No, I can't, but if you're going to justify the sheer scale of genocide committed by the Reapers, you need something a lot more solid than "They're acting to prevent a scenario that might possibly happen someday, even though there's absolutely no evidence this scenario could occur in your cycle."Buretsu said:
BioWare Announces Post-Ending DLC for Mass Effect 3 [Updated!]
- Thread starter Hevva
- Start date
Not necessarily - again, just for the sake of argument, it might be possible for an epilogue DLC to put your choices back into the ending, so to speak.MeChaNiZ3D said:
For example, if one of those cinematics reveals the fate of Rannoch - geth tending to quarian graves or quarians tossing aside empty geth bodies or quarians and geth building homes - that's a reflection of the choice you made.
If there's a text crawl that makes reference to Urdnot Mordin, the first female clan chief since Shiagur, that's also a situation where your choice mattered.
If Vega goes back and completes his N7 training, it's because you told him to do so. If Oriana's family adopts Miranda, it's because you saved them both. If Jack's kids become celebrities and finally overcome the stigma of human biotics, it's because you put them on the front lines and they saved lives.
I'm as upset by the ending we got as anyone else... but hypothetically, BioWare can still fix this. There are ways in which the current ending can be expanded that would result in a better, more satisfying conclusion. All that remains to be seen is whether BioWare truly understands why the ending failed, and take the steps that are required to correct that failure.
1) The DLC is free, as stated both on the OP and the FAQPingoBlack said:
2) Despite how much they should change the ending, their just 'clarifying' the ending. Which of course could be PR talk for 'lets change it but make it look like it was there all along', which would actually be surprisingly easy if they were to take the indoctrination theory and use it.
But anyway, at least they'll do -something- to try and fix the mess of the ending. I may actually be able to play Mass Effect again without feeling everything was broken by the ending. Oh well.
Why Would he? he was mad about CHANGING the ending not if they want to expand on it more. What makes me sad is how low fans can sink over the bob debacle and I hope it doesn't actually damage him economically. The internet really needs to change.Fappy said:One of the first things I thought when I read the press release actuallyZachary Amaranth said:
GET TO THE BUNKER! YOUR NOT SAFE!Audacity said:
your fucking right though. and you had the balls to say it.
Apples and oranges: there was no vocal backlash demanding that Lucas change certain elements in the original trilogy. He did so on his own, and it has been successfully argued by critics more knowledgeable in "Star Wars" than I that the changes he made actually made the films worse (off the top of my head, digitally inserting Hayden Christensen at the ending of the last film is incredibly disrespectful to the actor who actually played Vader in his final scene).Harbinger_ said:
Here, there is a vocal backlash demanding that BioWare change a very specific aspect of "Mass Effect 3" - regardless of the different demands made by various groups and individuals, the one thing they all have in common is that they want the ending to be as well-written, as detailed and as emotionally evocative as the rest of the game.
These posts put off a rather startling sense of self-loathing and ignorance about what art actually is.Active Schizophrenic said:
Here's the reality of the situation: at the bottom of all this, it was ultimately BioWare's choice to release an updated ending (and, quite frankly, if they're ready to reveal this in April it was probably already in development before the game launched). They could have simply sat back on their arses and done nothing - all the protests were just that, protests. No one marched into BioWare's headquarters and put a gun to the creative team's collective head. Sure, ignoring the backlash would have damaged their credibility in the long term, but if Ubisoft can be forgiven its monstrous DRM, I'm sure BioWare could've weathered the storm as well.
They have chosen to address a fault in their product, they have chosen to try and make their story better. I commend them for it.
And here's something else to consider: this perception of "fans getting their own way and now everything's doomed forever" is utter bollocks. There are many variables that led to the initial outrage and subsequent backlash, not least of which is the fact that the ending is demonstrably, qualitatively poorer than the rest of the game. I mean, honestly, it's not like people were out in the streets shrieking for revisions of X-Men: Destiny - in most cases, a poorly-told story is a poorly-told story throughout. People are up in arms about Mass Effect 3 because 35 hours and 50 minutes of excellent, top-notch (and yes, dare I say, artistic) storytelling is capped off by 10 minutes of ill-conceived tripe.
