BioShock Creator "Sad" Over ME3's Ending Scandal

[LadyTL]

A Little text and dialogue doesn't make them different either. The endings after the choice are almost exactly the same. Shepard dies the same way, the Normandy ends up in the same cutscene the same way, the battle on earth is shown the same way, the crucible explodes the same way, the mass relays end up the same way. How does adding a different color give you a different ending?

/twitch

Did you not stop to think about the ramifications of the different endings, or did you just buy into the whole self-righteous ragefest surrounding the BLARHGHLEL RED BLUE GREEN nonsense?

Seriously, if you can't figure out why a.) destroying all synthetic life forms, thus clearing the current slate while leaving the table open for the sort of synthetic revolt that would destroy all organic life (and the fear of which led to the creation of the Reapers in the first place), b.) Shepard becoming the new god-king of the Reapers apparently, which seems all peachy-keen except that one doubts it's as simple as the Reapers just doing whatever Shep wants without protest, and what happens if Shep gets tired, or dies, or w/e, and c.) combining all forms of life into a new hybrid technorganic paradigm, whether they like it or not, are different endings, then maybe you should stop playing video games and focus on material more at your level.

Like "See Spot Run".

Wow so if an ending is bad I'm just supposed to imagine the rest to make it better. Gee and I thought that's what I paid for, a complete game not a incomplete game that I imagine the ending for. I wonder why Bioware didn't put at the end "now imagine what happened"? Although they did put a prompt in saying there would be DLC coming.

Your interpretations are fine for your character playthrough of Shepard. Mine however would have said F off to the whole thing and let the armies fight it out. That however was not an option so none of the endings made sense to how my character was played.

Oh by the way, nice ad hominem attack, really helps your point. /s I did move on though to material more at my level since Mass Effect 3 proved to be too poorly written for me to consider playing it again. I've got a nice stack of books from the library I'm working on. Real writers after all know how to finish a story. Bioware has shown they do not.

 

[Kyle Crewdson]

Players were promised an ending, they were promised closure, promised variation, promised that what they did over three games would matter. But any set of wildly different choices along the entire trilogy will result in the same ending - an ending spoon-fed to players by a character that is introduced, never questioned, never challenged, never explained, and completely non-interactive. In whole the biggest failure in quality control - enough so to actually garner this level of response.

And it's not just "players". We are "customers". The "art" excuse is just that, an excuse, but I'm paying for it. And we, the customers, were specifically promised something better, we were SPECIFICALLY PROMISED closure, variation, validation of our countless choices.

I don't care if you say it's art. If I pay for a painting of a tree and you give me a painting of a duck, saying "it's art" is not a valid response. It's a stupid excuse to divert attention away from your misrepresentation and shoddy work.

And all the talk I hear about DLC makes me think that people will PAY for this. I already PAID for an ending to Mass Effect. I was promised an ending, I paid for an ending, and what I got was the sloppy ending that completely ignores the rest of the series, with more plot holes than Terminator: Salvation. I already paid for a finished product, I paid for what I was promised, repeatedly, by developers. What I got was a game series punctuated by a squeaking fart.

 

[Strazdas]

Hes right you know. does not matter how much you cry and whine, it was THEIR game and THEIR choice about the ending. dont like it? dont play the game. you have a choice.

 

[PingoBlack]

Lemme just put this out there:

Kubrick end for Odyssey 2001 ... Artsy, even though it was really difficult on the audiences after the book ended much more coherently. But it was not out of place, just a way to imagine hyperspacetime (disclaimer: this word was made up by me on the spot).

Ending-o-Tron machine with buttons labeled A, B and C ... If you intend to call this art you really don't know what the word implies. Besides, in that case, you just copied it from other games that did it before. Copy of Mona Lisa you did looks fine, sure, but won't make you Leo. It will still make "the dude that copied Leo".

 

[Subject7]

 

[Raesvelg]

Wow so if an ending is bad I'm just supposed to imagine the rest to make it better. Gee and I thought that's what I paid for, a complete game not a incomplete game that I imagine the ending for. I wonder why Bioware didn't put at the end "now imagine what happened"? Although they did put a prompt in saying there would be DLC coming.

There's no imagination involved in any of what I said. That is literally what the game tells you, nothing more. What happens after, sure, that's left to your imagination. But that in no way makes the endings all the same except for color variation, and to claim otherwise is infantile.

Your interpretations are fine for your character playthrough of Shepard. Mine however would have said F off to the whole thing and let the armies fight it out. That however was not an option so none of the endings made sense to how my character was played.

So your Shepard would have let the galaxy die.

Interesting.

 

[Therumancer]

but with both examples you have provided both endings are theoretically available... If I were watching a film (let's take Terry Gilliam's Brazil as an example) and I had the hack fanservice version or the true artistic version chances are quite good I would at least start with the true version of the production and look at the producer's/fan's cut as what it is. Bonus material.

