BioWare Knows It Can't Please Everyone

[antipunt]

Just drop this thingamajigy

The ending is a complete mess; unless they really think of something spectacular, I'll expect it to stay that way

 

[Murmillos]

... so they would rather please nobody.

Good strategy, good strategy.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

They (as in those responsible for the ending) will never change the ending because it would be admitting that they did something wrong, and for them that is much harder than say accepting their screw up.

 

[themilo504]

I?m carefully optimistic about this unlike many people I do think the ending can be saved just allow Sheppard to question the catalyst and have him explain all of the plot holes and then throw in a little fallout new vegas style epilogue that shows the galaxy isn?t completely doomed and the effect of your actions yes it?s all meaningless text but it?s better than nothing.

 

[themilo504]

woops double post sorry.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

This is a perfect example of what I dislike about the "retake Mass Effect" movement/meme. If they change the ending to satisfy you, Rooster, then they are changing a story that I and plenty of others liked.

Granted. But that has nothing to do with the part you quoted.

I believe it's relevant because if it was changed, then they'd be the dissatisfied customers who would need the apology and "everything [Bioware] can do to make them happy". Game devs get away with this because, as the article says, you can't please everyone.

You're ignoring my point. It's not okay to be dicks to your customers however they may feel about a product. "Can't please everyone" is a pathetic excuse for screwing up and a worse one for rudeness.

If we were mount a campaign to have it changed back, we could use identical "the customer is always right" reasoning to justify the position.

I wasn't saying they should change it because the customer is always right, I was saying they shouldn't be dicks to their customers. They should change it because it sucks.

This is just too perfect: Let me re-edit somethings in there so you can see how ridiculous this is.

I wasn't saying they should change it because the customer is always right, I was saying they shouldn't be dicks to their customers. They should change it because it sucks (READ: They should change it because I (the customer) AM RIGHT when I say it sucks)

Exactly! I'd say that's a pretty good summing up of my position. Your tone suggests your edit is some kind of rebuttal to my original post, but I cannot fathom it. You seem to be identifying a contradiction in the two parts you have bolded, but I think you will find they are utterly compatible.

What makes your desire to be a satisfied customer more important than mine?

For one thing, you are not me, so I hardly feel compelled to defend your interests on your behalf. Beside that, nothing. We have conflicting goals, but it doesn't mean you're some kind of victim here.

Unless you succeeded and Bioware had changed the endings, then he'd be the victim of your wants because he lost something he liked. It's like if he really loved Snickers, but you hated peanuts. So you got the candy company to remove all peanuts in all Snickers. He loses the product he liked because you couldn't be bothered to enjoy another product.

In that same sense, I am the tragic victim of your vile efforts to obstruct my campaign to get the ending changed as well as Bioware's vicious refusal to change it. Oh the humanity!

 

[tensorproduct]

This is just too perfect: Let me re-edit somethings in there so you can see how ridiculous this is.

I wasn't saying they should change it because the customer is always right, I was saying they shouldn't be dicks to their customers. They should change it because it sucks (READ: They should change it because I (the customer) AM RIGHT when I say it sucks)

Exactly! I'd say that's a pretty good summing up of my position. Your tone suggests your edit is some kind of rebuttal to my original post, but I cannot fathom it. You seem to be identifying a contradiction in the two parts you have bolded, but I think you will find they are utterly compatible.

In the spirit of taking people at their word, I'm going to assume that you're not being deliberately obtuse and that you honestly believe your opinion of the quality of a story is an irrefutable fact.

To Megalodon I say: this is how people see the RTM movement. There are far more voices like Rooster's than like yours. Believing that one's own opinion is the only one that matters, or that there is some objective measure of quality by which games can be judged, is childish (though not necessarily "entitled" because I know we're all sick of that word).


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Edited for clarity)

 

[irishda]

You're ignoring my point. It's not okay to be dicks to your customers however they may feel about a product. "Can't please everyone" is a pathetic excuse for screwing up and a worse one for rudeness.

