a lot more but I can't see the benefit in it. So, my apologies.

My point is, just because you want something, or just because you feel you deserve it, or even if you've been promised it doesn't mean you get it. It's perfectly reasonable to feel hurt, or betrayed or to want more than you got. That's a natural response to things not going your way. Letting people know that you're unhappy is totally okay. Never wanting to associate with whoever hurt you is fine. Raising money for charity is awesome (and the thing with the cupcakes was fucking hilarious).

However, demanding that things go your way is childish. We're not talking about human rights abuses, or the Nazis, or rape. This is the ending to a story. If you didn't like it, go find more stories, there are plenty out there. Pretend that this one didn't happen (personally, I believe that there were only three Indiana Jones movies and nothing can convince me otherwise) and write your own fanfic ending. Hell, make up your own tale from scratch. Tell the story that you think Bioware couldn't.

I don't want this to sound like "it's just a video game" (I love video games and I think they're a great medium for story-telling) and I certainly don't want to jump on the "you're killing art!!!" argument (that's just silly). I just can't see that anybody's time was best spent in petitioning Bioware to change their story, when all of that time and energy could have been spent elsewhere.

We are consumers.

If you lie to a consumer, you have to be prepared for a backlash.

If you are told that the car you're buying is in perfect condition and upon purchase you find out its fuel consumption is 50% higher than what was promised and there's a corpse in the trunk, you would be pretty damn angry. Pissed off.

Except in this case we are talking about an end to a 90 hour video games series that for millions of players was the modern Star Wars/Star Trek of science fiction. We can't just "find another game", that's not dealing with the issue, it's avoiding the issue.

It's about the fact that they brutally punched the ending to the ground and left it bleeding with plotholes, inconsistencies, loyal friends (Joker and the crew) betraying you for no reason and of course, you save the galaxy while dooming the galactic civilization.

All colonies that aren't fully self-reliant die, and everyone who happened to be near a Mass Relay when they exploded was probably very, very dead.

The ending is terrible as a whole. The premise is terrible, the execution is terrible and follow-up is terrible.

ChrisRedfield92:

canadamus_prime:

imahobbit4062:
This. So much this.
This entire ME3 ending outrage was beyond pathetic.

Indeed. I still haven't even played ME3 and TBH I don't care how bad ME3 ending is, the general response to the endings made me ashamed to call myself a gamer!

Let's see of you still feel that way when you get there.

Yeah, I love this.

"I DIDN'T PLAY IT BUT IT CAN'T BE THAT BAD, I MEAN COME ON!"

And then people finish it.

I secretly think anyone who isn't against the ending either never played all of the ME games, or didn't care about the plot.

I learned that overall, gamers are the most entitled little children on the planet.

ChrisRedfield92:

canadamus_prime:

imahobbit4062:
This. So much this.
This entire ME3 ending outrage was beyond pathetic.

Indeed. I still haven't even played ME3 and TBH I don't care how bad ME3 ending is, the general response to the endings made me ashamed to call myself a gamer!

Let's see of you still feel that way when you get there.

Well I guess we'll never know 'cause I have no intention of playing that game. Also I couldn't afford it right now even if I wanted to. Also didn't I say I don't care how bad the ending(s) are? There is nothing that justifies throwing a temper tantrum like a bunch of 3 year olds and organizing a revolution over a FICTIONAL PROPERTY!! That is beyond pathetic, that has to be worth it's own private circle of hell.

canadamus_prime:

ChrisRedfield92:

canadamus_prime:

Indeed. I still haven't even played ME3 and TBH I don't care how bad ME3 ending is, the general response to the endings made me ashamed to call myself a gamer!

Let's see of you still feel that way when you get there.

Well I guess we'll never know 'cause I have no intention of playing that game. Also I couldn't afford it right now even if I wanted to. Also didn't I say I don't care how bad the ending(s) are? There is nothing that justifies throwing a temper tantrum like a bunch of 3 year olds and organizing a revolution over a FICTIONAL PROPERTY!! That is beyond pathetic, that has to be worth it's own private circle of hell.