It only really matters when you sever the thread of the original intent with no way of accessing it (within the material itself I don't want to have to pay extra to get the originally intended version of a product/work of art)

Unfortunately, the original version did not provide both endings. Only the hackneyed ending went out, and even in modern copies that ending is in the book while the original is tacked onto the end. Though I'm not sure many people (including Dickens) were worried about the artistic vision of Dickens works.

What you suggest is likely what we will see happen. You want to see a different ending, buy the DLC. I would very much like to know if the devs and writers truly feel that the ending that exists is what they wanted it to be.

The differance here of course being that Dicken's ending fit the story he was telling even if it was a downer. The problem with the ending of ME3 is it does not fit with the rest of the game, and the spirit in which it was created.

People tend to overlook the simple fact that Bioware annouced that they planned to turn the trilogy into a franchise, and then we get this "do nothing" ending. There isn't really any artistic integrity involved here, if anything the ending is a result of that integrity being thrown out for the pursuit of money as it's contrary to everything the game stood for up until this point.

I'll also say that every time I read this thread I can't help but snicker given that the creator of "Bioshock" certainly got his share of criticism for "Bioshock 2" a lot of which was negative. I certainly don't seem to be alone in the suspician that he decided to move away from "Rapture" into "Bioshock: Infinite" and it's sky enviroment in part for that reason. To be honest he's sort of flying off the reception from the first game, if his writing is like the second game as opposed to the first and doesn't have an ending that satisfies people (please not that doesn't need to be a high fantasy ending, just one that the majority of people feel fits the game and are satisfied with) he's probably going to be in a similar position to Bioware. Granted he didn't drop the ball to the extent of "Dragon Age 2" and pull the attitude Bioware has been, so it won't be as bad, but the results will be similar. I kind of wonder if he's sort of reacting to being put "on notice" so to speak, with the realization that a few other missteps and this could have been him.

 

[LadyTL]

Wow so if an ending is bad I'm just supposed to imagine the rest to make it better. Gee and I thought that's what I paid for, a complete game not a incomplete game that I imagine the ending for. I wonder why Bioware didn't put at the end "now imagine what happened"? Although they did put a prompt in saying there would be DLC coming.

There's no imagination involved in any of what I said. That is literally what the game tells you, nothing more. What happens after, sure, that's left to your imagination. But that in no way makes the endings all the same except for color variation, and to claim otherwise is infantile.

Your interpretations are fine for your character playthrough of Shepard. Mine however would have said F off to the whole thing and let the armies fight it out. That however was not an option so none of the endings made sense to how my character was played.

So your Shepard would have let the galaxy die.

Interesting.

So pointing out that with the exception of some dialog and colors the ending cutscenes are the same is infantile? Who I didn't know that was part of noticing the obvious.

The dialog is the same regardless of choice, the explosions are the same regardless of choice, joker and the Normandy is in the relay regardless of choice, the Normandy getting hit and landing on the planet happens regardless of choice, the mass relays blowing up happens regardless of choice, the same fight scene happens on earth regardless of choice, the same cheap image of the two people on a snowy planet happens regardless of choice, the same flashback of people you cared about happened regardless of choice.

How is that not the same ending and please don't bring up the results of your choice again because that is never shown in the ending and thus is not a part of the ending of the game. I am talking about the ending that is in the game and how they are different from each other besides color and a few 2 second clips which do not make up the majority of the ending.

 

[Raesvelg]

How is that not the same ending and please don't bring up the results of your choice again because that is never shown in the ending and thus is not a part of the ending of the game. I am talking about the ending that is in the game and how they are different from each other besides color and a few 2 second clips which do not make up the majority of the ending.

lol, seriously?

"Show me how the endings are different, so long as you don't actually use any of the information given that shows how the endings are different!"

And you wonder why I call it infantile.

The choices are described to you. You choose one of them. The choices are fundamentally different, regardless of Bioware using most of the same cutscene material for the ending.

Again, we're back to saying that War & Peace and Twilight have the same endings, because "BLACK LETTERS ON WHITE PAPER BLARHRHGLEL!!!!"

Lack of resolution? Sure, that's a problem. But the "RED BLUE GREEN BLARGHHL!" nonsense is just childish.