That is where the resistance comes from. It's not entitlement, it's not childishness, it's not selfishness: it's the simple incongruity of a brilliant game with an awful ending, and quite frankly, you don't often see that kind of diametrically opposed combination in any narrative medium.
Yes! Woo-hoo! Sweet sweet closure! Thats all I ever wanted!
Ah crap, now I'm going to have to go through the ending again and cry some more :'(
Ah crap, now I'm going to have to go through the ending again and cry some more :'(
And... CRACK. There goes my resolve to not get involved in the whole Mass Effect 3 debate. I will do my best to contain my rage.
There are several things I take issue with (and yes, if you have got this far and still don't want spoilers, this post will contain some):
- The indoctrination "theory": I'm sorry but why are we still referring to this as just a theory. When you pile up the evidence it's undeniable. Are there still people out there unaware that most of the assets used on the jungle planet at the end are actually named "Dream_FoliageMove_MM" or something else beginning with Dream. My biggest fear right now is that BioWare does use this DLC to undermine the indoctrination ending just because of the "Ah yes, indoctrination - we have dismissed that claim" attitude of a few (admittedly vocal) gamers who would rather be angry than satisfied.
- It's already been pointed out that Jennifer Hale has said she has not been called in to record more dialogue which hints either at DLC such as this already being in BioWare's master plan or (more likely) they didn't want to delay release but had some content they had originally planned to be part of the ending. In this case the internet will owe BioWare the mother of all apologies.
- To the "Casey Hudson lied" crowd: Casey Hudson was the Executive Producer for Mass Effect 3, not one of the writers. A game will be worked on right up until the moment it has to be sent to Microsoft for validation. And even after that, it's become common for the team to go straight to work on DLC before the game actually hits shelves. With so much change possible that means press releases often end up being wrong post-release. And come on, even the President of America is guilty of more and bigger 'lies' about things which actually matter than the Casey Hudson one incorrect statement.
So, in short, can we go back to being decent human beings? Please?
There are several things I take issue with (and yes, if you have got this far and still don't want spoilers, this post will contain some):
- The indoctrination "theory": I'm sorry but why are we still referring to this as just a theory. When you pile up the evidence it's undeniable. Are there still people out there unaware that most of the assets used on the jungle planet at the end are actually named "Dream_FoliageMove_MM" or something else beginning with Dream. My biggest fear right now is that BioWare does use this DLC to undermine the indoctrination ending just because of the "Ah yes, indoctrination - we have dismissed that claim" attitude of a few (admittedly vocal) gamers who would rather be angry than satisfied.
- It's already been pointed out that Jennifer Hale has said she has not been called in to record more dialogue which hints either at DLC such as this already being in BioWare's master plan or (more likely) they didn't want to delay release but had some content they had originally planned to be part of the ending. In this case the internet will owe BioWare the mother of all apologies.
- To the "Casey Hudson lied" crowd: Casey Hudson was the Executive Producer for Mass Effect 3, not one of the writers. A game will be worked on right up until the moment it has to be sent to Microsoft for validation. And even after that, it's become common for the team to go straight to work on DLC before the game actually hits shelves. With so much change possible that means press releases often end up being wrong post-release. And come on, even the President of America is guilty of more and bigger 'lies' about things which actually matter than the Casey Hudson one incorrect statement.
So, in short, can we go back to being decent human beings? Please?
Does ANYONE pause to think about how this mess makes the game industry LOOK? Video gaming doesn't need any help looking shitty in the public eye- you don't need to HELP people who already think gaming is a kiddie hobby and not worth its due respect by acting like immature, entitled shits. This is the kind of thing that makes me think gaming really IS for children, it's just that some children ***** and moan from the bodies of 20-somethings. Basically, you're proving anti-gaming activists right when truly intelligent and creative people waste their time and energy to try and find a rationale for molesting the concept of creative freedom.
How can you be PLEASED when Electronic Arts is named the worst business of 2012? I don't particularly agree with their general design philosophy and I abhor their marketing campaigns; but you need to consider what it means when a prominent company in the realm of video game production is officially deemed a shitty business.
So yes, this is all the retarded mewling of kids- grow the fuck up. It was naive to think ME3's ending would be good anyway; they hit so many high notes over the course of the trilogy it was impossible for them to top themselves.