Can't agree enough dude. I'm a fan of the games and I don't think that the ending is any good. I'm also a fucking grown up.

tensorproduct:

canadamus_prime:

ChrisRedfield92:

Let's see of you still feel that way when you get there.

Well I guess we'll never know 'cause I have no intention of playing that game. Also I couldn't afford it right now even if I wanted to. Also didn't I say I don't care how bad the ending(s) are? There is nothing that justifies throwing a temper tantrum like a bunch of 3 year olds and organizing a revolution over a FICTIONAL PROPERTY!! That is beyond pathetic, that has to be worth it's own private circle of hell.

Can't agree enough dude. I'm a fan of the games and I don't think that the ending is any good. I'm also a fucking grown up.

"Welcome to the newly instituted 37th Circle of Hell for the unreleasable dipshit fanboy. For the rest of eternity you will be forced to play ET: The Extra Terrestrial on the Atari 2600."

EDIT "...while being forced to listen to nothing but Justin Beiber and the Jonas Brothers."

Abedeus:
We are consumers.

If you lie to a consumer, you have to be prepared for a backlash.

If you are told that the car you're buying is in perfect condition and upon purchase you find out its fuel consumption is 50% higher than what was promised and there's a corpse in the trunk, you would be pretty damn angry. Pissed off.

...snip...

The ending is terrible as a whole. The premise is terrible, the execution is terrible and follow-up is terrible.

This is an important issue: do you think that the ending should be changed because it didn't keep to the promises that Bioware made, or because you think that it's terrible? These are related, but distinct, points.

I've seen a lot of people on this forum and over at social.bioware throw around the word "objectively" followed by words like terrible, bad and carcinogenic; apparently in complete ignorance of the meaning of the word objective. The quality of any story is inherently subjective, otherwise you fall to telling people that they are wrong for liking (or disliking) the things they like.

If your complaint is just that you thought the ending is bad, I don't disagree, but I also think you're shit out of luck in this argument. Want to get a refund, good luck (honestly, you'll need a crowbar and TNT to get that back off EA). Want to boycott Bioware, good for you, there are plenty of great devs out there deserving of your gaming cash. Anything else... why is your opinion more important than somebody who liked the ending, or disliked it for different reasons than you did, or wrote the ending in the first place?

As for promises that Bioware made (excepting the usual disclaimers like "huh, you believed marketing hype ya n00b", and I really wanted to avoid discussing specifics), but what promises did they not follow through on?

There will be a wide variety of endings. Sure, every ending is just a different coloured magical space laser. Except that's not true, cheap as it is, depending on on your WA the magical space laser might be red and destroy the earth and literally everything else in the galaxy or it might be green and do something completely unexplained or it might be blue and the reapers just up and bloody leave without killing anybody else. These are wildly different outcomes. That these are only distinguished by a fairly crappy cinematic is kind of shitty on Bioware's part, no doubt.

Your choices in previous games will have an impact on the game's outcome. Well, the differently coloured ending cinematics are the same regardless of what choices you made, right? Right. Except that the galaxy as a whole is completely different depending on what you did. With one Shepard the Krogan were on the verge of a new dawn under Eve's leadership with the genophage cured, but with another I had to shoot Mordin in the back because Wreav couldn't be trusted. Once, she brokered a near miraculous peace between the Quarians and the Geth, but he sacrificed the entire migrant fleet because they were the ones that started the war. Even with the relays destroyed, these are hugely different results for the galaxy.

The ending will be completely free of plotholes and wrap up every storyline of the last three games. Well, yeah, they completely failed to bring one hundred hours of story and game together perfectly at the end. Can't disagree with you there.
Honestly, the only plot hole at the end that I had a problem with was the Normandy taking a mass relay jump with the whole squad aboard... that shit made no fucking sense whatsoever.

Abedeus:

ChrisRedfield92:

Let's see of you still feel that way when you get there.

Yeah, I love this.

"I DIDN'T PLAY IT BUT IT CAN'T BE THAT BAD, I MEAN COME ON!"