 

[klaynexas3]

shouldn't art be up for criticism if it wasn't done well? do we not criticize bad movies and books and music which happen to be art forms? if so, why shouldn't we be entitled to the opinion that the game was lazily ended? they shouldn't change it, because it won't feel right, but that doesn't mean we should be perfectly fine with the ending either. for those that want bioware to change the ending, stop. the game is done. they made the ending. even if they change it, in the back of your mind, you know, this wasn't what the ending was. i haven't played mass effect, so i wasn't apart of this rage, but i understand it. they should be allowed to voice their opinions of them not liking the game. but bioware, stand your ground, and say this is how it happened. you can use it as notes for how to not end a series later, but don't go back and say what this is never happened. if you were to make it though, at least try to have your respect, and make it like an alternate ending, and call it as such, not a replacement. movies have that sometimes with different endings, so should a video game, but don't act like this ending isn't real. it's there. deal with it.

 

[bimon_1234567]

How is that not the same ending and please don't bring up the results of your choice again because that is never shown in the ending and thus is not a part of the ending of the game. I am talking about the ending that is in the game and how they are different from each other besides color and a few 2 second clips which do not make up the majority of the ending.

lol, seriously?

"Show me how the endings are different, so long as you don't actually use any of the information given that shows how the endings are different!"

And you wonder why I call it infantile.

The choices are described to you. You choose one of them. The choices are fundamentally different, regardless of Bioware using most of the same cutscene material for the ending.

Again, we're back to saying that War & Peace and Twilight have the same endings, because "BLACK LETTERS ON WHITE PAPER BLARHRHGLEL!!!!"

Lack of resolution? Sure, that's a problem. But the "RED BLUE GREEN BLARGHHL!" nonsense is just childish.

IMO We are indeed presented with three different choices at the end. What then actually results from these choices within the game is virtually the same for all three. To actually have different endings would require some kind of epilogue that explains what happened afterwards in order to establish distinct variation.

I don't think your "War & Peace and Twilight" comparison holds water in that regard.

 

[Sigma Castell]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZOyeFvnhiI&list=FL8jfh8z8ocTJPafn5pDNeww&feature=mh_lolz
just watch it. it makes sense.

 

[Therumancer]

shouldn't art be up for criticism if it wasn't done well? do we not criticize bad movies and books and music which happen to be art forms? if so, why shouldn't we be entitled to the opinion that the game was lazily ended? they shouldn't change it, because it won't feel right, but that doesn't mean we should be perfectly fine with the ending either. for those that want bioware to change the ending, stop. the game is done. they made the ending. even if they change it, in the back of your mind, you know, this wasn't what the ending was. i haven't played mass effect, so i wasn't apart of this rage, but i understand it. they should be allowed to voice their opinions of them not liking the game. but bioware, stand your ground, and say this is how it happened. you can use it as notes for how to not end a series later, but don't go back and say what this is never happened. if you were to make it though, at least try to have your respect, and make it like an alternate ending, and call it as such, not a replacement. movies have that sometimes with different endings, so should a video game, but don't act like this ending isn't real. it's there. deal with it.

I disagree because the ending was done for fiancial reasons and further franchise potential, and what's more was not what was promised by the company when the game was being made. A lot of comments from Bioware showing what they promised have been dug up and posted (including in their forums) and compared to what they delivered. Interviews from that $3 app they wanted to release also show they had no real intention of ever fulfilling those promises and actually chose not to rather deliberatly.

In the final equsion while the ending isn't as bad as some people say, it does not fit with the rest of the series. Demanding a proper ending, of the sort intended before they wanted to turn this into an uber-franchise and maximize the potential for that (since they can always still find ways to continue it) is not unreasonable.

I'll also go so far as to say that if they don't produce the new ending they should offer to refund everyone the full retail value of their Mass Effect games as if they were new, much like a theater getting mobbed by people demanding their money back in a similar situation.

What's more I'll say I'm kind of angry over their promises and how they didn't keep them, or have any intention to keep them. I think they very much deserve to be sued, and I'm not entirely sure if them refunding the money or giving a proper ending should change that. The bottom line is they did attempt to defraud gsmers with false advertising, there is no doubts about that right now. It's like a thief returning stolen good after breaking into your house, simply getting the stuff back doesn't change the fact that the guy stole from you.

I also think people overlook the effect Bioware's own attitude, and the whole fiasco over "Dragon Age 2" played on this. It's really, really hard to feel sorry for them.

All of that aside, some people seem to think a demanded ending could never really count or hold much weight because the surrealistic ABC garbage we were handed was the intended ending. I do not agree with that, because I do not think that was the intended ending, but a business move. Indeed I'm pretty sure when we heard from the beginning this was going to be a trilogy they said they had the entire thing planned out storywise, as opposed just winging it with each chapter. The very fact that the writing team was apparently sitting down brainstorming seems to show that they were ordered to change the ending, especially seeing as it wss now going to be more than one trilogy. This probably has a lot to do with why the ending doesn't match the rest of the game and it's atmosphere. I think there is an intended ending out there that can be used.

 

[insanity00]

The differance here of course being that Dicken's ending fit the story he was telling even if it was a downer. The problem with the ending of ME3 is it does not fit with the rest of the game, and the spirit in which it was created.

