Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Random Sentience]

To be perfectly fair, "more exposition" actually kinda does constitute a rewrite given there's absolutely none at all in the current ending...

Actually, they're just putting back in what Casey Hudson mandated they take out.

If I were a cynical man, I would say this seems like the plan all along, considering the company lines of, "we'll see what the players ask for in terms of closure," and, "any DLC after the ending would be in a wasteland," in the launch day interviews I've seen. Can't find a link right now to one, but they're up on youtube somewhere.

What easier way to release DLC than to add in what would have been there in the first place?

I, of course, am not a cynical man. 

[BloodBird]

So I'm guessing this is still a relevant theory, then; They planned it from the beginning!

...no, I don't think they did. But deliberately fucking up everything about the end they could fuck up, then getting you a payable DLC to fix it?

That would be a very bad plan. I still want to hear the official excuse for exactly why the game was brilliant but the ending flopped about as badly as it possibly could flop. Was it EA's decision? Was it a Bioware manager/programmer/employee/asshole who decided? Did they run out of time? Did they plan this face-slap from ME1, or what? I'd like to not have several ideas and several indicators for all those ideas to possibly be valid. I'd like the straight answer and a single location to place the blame and the request that they kindly take responsibility and fix what they broke.

Namely, customer trust in their brand-name and the idea you actually get what you pay for. ME3 player's didn't.

[Random Sentience]

So I'm guessing this is still a relevant theory, then; They planned it from the beginning!

From what I've seen, this is the truth. From a certain point of view. 

...no, I don't think they did. But deliberately fucking up everything about the end they could fuck up, then getting you a payable DLC to fix it?

I don't think it was deliberately fucking up from their point of view. With a little bit more exposition, the endings could be bloody magnificent. The scene with Anderson and Shepard, absolutely awesome. I actually wish they'd ended things there instead of extending it out with "Starchild". They could have even left it with a cliffhanger, and I'd be more satisfied. "Shepard... Shepard are you there? Nothing's happening, something went wrong with the Crucible..." /fadetoblack

That would be a very bad plan. I still want to hear the official excuse for exactly why the game was brilliant but the ending flopped about as badly as it possibly could flop. Was it EA's decision? Was it a Bioware manager/programmer/employee/asshole who decided? Did they run out of time? Did they plan this face-slap from ME1, or what? I'd like to not have several ideas and several indicators for all those ideas to possibly be valid. I'd like the straight answer and a single location to place the blame and the request that they kindly take responsibility and fix what they broke.

As they say, "no publicity is bad publicity".

They hyped the heck out of ME3, and it's still being "hyped". They got their launch numbers, their preorder numbers, and they're probably getting a lot of positive feedback from multiplayer (on PC requiring Origin no less, so EA is probably VERY happy).

The assumption here is that a loud, unhappy player base is a bad thing. If the money is still coming in somehow (Multiplayer requisition packs, for instance...), and there's people buying the game "just to see the bad ending", then the fact that this is the last game in the trilogy pretty much guarantees that they won't have to worry about bad blood hurting their next successful franchise.

I could go into the whole marketing/demographics reasoning behind this, but I think I'll end here. Point being, this isn't a niche game like EVE where alienating the core audience is going to sink the company. Bioware is diversified enough, and EA is giving them enough backing, that they will probably survive this PR hiccup.

Namely, customer trust in their brand-name and the idea you actually get what you pay for. ME3 player's didn't.

That... is the only potential problem. If this idea is the one that survives all this, then yeah... ME3 could be an end to trust in future products from Bioware. But it's just a "potential" problem. As it stands, they have SWTOR still going strong (presumably), VERY successful ME3 multiplayer (probably making them a bit of cash from "whales" maxing out their arsenal and character selection), and the experience to move beyond RPG games into more mainstream shooter/pvp/f2p MMO territory. They even have some experience now with social games (Dragon Age Legends, and ME Datapad/Infiltrator apps).

And about the multiplayer side of ME3... unlike one-time DLC, multiplayer DLC "Lottery Packs" can be purchased multiple times by the same customer. So, yeah. More cost effective to make a multiplayer expansion (with new races and weapons, unlockable by either grinding away at the multiplayer or paying money to get a chance of unlocking what you want) than resource-intensive and one-time-purchase DLC storyline content for the single player game.