How can you be PLEASED when Electronic Arts is named the worst business of 2012? I don't particularly agree with their general design philosophy and I abhor their marketing campaigns; but you need to consider what it means when a prominent company in the realm of video game production is officially deemed a shitty business.
So yes, this is all the retarded mewling of kids- grow the fuck up. It was naive to think ME3's ending would be good anyway; they hit so many high notes over the course of the trilogy it was impossible for them to top themselves.
I don't really understand... any of that. Like, is that what people want in their ending? Why? I mean, obviously I can only speak for myself here, but I don't understand how including any of those things improve the ending in any way, or even provide closure.Diana Kingston-Gabai said:
I'll take Rannoch as an example. In my game, I successfully managed to get the quarians and the geth to make peace with each other, and then, afterwards I spoke with Tali on the Normandy, and she told me in detail what the geth and the quarians were doing now. As far as I can see, we already got closure on the issue. There's no need or reason to actually show any of that in an epilogue, we already know it happened. The same goes for just about everything you listed. For almost every event that happens in the game, closure is already given before you go on to Priority: Earth. There's no need or reason to include any of it in the ending. Pretty much the only exception to that is, if you cured the genophage, then there's still the question of can the Krogan be trusted not to start the krogan rebellions again afterwards, but then, I'd almost rather keep that vague. It's not always good to wrap up every single question, sometimes it's nice to have a couple small loose threads dangling to keep imagining and coming up with new stories. Especially considering Bioware's hinted that they may make further games in the Mass Effect universe.
Personally, I do not want the Epilogue to just summarize the things I've already done with fancy pictures. It would add absolutely nothing to the story.
To me, a big part of the issue is that everyone seems to have completely different reasons as to why the ending failed, which is why it's pretty much impossible for Bioware to satisfy everyone, which is something a lot of people have been saying since it started.
EDIT: Adding this in.
I think you need to brush up on your definition of the word 'undeniable'. And while you're at it, look up interpretation too. As it is, there's at least as much evidence that contradicts the indoctrination theory as there is that supports it. My favourite is how, if the indoctrination theory is true, then it renders the entire ending 100% irrelevant regardless of your choice and also means that the reaper's indoctrination didn't take effect until after it was too late for it to be of any use to them. Then there's the fact that Shepard's actions while 'indoctrinated' run contrary to those of everyone else who's ever been shown to be indoctrinated. The list goes on. While I'd say the indoctrination is possibly a valid interpretation for those who choose to see it that way, to say it's the factually correct ending and everyone else is wrong is just using the same general mindset used to promote nonsense conspiracy theories.PSimbo said:
The content itself isn't as relevant as the "if/then" structure. If we were to distill the many, many complaints about the ending - as has already been done elsewhere, I'm sure - it would come down to a basic commonality: players want to feel that their actions in the game mattered. The reason for the confusion is that some players are emphasizing the personal aspect while others are taking the broader galactic view (I think both are required).Gizen said:
To use Rannoch as a further example: while Tali tells you what will likely happen should the quarian and geth fleets accept a truce, that closure is apparently invalidated given that all endings strand said fleets in the Sol system. There is no manifestation of your own preference here: if you chose to eliminate the Reapers (and thus sacrifice the geth), does that have any effect on the quarians? Does Synthesis allow them to immediately remove their suits?
You're quite right to point out that there's a measure of closure offered in the dialogues before the push to the Citadel... and had the game ended with Shepard and Anderson sitting together and the Crucible firing, it would've been enough. But the specifics of the conclusion complicate (and in some cases invalidate) that closure.
This principle is also applicable on the level of character. Again, this isn't something BioWare doesn't already know: Jade Empire, Baldur's Gate II and Dragon Age: Origins all gave you at least a hint of what happens to your party members - and, in many cases, their fates were directly tied to your dialogues with them. Does Leliana return to the Chantry, or does she become a bard again? Does Kang the Mad discover his old identity or does he just keep on building exploding machines? Who survives the assault on the Collector Base because you took the time to help them with their personal problems?
Again, it comes down to feeling that your choices had an impact. And the reason the ending is coming under so much fire - why this has gone above and beyond any backlash in recent memory - is because the rest of the game already employs this device. Help Steve through his grief and he'll survive the shuttle crash. Get through to Ashley/Kaidan and you can recruit them again. Force Javik to use the echo shard and he'll plan his eventual suicide, or don't and he'll tell you he wants to explore the galaxy. These scenarios unfold at the player's behest, as a mechanism that has been consistent throughout the trilogy.