People tend to overlook the simple fact that Bioware annouced that they planned to turn the trilogy into a franchise, and then we get this "do nothing" ending. There isn't really any artistic integrity involved here, if anything the ending is a result of that integrity being thrown out for the pursuit of money as it's contrary to everything the game stood for up until this point.

I'll also say that every time I read this thread I can't help but snicker given that the creator of "Bioshock" certainly got his share of criticism for "Bioshock 2" a lot of which was negative. I certainly don't seem to be alone in the suspician that he decided to move away from "Rapture" into "Bioshock: Infinite" and it's sky enviroment in part for that reason. To be honest he's sort of flying off the reception from the first game, if his writing is like the second game as opposed to the first and doesn't have an ending that satisfies people (please not that doesn't need to be a high fantasy ending, just one that the majority of people feel fits the game and are satisfied with) he's probably going to be in a similar position to Bioware. Granted he didn't drop the ball to the extent of "Dragon Age 2" and pull the attitude Bioware has been, so it won't be as bad, but the results will be similar. I kind of wonder if he's sort of reacting to being put "on notice" so to speak, with the realization that a few other missteps and this could have been him.

Of course that is a matter of opinion. Clearly the advice Dickens got was in the spirit of a happier ending that would fit with the story. The fans must have liked it, he wasn't ostracized. However I think it is a sell-out moment in Dickens writing career.

Overall though, the argument against Bioware doesn't hold water and is complete hearsay. That doesn't necessarily make the suggestion false. Your conjecture could be true, but since there is no direct evidence, it remains invalid. The desire to make Mass Effect a franchise does not necessitate a poor or tacked on ending. They are fully capable of ending Shepard's story and yet continue to make games in the Mass Effect universe. Players' responses have already shown that there is plenty of love for other characters and that Bioware is capable of developing multiple engaging characters.

Also, Bioware's initial response to the desire for a new ending contradicts the commonly used argument that the ending is influenced by a desire to make more money by selling DLC and future games. The company has repeated stated that this would be the end of Shepard's story, and they initially said that they would stick with the ending as is. Their stance on the ending was only changed AFTER the push by the fan base for a new ending. Perhaps this is just a really complex plot to get us to buy new ending DLC, but personally I will refrain from wearing that tin foil hat. And unless we find out a new Shepard ME is in the works I won't presume they are changing their initial intentions.

I will not comment on DA2 because I still don't really get people's beef with the game. However I will point out that your comments about Ken Levine and Bioshock 2 are unfounded as he was not involved with the project (http://www.joystiq.com/2010/08/12/ken-levine-why-irrational-didnt-do-bioshock-2-what-he-thought/). So suggesting that he is trying to cover his own less than adequate games by changing settings and forgetting about it are wrong, there is no cause to "put him on notice", and his comments about ME3 have no reason to be tied to any of his projects.

Edit: I would like to add that I have no problem with criticism against Bioware, their ending, or how it did or did not fit the story/game/vision. Go for it! I am merely trying to point out that unless we talk to the writers and the devs we can't know if they cut/changed/or limited their ending for financial reasons. As hard as it may be to admit the ending we got could easily be the ending intended...

 

[Therumancer]

The differance here of course being that Dicken's ending fit the story he was telling even if it was a downer. The problem with the ending of ME3 is it does not fit with the rest of the game, and the spirit in which it was created.

People tend to overlook the simple fact that Bioware annouced that they planned to turn the trilogy into a franchise, and then we get this "do nothing" ending. There isn't really any artistic integrity involved here, if anything the ending is a result of that integrity being thrown out for the pursuit of money as it's contrary to everything the game stood for up until this point.

I'll also say that every time I read this thread I can't help but snicker given that the creator of "Bioshock" certainly got his share of criticism for "Bioshock 2" a lot of which was negative. I certainly don't seem to be alone in the suspician that he decided to move away from "Rapture" into "Bioshock: Infinite" and it's sky enviroment in part for that reason. To be honest he's sort of flying off the reception from the first game, if his writing is like the second game as opposed to the first and doesn't have an ending that satisfies people (please not that doesn't need to be a high fantasy ending, just one that the majority of people feel fits the game and are satisfied with) he's probably going to be in a similar position to Bioware. Granted he didn't drop the ball to the extent of "Dragon Age 2" and pull the attitude Bioware has been, so it won't be as bad, but the results will be similar. I kind of wonder if he's sort of reacting to being put "on notice" so to speak, with the realization that a few other missteps and this could have been him.

Of course that is a matter of opinion. Clearly the advice Dickens got was in the spirit of a happier ending that would fit with the story. The fans must have liked it, he wasn't ostracized. However I think it is a sell-out moment in Dickens writing career.

