I would hazard a guess that commissioning artwork predates money. The first commissioned piece was almost certainly bartered.Emiscary said:
Oh, and Da Vinci edited the Mona Lisa over many years.
BioWare "Considering" Calls for New Mass Effect 3 Ending
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Oh, and Da Vinci edited the Mona Lisa over many years.
NinjaDeathSlap said:
I would like an explanation for that as well, if they all BioWare did was provide a proper explanation as to why the Citadel and the relays blew up, I'd be happy. I destroyed the Reapers (and all other synthetic life), so as far as I know, the beam destroys Reaper constructs as well
Please, explain why? As a customer it's Your duty to demand that the product You buy is of as good quality as it's advertised. If You pay for a 60$, so called "tripple A" title why should You be satisfied with something that doesn't meet Your expectations? When You buy a fancy TV that cost several thousand $ and find out that you can't change channels with a remote are You just accepting it is a "innovative, artistic expression"?Andy Chalk said:
The game lacks an epilogue, an integral part of storytelling and writing. As customers we aren't slaves to companies and frankly if a company does something wrong we should yell about it, so next time they will think twice before making same mistake.
Eh, people would be angry either way. If it was their plan all along, people ***** because they were kept in the dark. If they adopt the idea from the fans, then people will ***** that it wasn't there in the first place and it will look like another attempt to cover their ass.Daystar Clarion said:
Bioware's really painted into a corner at the moment.
Indeed, I've seen a lot of people give really clear, concise feedback on what they thought as well as good explanations of how we're not just pissed because we didn't get a happy ending.TheCaptain said:
Unfortunately I've also seen many people flip their shit for no good reason, and in human history, the ones with the least to say have always yelled the loudest.
Why does your personal investment of time mean the ending needs to be changed? In any other media, I expect you wouldn't make the same demand. Do you go back and demand that Saving Private Ryan have a happier ending? Did you make a demand that the book Survivor end in something other than a suicidal plane crash? Assuming that you are generally a rational person, I'd wager the answer is no.Mikeyfell said:
The heavy use of choice as being a major draw to the game is likely the cause of the problem. Somehow, it would seem, being asked to make a handful of minor decisions from a pre-determined list of actions has convinced thousands (millions) that they are a part of the creative process. I suppose we are, in a way. Our role is to buy (or not) a product as a commentary of quality.
But, more to the point, I don't particularly understand why people think the game deserved a happy ending. The saga revolves around a pattern of extinction that has occurred at least 700 times. At least 700 races rose to power and were annihilated in an instant. The only difference is that this time around, the sentient races had a little more time - that is, in reality, the only thing any action the player performs actually achieves. The reapers still achieve complete strategic surprise. The reapers still have a fleet that is more massive and more powerful than anything the sentient races could muster.
The ending provided is already far too happy to be reasonable. It already leans heavily on deus ex machina in order to make what the player does count for anything more than one last shout of defiance in the face of annihilation. To give me an ending where the sentient races are saved, even in part, is more than the fiction could justify. To give me an ending where my player character and my allies and friends all survived and lived happy ever after goes beyond unreasonable.
It treads dangerously into children's fantasy. The story demanded sacrifice. The story demanded that there be a cost for choice. For two games we were told that annihilation was one decision away; but that was a lie. The choice between Ashley and Kaiden was hardly a choice (The situation demanded securing the bomb site or the whole mission was for nothing). Saving Wrex was the result of a speech check. Surviving the suicide mission was trivial. In a fight for the survival of advanced life itself, in a fight where the machines won hundreds of times in a row, the best any could hope for was for a little extra time. One does not get to simply walk into hell time and again without there being a cost and one does not get to break a cycle that has persisted for so long as to effectively be a process of the galaxy itself without expecting to pay something dear.
I honestly hesitated when it came to putting the disc in to see the final chapter through. Even with the best laid plans, how could the game end well? In the end, friends and allies were dead. Two entire races were gone and the legacy of countless more were shattered. The outlook for our heroes was grim at best. But this wasn't a fight for the people on the Normandy. It was a fight for people. The sacrifice of billions bought entire generations yet unborn the opportunity to live and make mistakes and struggle and die. The sacrifice bought them life itself.
Is it the happy ending I wanted? No. But it was happier than a reasonable man would dare hope.
We have been noticed! YAY?
Do I care? NO!
Long answer? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
On serious note,I probably should stop visiting the forums and watching the news on the Escapist for the week or so,because this is getting tiresome for me.
PS: The Red Button....that is all.
Do I care? NO!
Long answer? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
On serious note,I probably should stop visiting the forums and watching the news on the Escapist for the week or so,because this is getting tiresome for me.
PS: The Red Button....that is all.