But the rudeness was on the customers end for refusing anything less than a complete rewrite of the original. When any sort of platitudes are rejected on the basis of "this isn't what we want", then it's not exactly rude for not catering to the over-the-top demands. I've never heard anything of Bioware insulting people or mocking them. What I have seen though is comments of "we're taking this criticism seriously" get chewed out as "missing the point.

Exactly! I'd say that's a pretty good summing up of my position. Your tone suggests your edit is some kind of rebuttal to my original post, but I cannot fathom it. You seem to be identifying a contradiction in the two parts you have bolded, but I think you will find they are utterly compatible.

Forgive me. Allow me to clarify your logic:

1. Bioware shouldn't change the game because the customer is right, they shouldn't be dicks to their customers.
2. They should change the game because I (the customer) am right when I say the ending sucks.

The trip up comes in both the subjective nature of you being right, and in your double-backing on what Bioware should or shouldn't do.

In that same sense, I am the tragic victim of your vile efforts to obstruct my campaign to get the ending changed as well as Bioware's vicious refusal to change it. Oh the humanity!

Close, but the existing product has that going for it. It already exists. You've taken a product and demanded it be changed on the basis that you don't like it to the detriment of those that already approve of it, rather than seeking out another product that suits your taste. You're grabbing other people's toys and saying they need to be different, and that makes you a bigger dick than Bioware for refusing to change it.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

This is just too perfect: Let me re-edit somethings in there so you can see how ridiculous this is.

I wasn't saying they should change it because the customer is always right, I was saying they shouldn't be dicks to their customers. They should change it because it sucks (READ: They should change it because I (the customer) AM RIGHT when I say it sucks)

Exactly! I'd say that's a pretty good summing up of my position. Your tone suggests your edit is some kind of rebuttal to my original post, but I cannot fathom it. You seem to be identifying a contradiction in the two parts you have bolded, but I think you will find they are utterly compatible.

In the spirit of taking people at their word, I'm going to assume that you're not being deliberately obtuse and that you honestly believe your opinion of the quality of a story is an irrefutable fact.

Far from it. This is just a silly ad hominim people make when they don't feel confident enough to argue their point on it's own merits.

To Megalodon I say: this is how people see the RTM movement. There are far more voices like Rooster's than like yours. Believing that one's own opinion is the only one that matters, or that there is some objective measure of quality by which games can be judged, is childish (though not necessarily "entitled" because I know we're all sick of that word).


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Edited for clarity)

 

[tensorproduct]

This is just too perfect: Let me re-edit somethings in there so you can see how ridiculous this is.

I wasn't saying they should change it because the customer is always right, I was saying they shouldn't be dicks to their customers. They should change it because it sucks (READ: They should change it because I (the customer) AM RIGHT when I say it sucks)

Exactly! I'd say that's a pretty good summing up of my position. Your tone suggests your edit is some kind of rebuttal to my original post, but I cannot fathom it. You seem to be identifying a contradiction in the two parts you have bolded, but I think you will find they are utterly compatible.

In the spirit of taking people at their word, I'm going to assume that you're not being deliberately obtuse and that you honestly believe your opinion of the quality of a story is an irrefutable fact.

Far from it. This is just a silly ad hominim people make when they don't feel confident enough to argue their point on it's own merits.

To Megalodon I say: this is how people see the RTM movement. There are far more voices like Rooster's than like yours. Believing that one's own opinion is the only one that matters, or that there is some objective measure of quality by which games can be judged, is childish (though not necessarily "entitled" because I know we're all sick of that word).


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Edited for clarity)

I don't really know what to make of this. Are you accusing me of a silly ad hominem (possible, though I'm fairly sure I didn't make one), or admitting to one yourself (in which case I don't see it)?

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

This is just too perfect: Let me re-edit somethings in there so you can see how ridiculous this is.

I wasn't saying they should change it because the customer is always right, I was saying they shouldn't be dicks to their customers. They should change it because it sucks (READ: They should change it because I (the customer) AM RIGHT when I say it sucks)

Exactly! I'd say that's a pretty good summing up of my position. Your tone suggests your edit is some kind of rebuttal to my original post, but I cannot fathom it. You seem to be identifying a contradiction in the two parts you have bolded, but I think you will find they are utterly compatible.