Overall though, the argument against Bioware doesn't hold water and is complete hearsay. That doesn't necessarily make the suggestion false. Your conjecture could be true, but since there is no direct evidence, it remains invalid. The desire to make Mass Effect a franchise does not necessitate a poor or tacked on ending. They are fully capable of ending Shepard's story and yet continue to make games in the Mass Effect universe. Players' responses have already shown that there is plenty of love for other characters and that Bioware is capable of developing multiple engaging characters.

Also, Bioware's initial response to the desire for a new ending contradicts the commonly used argument that the ending is influenced by a desire to make more money by selling DLC and future games. The company has repeated stated that this would be the end of Shepard's story, and they initially said that they would stick with the ending as is. Their stance on the ending was only changed AFTER the push by the fan base for a new ending. Perhaps this is just a really complex plot to get us to buy new ending DLC, but personally I will refrain from wearing that tin foil hat. And unless we find out a new Shepard ME is in the works I won't presume they are changing their initial intentions.

I will not comment on DA2 because I still don't really get people's beef with the game. However I will point out that your comments about Ken Levine and Bioshock 2 are unfounded as he was not involved with the project (http://www.joystiq.com/2010/08/12/ken-levine-why-irrational-didnt-do-bioshock-2-what-he-thought/). So suggesting that he is trying to cover his own less than adequate games by changing settings and forgetting about it are wrong, there is no cause to "put him on notice", and his comments about ME3 have no reason to be tied to any of his projects.

Edit: I would like to add that I have no problem with criticism against Bioware, their ending, or how it did or did not fit the story/game/vision. Go for it! I am merely trying to point out that unless we talk to the writers and the devs we can't know if they cut/changed/or limited their ending for financial reasons. As hard as it may be to admit the ending we got could easily be the ending intended...

As far as Mass Effect 3 goes, it comes directly from what Bioware has itself said. They have been clear recently about not wanting to end the series after "3" now and turn it into a franchise. They were also clear about having plotted it out from the very beginning. Information coming from that $3 app people have been talking about has the writers cooking up the ending as they were finishing the project. Not only is that damning evidence in their own words of deceit given that the people claiming that the ending was going to answer everything and not be an "A B or C" choice and so on were not being truthful. It also shows that as they were developing an ending they were diverging from the original plans since the storyline had already been planned out as far back as ME1 as opposed to them making it up chapter by chapter. It's not hearsay, but circumstantial evidence, while this case wouldn't hold in a criminal trial, it would be a big deal in a civil one where the standards of proof are differant, and that's probably why gamers have been able to find lawyers willing to take the case for fraud and false advertising to court. As much as some Bioware defenders might like the point, it's pretty damning overall, I didn't just assume the stance I'm taking for the heck of it.

The most commonly used arguement about the ending is not that it will sell DLC, but that the ending, which the writers themselves admit was intended to answer very little and end in a cloud of speculation, was intended to leave the series as open as possible to a future sequel. The intentionally decided NOT to reveal the answers to various questions as originally planned, despite the promises to do so. If you do a search for the $2.99 app they wanted to sell and find the stuff on the interviews there is a lot of interesting stuff there that has been fueling a lot of this, especially when you compare it to other statements by Bioware.

-

The point about Dickens is that both endings fit the kind of romantic story he was telling even if the resolution differed. The issue with Mass Effect 3 is that the ending does not fit within the fairly upbeat, bigger than life, high fantasy space opera that the series is. The ending we got would have been fine in another type of science fantasy, but not in this story, as it goes against the entire tone of the series up until that point.

It would be like Dickens deciding to end "Great Expectations" with a sudden alien abduction, that might be a great finale to many stories, but doesn't fit with that kind of story.

-

As far as Levine goes, I'll concede your point there, though even without a personal stake I do think he tends to get kind of artsy with his stuff and he probably does have some concern over these turns of events.

-

With "Dragon Age 2" the big beef is a matter of Bioware asking people if it was okay to seriously reduce the character generation options in the game, they were told "no" and then not only did it anyway but claimed there was massive fan support for it.

When the game was released it was a glorified brawler with horrible mechanics, monsters popping out of nowhere or dropping off rooftops, and spawning in waves. You couldn't block with warriors to keep things off your mages despite the intent declared in the loading screens for example, and you'd run into situations where you walk down a hallway and a spider the size of an elephant will just suddenly spawn on top of your squishier characters, no chance to prepare for the fight or anything. They continually recycled the same enviroments, ignored desicians made in the first game (despite sharing data), and oh yeah... had a crappy ending that resolves nothing. Your ending is your character disappears and you have no idea what happened to him or her!