So... would it be "stupid" to make a bad ending for a game, and then later "enhance" that ending? NO, not if the expanded content was already written/voices already recorded. "Cut" content is more cost effective than "new" content. If they already thought the ending was "brilliant and artistic", why would they worry about customer response? If they didn't know it was bad, and had blinders on in regards to fan interest because "the die-hard fans aren't the ones we're marketing this to" (see the Battlefield 3 early access promotion), then it makes much more sense.

It may not be 100% "ethical", but it's 100% in line with making money and ensuring that you can get the most bang for your development resource buck.

 

[Caellach Marellus]

So I'm finding myself playing more and more MP recently. I've managed to find the one thing more fun to play (and more annoying to your teammates) than a Krogan or Vanguard (or even a Krogan Vanguard)


Melee Geth Infiltrator. Dear god this build is just 

[Seriphyn]

Every ME1, ME2, ME3 video has a "OMG BIOWARE ENDING SUX" as top comment.

Pleeeeeease just shut up now. We get it.

[Caellach Marellus]

[BloodBird]

And that picture and joke is even more disgusting than Seri's new avatar. I'm impressed with the things some people bother to waste their time on.

There isn't even a good connection to be found here. 

[Mizhara]

Seriphyn being a Dolan fan doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

[Silas Vitalia]

Let's not forget that the story/writing/fiction people at Bioware are quite separated from the money/corporate/monetizing people in charge at EA, and are subordinate to them.

EA's interest is turning a lucrative franchise into a revenue stream via DLC, exclusive pre-order vanity items, and recurring dlc-to-play multiplayer. Your $60 game is now really a $90 game, multiplied by a few hundred thousand copies.  DLC and pay-multiplayer is serious money for EA's bottom line.

Bioware's interest is (was) about producing good stories and a great experience.

EA owns bioware, and does not give two shits about the ending, or the story.  If some fiction/writer peon tries to complain they need more time for x ending scenes or whatever, do we honestly think any EA corporate types are going to alter scheduling, etc to satisfy? They've got deadlines and profit projections, etc. 

This isn't bioware from 10 years ago

[Seriphyn]

Seriphyn being a Dolan fan doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

It is genuinely awful. Absolutely abysmal. The fact that something so poor can get proliferated regardless of its quality. Which is what makes it hilarious, especially people's reactions to it.

[Jev North]

So we'll be seeing you in Goonswarm then?

[Seriphyn]

jev pls

[Lyn Farel]

This isn't bioware from 10 years ago

This isnt any serious game company. Milestones are to be respected or projects are going to the trashbin for being too expensive. Exceptions are rare. Even a game that has started for long and is on its way to get released and that does not respect the milestones is probably going to be dumped, just because it costs less to stop the development than continue paying for its release. Thats damage control.

Except in the underground and indy milieu, ofc.

[Random Sentience]

So I'm finding myself playing more and more MP recently. I've managed to find the one thing more fun to play (and more annoying to your teammates) than a Krogan or Vanguard (or even a Krogan Vanguard)


Melee Geth Infiltrator. Dear god this build is just 

Heh, Biotics were my thing up until Resurgence launched. Nothing funner than taking 2/3rds of a Banshee's HP in two hits (biotic explosions are insane, and warp/throw combos are just sick if properly spec'd). Heck, even a Quarian engineer and Incinerate/Cold Blast combos are devastating.

However, my new favorite is the Batarian Soldier. Oh my God... that blade gauntlet attack... High initial damage, and then an explosion 3 seconds later, with increased fire cone and damage. Throw in a Disciple shotgun for some stagger goodness, and I can hold pretty much any position indefinitely against anything but a Banshee or Brute.

[Kybernetes Moros]

I never quite got how to not be shit at Batarian soldier, honestly. Turian, I'm fine with; perhaps the Striker is just an awkward weapon to use. (Although I have the same issue of not quite getting it with Krogans and various shotguns, too.)

Asari adepts (vanilla) and Turian soldiers are probably my favourite classes, though; stasis with a scoped Carnifex wreaks havoc on enemies that can be frozen, whereas warp chased with a throw will play merry hell with the rest. Turian soldier's a lot more straightforward: hit 1 to activate marksman and vomit bullets from the Phaeston into enemies' faces. \o/