In the spirit of taking people at their word, I'm going to assume that you're not being deliberately obtuse and that you honestly believe your opinion of the quality of a story is an irrefutable fact.

Far from it. This is just a silly ad hominim people make when they don't feel confident enough to argue their point on it's own merits.

To Megalodon I say: this is how people see the RTM movement. There are far more voices like Rooster's than like yours. Believing that one's own opinion is the only one that matters, or that there is some objective measure of quality by which games can be judged, is childish (though not necessarily "entitled" because I know we're all sick of that word).


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Edited for clarity)

I don't really know what to make of this. Are you accusing me of a silly ad hominem (possible, though I'm fairly sure I didn't make one), or admitting to one yourself (in which case I don't see it)?

I probably should have called it a straw man. What I'm trying to say is, rarely does anyone actually try to pass off their opinion as fact, and that certainly isn't happening here. You may not like my opinion, but I never stated or implied it was anything else.

As for your message to Megalodon, I do not believe my opinion is the only one that matters. But even if I did, I could charge you with the same because you haven't admitted mine is right either. You are obstructing my wishes as much as I am obstructing yours. I never stated or implied there was some objective measure of quality or that my opinions are facts so please just forget that whole line of argument. All it does is gum up the works. Try reading this: "I'm sorry you think I'm childish. But that is only your opinion, and you are trying to present it as a fact. You honestly believe your opinions are facts. You believe that there is an objective measure of childishness. Therefore, you are disqualified from the discussion of my childishness. Furthermore, you're obtuse and dumb and so on and so forth." That is what I am going through over here.

And what the fuck does "entitled" have to do with any of that? Seriously, what is the logical connection between my allegedly confusing opinions with facts and a sense of entitlement? This is how I see the anti-RTM movement: they throw out pointless insults that don't even make sense in context without thinking about the subject at hand. Why did you call me "entitled" instead of fat? Can you even think of a reason?

The irony here is that all I'm doing is saying how I feel about this fucking game and it is you who cannot cope with a dissenting opinion.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

You're ignoring my point. It's not okay to be dicks to your customers however they may feel about a product. "Can't please everyone" is a pathetic excuse for screwing up and a worse one for rudeness.

But the rudeness was on the customers end for refusing anything less than a complete rewrite of the original. When any sort of platitudes are rejected on the basis of "this isn't what we want", then it's not exactly rude for not catering to the over-the-top demands. I've never heard anything of Bioware insulting people or mocking them. What I have seen though is comments of "we're taking this criticism seriously" get chewed out as "missing the point.

Demanding satisfaction from a business transaction is not rude. Granted, I'm sure a lot of customers were total dicks over the whole thing, but that is not why. I can't think of a better reason to reject something than it not being what I want. That doesn't sound over-the-top to me. And I didn't say it was rude to not cater to customer demands. Rejecting it was a lot worse than merely rude. It was rude to act rudely and be condescending. If you want to see Bioware insulting people or mocking them, I suggest you read the article at the beginning of this thread. They have never taken this criticism seriously, ever. They have been evasive, dismissive, condescending, defensive, misleading, pretentious, and just fucking rude in general. And beside that, they have consciously chosen to miss the point. Again, read the article if you want to see it in action.

Exactly! I'd say that's a pretty good summing up of my position. Your tone suggests your edit is some kind of rebuttal to my original post, but I cannot fathom it. You seem to be identifying a contradiction in the two parts you have bolded, but I think you will find they are utterly compatible.

Forgive me. Allow me to clarify your logic:

1. Bioware shouldn't change the game because the customer is right, they shouldn't be dicks to their customers.
2. They should change the game because I (the customer) am right when I say the ending sucks.

The trip up comes in both the subjective nature of you being right, and in your double-backing on what Bioware should or shouldn't do.

What I said makes perfect sense and I stand by it. There is no contradiction. You're number '2' is very oddly worded. Why don't you shorten it to something that means the same and is less misleading, like: "They should change it because it sucks."

I think what you're trying to do is establish a contradiction between fixing something that sucks while simultaneously not being swayed by customer complaints. I'm sorry but it is just not there.