This annoyed people greatly, and helped pave the way for this current situation. It's noteworthy because understand that this is the second game that has gotten massive fan backlash (as opposed to a tiny minority of people), it's just that this time is far worse, DA2 was given a pass of sorts as "anyone can drop the ball now and again" even if people were irritated, but now this is two in a row... and really Bioware's attitude towards it's fans has been pretty horrible overall which doesn't help matters. All of the gouging over DLC and things like that has also helped to build the rage and dislike. This explosion is over a lot of things, all of which contributed to it, with the focus being on the ending of ME3.

See, even if Bioware fixes the ending of ME3 and comes up with something acceptable to everyone, it's still going to have to do a lot to rebuild bridges with it's fan base, including becoming a bit less greedy with the DLC and such. Resolving the issue at the focus of this disaster will help in the short term, but if other things keep building they will lead to another explosion.

I think the industry watching this needs to understand that there is a limit to how far gamers can be pushed, and this explosion shows where the lines are being drawn.

-

I'm not sure where you got the conspiricy to sell us DLC thing from to be honest, mostly I tend to hear people saying that if they don't fix the ending they won't buy any DLC. In my case I felt DA2 was such a mess I refused to buy any of the DLC to support it, and the same is going to apply to ME3 unless they make good (in DA2 the problems went beyond just fixing the ending) It's very simple, and I think a lot of people feel the same way, I do notice the plans for DA2 DLC got quashed with the last bit being cancelled, so I'm guessing they weren't moving enough DLC to justify it.

In short I think the attitude is more "fix this, or you won't sell me any more DLC" rather than they did it to sell DLC.

 

[insanity00]

As far as Mass Effect 3 goes, it comes directly from what Bioware has itself said. They have been clear recently about not wanting to end the series after "3" now and turn it into a franchise. They were also clear about having plotted it out from the very beginning. Information coming from that $3 app people have been talking about has the writers cooking up the ending as they were finishing the project. Not only is that damning evidence in their own words of deceit given that the people claiming that the ending was going to answer everything and not be an "A B or C" choice and so on were not being truthful. It also shows that as they were developing an ending they were diverging from the original plans since the storyline had already been planned out as far back as ME1 as opposed to them making it up chapter by chapter. It's not hearsay, but circumstantial evidence, while this case wouldn't hold in a criminal trial, it would be a big deal in a civil one where the standards of proof are differant, and that's probably why gamers have been able to find lawyers willing to take the case for fraud and false advertising to court. As much as some Bioware defenders might like the point, it's pretty damning overall, I didn't just assume the stance I'm taking for the heck of it.

The most commonly used arguement about the ending is not that it will sell DLC, but that the ending, which the writers themselves admit was intended to answer very little and end in a cloud of speculation, was intended to leave the series as open as possible to a future sequel. The intentionally decided NOT to reveal the answers to various questions as originally planned, despite the promises to do so. If you do a search for the $2.99 app they wanted to sell and find the stuff on the interviews there is a lot of interesting stuff there that has been fueling a lot of this, especially when you compare it to other statements by Bioware.

-

The point about Dickens is that both endings fit the kind of romantic story he was telling even if the resolution differed. The issue with Mass Effect 3 is that the ending does not fit within the fairly upbeat, bigger than life, high fantasy space opera that the series is. The ending we got would have been fine in another type of science fantasy, but not in this story, as it goes against the entire tone of the series up until that point.

It would be like Dickens deciding to end "Great Expectations" with a sudden alien abduction, that might be a great finale to many stories, but doesn't fit with that kind of story.

-

As far as Levine goes, I'll concede your point there, though even without a personal stake I do think he tends to get kind of artsy with his stuff and he probably does have some concern over these turns of events.

-

With "Dragon Age 2" the big beef is a matter of Bioware asking people if it was okay to seriously reduce the character generation options in the game, they were told "no" and then not only did it anyway but claimed there was massive fan support for it.

When the game was released it was a glorified brawler with horrible mechanics, monsters popping out of nowhere or dropping off rooftops, and spawning in waves. You couldn't block with warriors to keep things off your mages despite the intent declared in the loading screens for example, and you'd run into situations where you walk down a hallway and a spider the size of an elephant will just suddenly spawn on top of your squishier characters, no chance to prepare for the fight or anything. They continually recycled the same enviroments, ignored desicians made in the first game (despite sharing data), and oh yeah... had a crappy ending that resolves nothing. Your ending is your character disappears and you have no idea what happened to him or her!

This annoyed people greatly, and helped pave the way for this current situation. It's noteworthy because understand that this is the second game that has gotten massive fan backlash (as opposed to a tiny minority of people), it's just that this time is far worse, DA2 was given a pass of sorts as "anyone can drop the ball now and again" even if people were irritated, but now this is two in a row... and really Bioware's attitude towards it's fans has been pretty horrible overall which doesn't help matters. All of the gouging over DLC and things like that has also helped to build the rage and dislike. This explosion is over a lot of things, all of which contributed to it, with the focus being on the ending of ME3.