And then people finish it.

I secretly think anyone who isn't against the ending either never played all of the ME games, or didn't care about the plot.

I like to think that I have disproved this assertion with my little nerd-out above. For the record, I think that the end (Starchild, Deus Ex choices) was a good idea with awful execution.

Bitch more.

EA won (lost I guess) that Golden Poo award, got loads of hate mail and the internet bitching about ME3 ending, now they announced that the new multiplayer DLC for ME3 will be free, in no fucking way they were planning in releasing it for free before the shit hit the fan (get it? Shit hitting fans... , I'l try harder next time)

Another thing that I learned... some people can't see the obvious name when it's staring them in the face.

Retake Mass Effect
like Take Mass Effect Back
like Take Back Mass Effect
like Take Back Earth
like the game in question's tagline.

Honestly, the RTM people missed an open goal here.

I learned that the forums can act as a sort of culture. Posting on only one forums can lead to situations where you essentially are preaching to the choir.

This leads to one assuming everyone thinks the way they do. The lack of questions at pax focused on the star child and shepards last breath among other inconsistencies lead me to believe that most people dont care about such issues.

It has less to do with distrust, ending a trilogy, giving an ending that gamers want to see, etc. It has to do with a space opera adventure game involving RPG elements. With that, the C&Cs made throughout the game has to significantly affect the ending besides other aspects of the game (such as the difficulty of accomplishing certain missions, etc.).

At least this is what I think adventure-RPG gamers were looking for in ME3. Those looking for examples can look at the endings of ME1 and 2.

Dendio:
I learned that the forums can act as a sort of culture. Posting on only one forums can lead to situations where you essentially are preaching to the choir.

This leads to one assuming everyone thinks the way they do. The lack of questions at pax focused on the star child and shepards last breath among other inconsistencies lead me to believe that most people dont care about such issues.

Oh no, because all the questions were OBVIOUSLY pre-screened, and that it was done with malicious intent to prevent all of the Retakers from making their anger clear for the world to see!

Seriously, that was a post I saw on the Bioware Social Network to explain why no one raised a stink at PAX. I wasn't aware that you needed to be called upon to raise a stink if you wanted to. Either the people of the Retake moment don't know how to protest... or the ending really doesn't bother anyone enough.

Abedeus:

posted in another thread

About your RTM questions, I apologize as I must've missed it for some reason.

They promised 16 different endings, your choices being shown in the ending and coherent ending.

We have 9 that are basically 3 colors with variations, your choices don't matter (only your war asset number changes the "destroy or preserve" outcome) and there are many, many problems with the ending that other people already explained better than I did.

Did you see the thread where someone found out that they had voices for the Geth armies, Zaeed, Jacob, Grunt and I think one more person in-game, but abandoned them for some reason? We were supposed to have something like the suicide mission from ME2, where we would command armies to strike enemies in key locations, fight with the allies we gathered over the course of the trilogy and have an actual battle for Earth. Not that "kill 5 banshees to get to the illogical cutscene" crap.

Thanks for coming back to me on this.

As I said above, the ending of the series does vary wildly depending on your choices throughout the game. The cutscene at the end doesn't, but the state of the galaxy does. It does quite a lot actually. If you care about the characters and the universe (and I assume you do) then I don't see how you can disregard such differences.
I gave examples above, but here's another: if you keep the Quarians alive (either by betraying Legion or brokering peace) then you get the migrant fleet to help with the final assault on earth. So, when the relays are destroyed and all of the fleets are stranded in Sol, now the Quarian live ships can provide food for the Turians and any other dextro-amino acid based DNA species that there. This is a huge difference for the ending.

Of course, the cutscene at the end doesn't go into more detail on this or a million other things which I would very much like to see. On the other hand, I think that part of the fun of this sort of story is imagining how things might play out, once the main plot has been completed.

The issue of some voices not making it into the game strikes me as completely irrelevant. Dialog is always cut from games. Unless you honestly think that every single line written and recorded must be included then... I just don't know why you would bring it up.