In that same sense, I am the tragic victim of your vile efforts to obstruct my campaign to get the ending changed as well as Bioware's vicious refusal to change it. Oh the humanity!

Close, but the existing product has that going for it. It already exists. You've taken a product and demanded it be changed on the basis that you don't like it to the detriment of those that already approve of it, rather than seeking out another product that suits your taste. You're grabbing other people's toys and saying they need to be different, and that makes you a bigger dick than Bioware for refusing to change it.

BBBwwwwhhhhaaaaaat the fuck? Cool your jets guy. I won't report you but you've got to do better than that. It's always the people that like the ending that are abusive! Every Mass Effect thread is like this! And I'm supposed to believe the 'retakers' are the unreasonable ones?!

This is pure histrionics but I'll run with it as best I can. From my perspective, this is not a matter of taste but of insultingly shitty quality. The ending sucks and I want it changed. I sympathize if you don't want it to change. I understand that you will be inconvenienced. But games get changed all the time for better or worse. Do you really think every developer that ever did that is a bigger dick than whatever? Give me a break. Sorry you don't want it changed but I do and that's that. Fortunately, you are perfectly free to purchase a different product that suits your tastes. In fact, I encourage it.

I didn't say Bioware were dicks for refusing to change the ending. I said they were dicks for acting like dicks. Please cut it out with all the straw men, this is like the fifth time. There are three or more in this post alone.

 

[irishda]

This is pure histrionics but I'll run with it as best I can. From my perspective, this is not a matter of taste but of insultingly shitty quality. The ending sucks and I want it changed. I sympathize if you don't want it to change. I understand that you will be inconvenienced. But games get changed all the time for better or worse. Do you really think every developer that ever did that is a bigger dick than whatever? Give me a break. Sorry you don't want it changed but I do and that's that. Fortunately, you are perfectly free to purchase a different product that suits your tastes. In fact, I encourage it.

I'm gonna just cut to this cause this is what it essentially boils down to, plus it's kind of odd that you took my line almost verbatim and plugged it as if it justifies your opinion...

The million dollar question is: why is it encouraged for me to find different products that suit my tastes, but this particular one has to be changed for you? As I pointed out, you're demanding a product be changed to the detriment of others' enjoyment. You might be tempted to retort, "yes, but as it is, the product is detrimental to MY enjoyment." And once again the question must be raised as to why it's so important that this product especially must be enjoyable to you instead of you finding another. There exists numerous means for resale in this industry, so it's not really a question of money, unless you went digital, in which case lesson learned I hope.

I really have to refer back to my original metaphor in the hopes to show you why people would feel offended by your opinion. It's kind of a dick move to latch onto a product you don't like and demand it's change, rather than seeking out another that you like. It's like breaking other kids' toys because it wasn't what you wanted.

It might be why the Retake people always felt so "abused" for merely expressing their opinion, cause their opinion realized meant others happiness would be endangered.

 

[tensorproduct]

I probably should have called it a straw man. What I'm trying to say is, rarely does anyone actually try to pass off their opinion as fact, and that certainly isn't happening here. You may not like my opinion, but I never stated or implied it was anything else.

Rooster, if you want to say that everything you have said so far is simply a statement of opinion and you fully understand that your opinion is no more important that anybody else's then I retract the statement about you being childish and offer sincere apologies (neither a strawman nor an ad hominem, by the way).

I hope you understand though, that from your statements up until this point in the thread, it's very hard to see that that is the case. As I've said, I think it best to take people at their word on the Internet.

'Your' story sucks ass. Get it? Stop pretending it doesn't suck or that it's bold and expressive and open to interpretation.

They should change it because it sucks.

(READ: They should change it because I (the customer) AM RIGHT when I say it sucks)

Exactly! I'd say that's a pretty good summing up of my position.

From my perspective, this is not a matter of taste but of insultingly shitty quality. The ending sucks and I want it changed.

These all seem pretty clear cut, but are obviously open to interpretation.

As for your message to Megalodon, I do not believe my opinion is the only one that matters. But even if I did, I could charge you with the same because you haven't admitted mine is right either.