See, even if Bioware fixes the ending of ME3 and comes up with something acceptable to everyone, it's still going to have to do a lot to rebuild bridges with it's fan base, including becoming a bit less greedy with the DLC and such. Resolving the issue at the focus of this disaster will help in the short term, but if other things keep building they will lead to another explosion.

I think the industry watching this needs to understand that there is a limit to how far gamers can be pushed, and this explosion shows where the lines are being drawn.

-

I'm not sure where you got the conspiricy to sell us DLC thing from to be honest, mostly I tend to hear people saying that if they don't fix the ending they won't buy any DLC. In my case I felt DA2 was such a mess I refused to buy any of the DLC to support it, and the same is going to apply to ME3 unless they make good (in DA2 the problems went beyond just fixing the ending) It's very simple, and I think a lot of people feel the same way, I do notice the plans for DA2 DLC got quashed with the last bit being cancelled, so I'm guessing they weren't moving enough DLC to justify it.

In short I think the attitude is more "fix this, or you won't sell me any more DLC" rather than they did it to sell DLC.

I appreciate the clear and cogent response. I would like to respond in kind.

I did not mean to suggest that you were taking your stance for the heck of it. I intend/ed to suggest that your stance may not be as certain as many have claimed it to be. It seems from what I could find about the 2.99 app that the end of the game was moderately well ironed out before August, they knew it would involve the illusive man, they knew the scene and the setting, they just wanted to hammer out the details and make it fit. I may be giving BW more credit than they deserve or misreading it, but that was what I got out of it. And again, I don't see how wanting to make more Mass Effect games necessitates the devs to take short cuts with the ending. They have shown a lot of skill in creating new universes and expanding on established ones without touching on existing cannon.

Nonetheless, I concede the possibility that they changed the story/ending with the goal of encouraging later installments. And there is definitely some circumstantial evidence suggesting that was so.

For DA2 I never heard about the character gen options, just complaints about the story, dungeon reuse, combat, and ending. I didn't mind the combat, but I can see how people may have been disillusioned after DA:O. The dungeon reuse was REALLY dumb and annoying. I wasn't surprised considering the quick sequel turn-around, but it didn't change the fact that the dungeons broke immersion and screamed "lazy shortcuts". I enjoyed the story, the concentration on characters, and didn't mind the abrupt disappearance. It seemed to fit with the theme (and I have read similar books). Lastly, I didn't have any of the game play problems you and others had, so that may have colored my experience. That all said, of any BW game I have played, nothing has said "cash in" like DA2. So I see your point.

I got the DLC conspiracy not from you, but from many other discussions around the web. This issue has been blended in with the day-one DLC such that the tin hat folks are scared Bioware is out to screw them anyway they can.

I wonder how big the fan backlash really is. I have heard numbers like 50,000 thrown around, and even presuming that is only 10% of the total, then less than 15% of initial adopters are unhappy with the ending. I'm sure BW has a better idea of the actual numbers, I am just speculating and curious.

Overall as a consumer of many types of media, and someone fully aware how few gamers actually "beat" most games, especially longer games like ME3, it is amazing, and kinda awesome that the ending has garnered such a strong response. It shows how important this story has been for people, an aspect not often celebrated in games. I also REALLY enjoy playing the game from story to game play I love it. And having gone back to play ME1 last summer, ME2 and 3 for my money, have far superior controls, engagement, and story than the first installment.

In my opinion, Bioware has to look at the reasons for their story and game development and move ahead based on those. If they can honestly say they this was their vision, this was what they wanted the game to be, more power to them. If however they changed development, planning, or story purely for economic or business reasons, they need to readdress their approach to game development. Either way, only they can know the answer, and only we can tell them if we approve...by voting with our dollars.

 

[deadish]

OMG this is still being debated?

Bioware dropped the ball and released a flawed product that you bought. Big deal. Shitty products get released all the time. Get over it. I watched "I am Legend" and I didn't like it but you don't see me filing a FTC compliant over it do you?

Jesus christ, talk about being an Otaku (obsessive fan).

 

[Therumancer]

OMG this is still being debated?

Bioware dropped the ball and released a flawed product that you bought. Big deal. Shitty products get released all the time. Get over it. I watched "I am Legend" and I didn't like it but you don't see me filing a FTC compliant over it do you?

Jesus christ, talk about being an Otaku (obsessive fan).

Well this is more than just a single flawed product at this point, going back to DA2. It's also the decimation of an entire trilogy which represents an investment of cash and time greater than a single movie ticket.