Except for the ending. In which nothing you do matters, no actions you take can change the outcome (since even the Control ending results in the loss of the relays and the crashing of the Normandy), and nothing more is told of your crew, of the story's protagonists, past apparently being marooned on an unknown world.
And that's a categorical misunderstanding of what Mass Effect is: a variable experience, even beyond the Paragon/Renegade morality spectrum. Ten players may have had ten different stories unfold within the general narrative framework. But unlike novels and films and every other medium this has been compared to, it is broadly possible to satisfy a large number of people in this specific instance, simply by allowing the ending to flow from the choices you, the player, have made. Even if the differences are cosmetic - the Council lives/the Council dies, Alistair is king of Ferelden/a Grey Warden/a wandering drunk - these would still be facets of the ending determined by the actions of the player. That's why the naysayers aren't able to comprehend what's being asked of BioWare here, because they're making comparisons to J.K. Rowling changing the ending of the Harry Potter books and those comparisons just aren't valid.
All games are the same, the start is worked on the most, the ending is rushed as deadlines loom, the fact that people pay $60 for a game that does not have a complete story or is missing a few pieces is then charged an extra $20? For those pieces that were already on disc? Then you wonder about their outcry? Just imagine for a sec you went to the movies to see the latest blockbuster and were charged $20 entry and maybe $10 snacks, then you watched the film, mid way through the film, it jumps completely to a new scene with no context on what happened. Then it did it three more times, then the ending was rushed and brief just like that no closer or anything. You are told after that if you paid $15 bucks each for the missing pieces as well as another $15 for the complete ending you would have an outcry to. Oh and FYI the games industry is worth more than any other entertainment industry at the mo you tell me that an industry that is rescission proof is seen as a silly hobby? Lol.Brentpool said:
I personally don't believe this will be enough to appease the fans they've alienated. I know that the chances of that on behalf of myself are already slim - not as the endings are per se that have alienated me, but how they've regarded the uproar up until this point.
They speak of humility but show none. And in a medium such as Video Games, which is known for having multiple endings as an acceptable artistic compromise, flat out denying that possibility in their announcement was upsetting enough to withdrawal hope and support.
Put bluntly, Square-Enix is handling FFXIV better than BioWare is handling this, and given that I, up until this issue, regarded BioWare much higher than Square Enix in multiple ways, this is a rather large statement to make.
With nothing visible on the horizon, and with now both the Mass Effect and Dragon Age brands tarnished by theses recent and ongoing fiascos, it is hard to see how BioWare is going to pull itself out of the Damaged Goods marker they've firmly placed themselves in the eyes of many fans.
I don't think maintaining any sort of pride at this point is the way to do it.
They speak of humility but show none. And in a medium such as Video Games, which is known for having multiple endings as an acceptable artistic compromise, flat out denying that possibility in their announcement was upsetting enough to withdrawal hope and support.
Put bluntly, Square-Enix is handling FFXIV better than BioWare is handling this, and given that I, up until this issue, regarded BioWare much higher than Square Enix in multiple ways, this is a rather large statement to make.
With nothing visible on the horizon, and with now both the Mass Effect and Dragon Age brands tarnished by theses recent and ongoing fiascos, it is hard to see how BioWare is going to pull itself out of the Damaged Goods marker they've firmly placed themselves in the eyes of many fans.
I don't think maintaining any sort of pride at this point is the way to do it.
Perhaps I worded that badly, though I was careful to use the asset names as the crux of my argument rather than any observations from my or other people's playthroughs. By even considering the notion of dreams presented as actual gameplay we must take just about every gameplay observation with a pinch of salt. I can promise you that I don't often side with conspiracy theorists and nor do I do so lightly.Gizen said:
As for the issue of 'satisfaction', I should perhaps have used the word 'acceptance' as I don't for a minute want to suggest that ME3's current ending offers complete closure or a sense of catharsis. My personal belief is that it offers an insight into Cmdr. Shepards hopes and desires - which, in my opinion, is a far more rewarding payoff than a boss battle with Harbinger.