My main problem with the Retake Mass Effect movement is that it attempts to elevate the opinion of a portion of the fanbase (and there is nothing at all to indicate that this is anything but a vocal minority) above all others. My question for you is: why should your opinion of the ending count more than that of people who genuinely liked it, or people who disliked it but for different reasons or even than the people who wrote this story in the first place?

The gaming media is to be ignored. Seriously, that was my lesson of the day. It's now painfully obvious they do not serve my interests nor do they care what I think. So, I'm done listening to what they have to say.

Besides, social media and word of mouth in the information age basically invalidates conventional news coverage anyways.

Between the sliding scale of Bioware/EA being complete pricks and screwing the customer and the customer being the whiny child...

The latter was more accurate.

Bioware made a subpar ending for a great game and great series. And people freaked the fuck out.

The "entitled" label was well earned by the movement because of the attitude it took. People will say it was only a minority that was the ones metabombing, sending death threats and declaring it the worst game ever and demanding nothing less than a complete overhaul of the ending else it would still be the worst game ever, but it won't make it true. The majority of that movement are the type of fans that give gaming a bad name.

Awexsome:
Between the sliding scale of Bioware/EA being complete pricks and screwing the customer and the customer being the whiny child...

The latter was more accurate.

Bioware made a subpar ending for a great game and great series. And people freaked the fuck out.

The "entitled" label was well earned by the movement because of the attitude it took. People will say it was only a minority that was the ones metabombing, sending death threats and declaring it the worst game ever and demanding nothing less than a complete overhaul of the ending else it would still be the worst game ever, but it won't make it true. The majority of that movement are the type of fans that give gaming a bad name.

This post is a bit too severe. Death threats or some of the other hyperbole you throw out there was by far the work of one or two crazies. Any organized movement has the 1 or 2 crazies. The bottom line is that people love Mass effect. The ending to a beloved series was subpar. People got together and found peaceful ways to protest.

The majority of the movement shared theories, celebrated all they loved with the series and gave cupcakes/ toys for kids. Mass effect is beloved, and it was a good thing to see gamers display reasonable influence on the media through peaceful protest.

Im actually proud of the retake movement. Mass effect fans showed that they will fight for what they believe in and were able to gain a free extended cut out of the ordeal.

tensorproduct:

Abedeus:

posted in another thread

About your RTM questions, I apologize as I must've missed it for some reason.

They promised 16 different endings, your choices being shown in the ending and coherent ending.

We have 9 that are basically 3 colors with variations, your choices don't matter (only your war asset number changes the "destroy or preserve" outcome) and there are many, many problems with the ending that other people already explained better than I did.

Did you see the thread where someone found out that they had voices for the Geth armies, Zaeed, Jacob, Grunt and I think one more person in-game, but abandoned them for some reason? We were supposed to have something like the suicide mission from ME2, where we would command armies to strike enemies in key locations, fight with the allies we gathered over the course of the trilogy and have an actual battle for Earth. Not that "kill 5 banshees to get to the illogical cutscene" crap.

Thanks for coming back to me on this.

As I said above, the ending of the series does vary wildly depending on your choices throughout the game. The cutscene at the end doesn't, but the state of the galaxy does. It does quite a lot actually. If you care about the characters and the universe (and I assume you do) then I don't see how you can disregard such differences.
I gave examples above, but here's another: if you keep the Quarians alive (either by betraying Legion or brokering peace) then you get the migrant fleet to help with the final assault on earth. So, when the relays are destroyed and all of the fleets are stranded in Sol, now the Quarian live ships can provide food for the Turians and any other dextro-amino acid based DNA species that there. This is a huge difference for the ending.

Of course, the cutscene at the end doesn't go into more detail on this or a million other things which I would very much like to see. On the other hand, I think that part of the fun of this sort of story is imagining how things might play out, once the main plot has been completed.

The issue of some voices not making it into the game strikes me as completely irrelevant. Dialog is always cut from games. Unless you honestly think that every single line written and recorded must be included then... I just don't know why you would bring it up.