To be honest your also misunderstanding the sheer suck of this ending, see "didn't like it" is a fairly mild response. What's more your dealing with a movie a lot of people did apparently like, or at least didn't hate. Chances are if you made a big enough scene you would have gotten your ticket fee refunded, and that definatly would have happened if enough people hated th emovie that they all went looking for a refund.... which has happened on numerous occasions.

Being able to referance something like this might seem relevent, but it's really not, as you apparently have never been that pissed off, nor have you been involved in anything that has pissed people off to that extent. If things had been worse and the entire theater decided to go to the manager to demand their money back, you probably would have been right there with them, and that's basically what this is.

As I've said before, changing the ending is a valid solution given the exact problems, but so would refunding people their money and buying back the Mass Effect merchandise, even if just that one game $60 a pop times a million or so people would really hurt EA. Overall demanding a new ending is fairly reasonable as at most that's going to cost EA a few million, a lot less than the equivilent of a Hollywood refund at this point.

 

[Therumancer]

[

I got the DLC conspiracy not from you, but from many other discussions around the web. This issue has been blended in with the day-one DLC such that the tin hat folks are scared Bioware is out to screw them anyway they can.

I wonder how big the fan backlash really is. I have heard numbers like 50,000 thrown around, and even presuming that is only 10% of the total, then less than 15% of initial adopters are unhappy with the ending. I'm sure BW has a better idea of the actual numbers, I am just speculating and curious.

Overall as a consumer of many types of media, and someone fully aware how few gamers actually "beat" most games, especially longer games like ME3, it is amazing, and kinda awesome that the ending has garnered such a strong response. It shows how important this story has been for people, an aspect not often celebrated in games. I also REALLY enjoy playing the game from story to game play I love it. And having gone back to play ME1 last summer, ME2 and 3 for my money, have far superior controls, engagement, and story than the first installment.

In my opinion, Bioware has to look at the reasons for their story and game development and move ahead based on those. If they can honestly say they this was their vision, this was what they wanted the game to be, more power to them. If however they changed development, planning, or story purely for economic or business reasons, they need to readdress their approach to game development. Either way, only they can know the answer, and only we can tell them if we approve...by voting with our dollars.

Well, Bioware or more specifically their publisher EA is out to screw people any way it can. The Day 1 DLC inspired a lot of anger which contributed to this, but I don't think there is any direct connection. I tend to lump all that in by pointing out that this isn't just about the ending even if that's the rallying point, but about a lot of things that have all come to a head due to that. They have gotten ridiculously greedy, cut corners, released shoddy products like DA2, and then there was this ending which didn't match the spirit of a series people were heavily invested in.... There is no direct connection with the DLC, but it did contribute to the anger as did many things. That's how I see it.

It's hightly doubtful that this was their original vision, or anything close to it, given that the ending doesn't match the spirit of the game up until this point.

When it comes to the sheer numbers, some of the things I've been reading have talked about polls on the subject giving an 86% rate of dis-satisfaction. There might only be 50,000 or so people actively involved in going after Bioware and expressing themselves strongly over it, but like everything the vocal part is usually the smallest part of the position that spawns them. 50,000 vocal protestors is huge for something like this.

As far as "Mass Effect" goes and the quality of the games goes, I disagree with you there, but that has nothing to do with this discussion really. I think the first game was the best and was the most RPG-like. I think 2 and 3 became cinematic shooters and I'm not a big fan of the genere. 3 did tighten up the controls and AI as far as shooters go, and made it better for that kind of game, but I still did not care for that design choice. I was playing it mostly due to liking the universe and storyline up until that point.

To be honest there was still a lot of bad blood over changing ME into a shooter as opposed to keeping it an RPG that looked like a shooter, and that doubtlessly contributed to this for some people. Indeed it was an issue that came up with "Dragon Age 2" as they turned it from an RPG into a glorified brawler, complete with plate wearing enemies jumping off buildings like ninjas. With the story being the selling point keeping a lot of people coming back despite this, ruining that probably contributed to the rage. The RPG to shooter transition would not have fueled this alone as there are simply put more shooter fans than RPG fans out there at this time.

Speaking for myself, I thought the ending was bad, but not as bad as some people seem to think and I've said that before. I'd prefer a better ending and am willing to defend that point, but truthfully I probably wouldn't have jumped into the whole thing supporting the "movement" to have it changed if there wasn't a goodly amount of intertia, with so many issues also coming to a head. I really believe this could be a changing point for the industry that will leave things better than they were, as having reached the limit to how far people can be pushed they probably will backpedal a bit and stop pushing to find that limit.

As far as people voting with their money, I think that is already happening. One of the interesting things about this is that rather than just vocalized rage, people are spending money to go after EA/Bioware one way or another. What's more without changing the ending I do not think the DLC they have planned will go over very well, similar to what happened with DA2 where the DLC apparently did badly enough where the last installment of it that they had planned was cancelled.