I'm honestly surprised they didn't just do a sort of Fallout New Vegas esq ending (Or something similar). You know where it talks about how a lot of your decisions affected the world in whatever way you made them. That cutscene if you did enough lasted like five minutes. It was a great way to end the game and make you feel like a part of the world. Maybe that would have been to much work for Bioware to do with a trilogy but I don't think anyone could have complained at all about that. On the other hand if this never happened 70 grand wouldn't have been raised for charity. Silver lining I suppose.
I'm starting to wonder if Critical Miss is wrong and I am indeed the only one who liked the ending (not tolerated, actually liked it)
I hope they don't change it. If they want to clarify things, that's cool but I really hope they don't flat out retcon this ending.
I hope they don't change it. If they want to clarify things, that's cool but I really hope they don't flat out retcon this ending.
False advertising? Come on, I know people like to rag on the endings but false advertising complaints?! Nobody's gonna take that seriously! And charity is cool and all but fuck isn't that a dirty way to try and get an ending change?
"Oh look at all the money we've raised for the sick kiddies! What's that Bioware? You don't want a new ending? Fuck it. Sorry kids Bioware says no." *throws money off cliff*
I do want to believe that this Indoctrination Theory is true, there is evidence for it after all. I'll look out for it when I get to the end of my second playthrough. It's basically established Fanon round the Bioware forums...
Plus Marauder Shields needs his own DLC. Just throwing it out there.
[sub]Never Forget[/sub]
"Oh look at all the money we've raised for the sick kiddies! What's that Bioware? You don't want a new ending? Fuck it. Sorry kids Bioware says no." *throws money off cliff*
I do want to believe that this Indoctrination Theory is true, there is evidence for it after all. I'll look out for it when I get to the end of my second playthrough. It's basically established Fanon round the Bioware forums...
Plus Marauder Shields needs his own DLC. Just throwing it out there.
[sub]Never Forget[/sub]
Except that the Indoctrination Theory is as holed as the ME3 ending.Daystar Clarion said:
If people wants to come up with their own endings, it would be appreciated if they weren't as crap as the BioWare ones. The only reason people are starting to support the indoctrination theory is that people like seeing connections when there is none (or at least only a thin connection), and now that they didn't like the BioWare ending, they just latch on the whatever alternative idea springs up.
But like i said, the theory falls just as flat as the real ending upon close examination. If BioWare decided to run with it, then there would be another horde of people (who actually see all the plotholes of the theory) raging about it, and we would be back to square one. Just make a PROPER fucking ending and get it over with.
For the most part, the fans aren't asking for the endings to be changed. They are asking to get endings where all their choices, made over the span of three games, will play out before them. They don't mind the current endings being kept. All they want is a chance to stay true to the whole adventure and fight the impossible odds. Not be constricted to a color choice.
And what if you were the person that paid for the Mona Lisa to be painted? And were told by Da Vinci that she would be smiling in the painting? Could you then demand that he correct it?Andy Chalk said:
I wonder why all the people that support/aren't against the current ending think those of us that want it changed, want it to be "happier". I personally don't care if the ending is happy or sad, I just want it to be done right and have some effort put into it (there are about the same number of ways they could use to kill Shepard as there are to give him a happily ever after).
While that's kind of extreme, it's not completely wrong, is it? I think it's been in the end of the Angry Joe "Ten reasons we don't like the ME3 endings" video that you could see all possible endings play out next to each other - they look pretty much the same (not just similar). The fact that one of the main selling points went something like "since we're not making a sequel, we can have an array of wildly different endings" is questionable at best.The Wykydtron said:
This is freaking stupid. There are plenty of movies that have crapsack endings where everyone dies. These are often critically acclaimed. Plenty of books have "bad" or sad endings. These are also critically acclaimed. It's one thing to expect everything to be ok when you're 10 and it's a fairy tale. We aren't 10 anymore and Mass Effect certainly is not a fairy tale.
Ignore the Haters, the Escapist Staff (and Jim inparticular) can spew all the bile they want, we're getting noticed HOLD THE LINE!
I agree, with most choices throughout the series, there is usually a few choices in which there will be a catch. i.e. Curing the genophage, but losing the support of the majority of the Salarian fleets.teh_Canape said:
OT: All I can say is that Zeel is probably going to have to eat his words if his last thread was any indication. At least for now.
Thing is, The Mona Lisa was a Masterpiece - Mass Effect 3 was not. If not for this ending we'd be talking about the poor quest tracking and the glitches - small problems in an otherwise stellar game. Hold the Line
Same... I played through it thinking "man... it can't be as bad as they're saying" and it totally was. All that dark energy foreshadowing, Harbinger as a character being so driven and absolute, the sci-fi embodiment of lovecraftian horror, all for another writer to pick up the master left off and think "hmm, I just saw this old movie called The Matrix and it was pretty cool, that would be a good ending!" *facepalm*Ridgemo said:
I'm really hoping they run with the indoctrination retcon and give us a proper wrap up and actual moral choice, not a palate swapped explosion and nonsensically crewed Normandy running for it's life.