My main problem with the Retake Mass Effect movement is that it attempts to elevate the opinion of a portion of the fanbase (and there is nothing at all to indicate that this is anything but a vocal minority) above all others. My question for you is: why should your opinion of the ending count more than that of people who genuinely liked it, or people who disliked it but for different reasons or even than the people who wrote this story in the first place?

See the problem here is that endings AREN'T wildly different. You ASSUME that Quarians have all the food they need, but also food to spare to another race. ALL ASSUMPTIONS. We have nothing to base that on.

And that dialog cut out is VERY IMPORTANT. It suggests that at least an hour or two of story/gameplay was cut out due to deadlines. It's not something like a random quest cut out - it's just another proof that they were very, very late with game and EA doesn't like to postpone games to get quality, they want fast money.

If your argument is that "we can imagine the rest", then we should have very little reasons to actually play games - read the back of the box and imagine the rest...

Abedeus:

tensorproduct:

My main problem with the Retake Mass Effect movement is that it attempts to elevate the opinion of a portion of the fanbase (and there is nothing at all to indicate that this is anything but a vocal minority) above all others. My question for you is: why should your opinion of the ending count more than that of people who genuinely liked it, or people who disliked it but for different reasons or even than the people who wrote this story in the first place?

See the problem here is that endings AREN'T wildly different. You ASSUME that Quarians have all the food they need, but also food to spare to another race. ALL ASSUMPTIONS. We have nothing to base that on.

And that dialog cut out is VERY IMPORTANT. It suggests that at least an hour or two of story/gameplay was cut out due to deadlines. It's not something like a random quest cut out - it's just another proof that they were very, very late with game and EA doesn't like to postpone games to get quality, they want fast money.

If your argument is that "we can imagine the rest", then we should have very little reasons to actually play games - read the back of the box and imagine the rest...

Well, you're right, I am assuming that difference. Though I think it's a perfectly reasonable assumption.
There are a tonne of differences that I'm not assuming though. The genophage being cured or not; the result of the Quarian/Geth war; and ultimately the survival of Earth itself (in at least one of the endings the world is destroyed by space magic). Whether or not the Rachni survive might not make a difference to the final battle (which was disappointing) but it sure as hell makes a difference to the Rachni.

I'll need to look into it further, and I'm not in a position to do so right now, but based on the characters you quoted I wouldn't expect that it was all that vital to the story. Zaeed, Jacob and Grunt were never central to the plot. More Geth speech could be very interesting in light of the choice of cupcake colour...

Imagination is part of enjoying any story.

Still, the important question is why the opinion of those who want the ending changed should outweigh those who enjoyed the ending, or those who didn't like it but don't think it should be changed, or those who wrote it?

Another question is just what ought to be changed? The Retake Mass Effect movement does not represent a united front of complaints. From what I've read, the complaints seem to fall into four broad (not mutually exclusive) categories:

1) Not enough closure. The game just kind of ends, without any sort of farewell tour of the characters and cultures, New Vegas style. This is the complaint that it looks like Bioware have chosen to deal with in the forthcoming DLC.
2) Plot holes and inconsistencies. These range from big to small, like why exploding mass relays didn't annihilate the surrounding star systems, or how did Andersen get so far ahead of Shepard on the Citadel.
3) Not enough variety in the endings. Three different colours of space magic and then credits roll is very disappointing. It's possible that the DLC will address this as well.
4) Disappointment in the revelation of what the Reapers are and why they do what they do, and how the Crucible is to deal with them.

Not everyone who played the game was annoyed by all (or even any) of these. So, which ought to be changed (assuming that the minority who want it changed have more rights to it than everybody else)?

tensorproduct:

Abedeus:

tensorproduct:

My main problem with the Retake Mass Effect movement is that it attempts to elevate the opinion of a portion of the fanbase (and there is nothing at all to indicate that this is anything but a vocal minority) above all others. My question for you is: why should your opinion of the ending count more than that of people who genuinely liked it, or people who disliked it but for different reasons or even than the people who wrote this story in the first place?