The difference being that I am not now, nor have I ever, demanding that a story be changed to suit my tastes. We are both absolutely entitled to our opinions, but that's about all. So, if Bioware decide to change things to suit you, then I am shit out of luck. I would be just as justified as you then in launching a campaign to get it changed back, but that way madness lies.

The irony here is that all I'm doing is saying how I feel about this fucking game and it is you who cannot cope with a dissenting opinion.

I can absolutely cope with an dissenting opinion, right up until somebody tries to shove it down my throat. If we were merely discussing what we thought about the game then it would be a discussion of opinions, but that is clearly not what is going on here. Do you really think that that is what is happening?

 

[Zaik]

A lot of it still makes no damn sense at all, but they did at least add in enough explanation that it doesn't seem like you're just picking which color light to kill everyone with.

Spoiler

Also added a none of the above option, but it just results in everyone being quickly swept under the rug and the next cycle "gets it right". Kind of stinks of pettyness about people not liking it the first time tbh.

 

[ReinWeisserRitter]

"This is for people that'll like it for what it is, so shut the fuck up."

I approve. Was about the best way they could have presented it, really. I think Bioware can jump itself off the nearest bridge in general, but I'll still give them credit where it's due.

 

[Aggieknight]

Personally the straw man arguments (you can't please everyone) and the artistic integrity statements from Hudson just turn me off from buying a product of his in the future. There was nothing "artistic' about Mass Effect 3's ending - it was a last minute rewrite done to meet a likely unrealistic deadline.

I probably won't play through the game again, but I did watch them on Youtube last night. It was obvious that they generated a list of the plot-holes identified by the community because they tried very hard to plug them all.

Spoiler

Also added a none of the above option, but it just results in everyone being quickly swept under the rug and the next cycle "gets it right". Kind of stinks of pettyness about people not liking it the first time tbh.

Ha. I got the exact same feeling when I watched that ending.

 

[chiefohara]

What was it about the ending that you liked?

Didn't like it at all myself, but im genuinely curious as to why you found it a satisfying ending to the franchise. What did you like about it?

Overall, my take on the ending was that it was a good idea with some dodgy execution. That's pretty much how I saw most of the series. There has always been a lot to like, but frequently you have to squint a bit and be somewhat selectively blind to see the good stuff.

I'll start off with the only thing that I think was actively awful: the Normandy fleeing the battle at the very end and crash landing on some random planet. I can't say much about how stupid that was, and how completely out-of-character it was for Joker and the crew, that has not already been said.

Other than that... yeah I liked most of it. I liked that it required sacrifice. I thought that the motivation of the Reapers made perfect sense (by the standards of amoral immortal machines). I liked that I couldn't just take the easy way out (destruction), because that would mean killing the Geth (who I had worked so hard to save on Rannoch): that was a serious choice which was difficult to make, a factor that has always been the best thing about the series. Most of all, I liked that it actually ended. No LotR style fakeouts, or sequel hooks, or New Vegas type epilogues... it was just over because Shepard's story was finished. It was left to our imaginations how the rest of the galaxy fared after the relays were gone, or how the Turian fleet would be fed (if you saved the Quarians then the live-ships are there with plenty of dextro-DNA food). I even like that indoctrination seems to be a perfectly valid interpretation of the ending: though I disagree with it, that sort of wild theorizing is part of the fun of stories.

Now, I do have nits to pick (space-child... really Bioware, really?) but they don't affect my enjoyment of what was a solid ending to a solid game.

i have to agree with regarding the destruction option, the idea of the geth and especially EDI being wiped out was abhorent to me. i ended up chooing synthesis because of my main shepards moral compass. Aspects of the ending that didnt make sense such as the illusive mans pressence on the station was nonetheless a part of the story i really enjoyed. Starchild and normandy aside however my biggest gripe was a lack of an epilogue. i know shepards story ended there and i had a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach that was always how it was going to bebut id ended up caring for the universe and secondary characters almost as much, and for so many unanswered variables to not be addressed did get to me it was quite a disapointment. but hopefully the extended cut DLC will address that.

asfor the indoctrination theory. well i see it as a missed opportunity unfortunatley.

thank you for answering my question