See the problem here is that endings AREN'T wildly different. You ASSUME that Quarians have all the food they need, but also food to spare to another race. ALL ASSUMPTIONS. We have nothing to base that on.

And that dialog cut out is VERY IMPORTANT. It suggests that at least an hour or two of story/gameplay was cut out due to deadlines. It's not something like a random quest cut out - it's just another proof that they were very, very late with game and EA doesn't like to postpone games to get quality, they want fast money.

If your argument is that "we can imagine the rest", then we should have very little reasons to actually play games - read the back of the box and imagine the rest...

Well, you're right, I am assuming that difference. Though I think it's a perfectly reasonable assumption.
There are a tonne of differences that I'm not assuming though. The genophage being cured or not; the result of the Quarian/Geth war; and ultimately the survival of Earth itself (in at least one of the endings the world is destroyed by space magic). Whether or not the Rachni survive might not make a difference to the final battle (which was disappointing) but it sure as hell makes a difference to the Rachni.

I'll need to look into it further, and I'm not in a position to do so right now, but based on the characters you quoted I wouldn't expect that it was all that vital to the story. Zaeed, Jacob and Grunt were never central to the plot. More Geth speech could be very interesting in light of the choice of cupcake colour...

Imagination is part of enjoying any story.

Still, the important question is why the opinion of those who want the ending changed should outweigh those who enjoyed the ending, or those who didn't like it but don't think it should be changed, or those who wrote it?

Another question is just what ought to be changed? The Retake Mass Effect movement does not represent a united front of complaints. From what I've read, the complaints seem to fall into four broad (not mutually exclusive) categories:

1) Not enough closure. The game just kind of ends, without any sort of farewell tour of the characters and cultures, New Vegas style. This is the complaint that it looks like Bioware have chosen to deal with in the forthcoming DLC.
2) Plot holes and inconsistencies. These range from big to small, like why exploding mass relays didn't annihilate the surrounding star systems, or how did Andersen get so far ahead of Shepard on the Citadel.
3) Not enough variety in the endings. Three different colours of space magic and then credits roll is very disappointing. It's possible that the DLC will address this as well.
4) Disappointment in the revelation of what the Reapers are and why they do what they do, and how the Crucible is to deal with them.

Not everyone who played the game was annoyed by all (or even any) of these. So, which ought to be changed (assuming that the minority who want it changed have more rights to it than everybody else)?

I am not sure it's that much of a minority. Did you see EA stocks? They keep getting lower and lower. They went from 19.57 in February to hit 14.76 three days ago. There was a spike after ME3's release, when it went to 17,46, but it hasn't seen that number ever since.

http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/charts?symbol=US:EA#all=on&period=3m&interactive=on&symbol=US:EA

If it was that minor of a case, those numbers would go... up? After so many successful reviews and sales, if only a minority of playerbase was angry and got refunds, then this wouldn't be a problem. And EA's stock is dropping lower and lower.

About your arguments - who cares if Krogan are cured? Those that came to Earth will either starve or eat other races, and those left on Tuchanka have a big rocky planet to die on with supplies, scientists, and if they somehow survive they will eventually repopulate the planet just so it gets overcrowded again. Which will bring another nuclear war...

Earth is in ruin and forced to maintain several alien races and their armies for unknown amount of time and any colony of any race that isn't self-reliant is fucked in the butt. They'll all die once a major epidemic breaks out or they run out of food or supplies.

I don't really see the point in this discussion. It's more tiring than pointing out contradictions in the Bible to a fundamentalist, who claims half the stories are metaphors and the other half is outdated.

Abedeus:

I am not sure it's that much of a minority. Did you see EA stocks? They keep getting lower and lower. They went from 19.57 in February to hit 14.76 three days ago. There was a spike after ME3's release, when it went to 17,46, but it hasn't seen that number ever since.

http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/charts?symbol=US:EA#all=on&period=3m&interactive=on&symbol=US:EA

If it was that minor of a case, those numbers would go... up? After so many successful reviews and sales, if only a minority of playerbase was angry and got refunds, then this wouldn't be a problem. And EA's stock is dropping lower and lower.

I'm trying to think of a way to establish what proportion of players are on board with RTM. Given that the game sold in the millions (3.5m according to Wikipedia), I very much doubt that there were millions of people actively complaining about it. Of course, there will be many who would like it changed but kept quiet...

As for the stock price. I'm pretty sure that that would be more accurately explained by the colossal amount of negative press for EA over the last two months, as well the fact that their release schedule doesn't look so healthy right now. A lot of that bad press was around ME3, but that only supports that the complaints were loud, bot that they were coming from a majority.

About your arguments - who cares if Krogan are cured? Those that came to Earth will either starve or eat other races, and those left on Tuchanka have a big rocky planet to die on with supplies, scientists, and if they somehow survive they will eventually repopulate the planet just so it gets overcrowded again. Which will bring another nuclear war...

Earth is in ruin and forced to maintain several alien races and their armies for unknown amount of time and any colony of any race that isn't self-reliant is fucked in the butt. They'll all die once a major epidemic breaks out or they run out of food or supplies.

So, is that your problem with the ending, that it's too much of a downer?

I don't really see the point in this discussion. It's more tiring than pointing out contradictions in the Bible to a fundamentalist, who claims half the stories are metaphors and the other half is outdated.

I'm inclined to agree. I really am interested in understanding why the ending resulted in so much wailing and gnashing of teeth, because while it is easy (and fun) to just dismiss the RTM people as whiny, crybabies it's not particularly productive.

That's why I asked you to continue the discussion, but I'm really no closer to understanding why you think that it needs to be changed beyond the fact that you didn't like it.

Feel free not to reply if you think that this isn't going anywhere. I would start a new thread if I didn't think that it would just result in an epic flamewar.

tensorproduct:
As I said above, the ending of the series does vary wildly depending on your choices throughout the game. The cutscene at the end doesn't, but the state of the galaxy does. It does quite a lot actually. If you care about the characters and the universe (and I assume you do) then I don't see how you can disregard such differences.
I gave examples above, but here's another: if you keep the Quarians alive (either by betraying Legion or brokering peace) then you get the migrant fleet to help with the final assault on earth. So, when the relays are destroyed and all of the fleets are stranded in Sol, now the Quarian live ships can provide food for the Turians and any other dextro-amino acid based DNA species that there. This is a huge difference for the ending.

Of course, the cutscene at the end doesn't go into more detail on this or a million other things which I would very much like to see.

Ding ding ding. Emphasis mine.

I think I know what Casey Hudson meant when he said that the endings would vary wildly. It's close to what you're talking about now. "Maybe you killed the Quarians, or you didn't." "Maybe you killed the Geth, or you didn't."

But that's wrong. Those aren't the ending. You do those throughout the game, and ME3 the game is not the ending. The ending of ME3 is the ending.

The last 5, 10, 15 minutes, hour, two hours - however long - are the ones that had to combine everything, accout for everything. Because that's the ending. Not the stuff leading up to it, not the stuff I have to imagine, but what the game is showing me on my screen. This needs to be the series' finest hour, where every single choice you made comes together to give you the most different experience possible, because there's no need to worry about the consequences varying so wildly that they'll make further development impossible. There's no need for further development. And after all that, the game doesn't just try and fail, it doesn't TRY. It sits back on its laurels for the entirety of the 2 hour final mission, apparently happy with what it's already done before this, and literally the only difference at this point will be whether you can have a single brief conversation with every surviving character, and a couple of random shots of Quarian or Geth troops. That's it.

Going into this I was expecting the ME2 ending on crack. If they could pay off so many different choices in the MIDDLE game, there is no reason they couldn't have in a game that requires no sequels. That's the ending ME3 deserved - and they, I imagine, unintentionally promised to deliver. A brief relevant cutscene and an epilogue would function. But what we actually got?...

I can't think of a single reason this didn't happen, except for deadlines.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked