Mass Effect 3: Retake This

[Shamanic Rhythm]

This comic and the accompanying thread is a PhD in sociology just waiting to happen.

 

[MatsVS]

Then explain why I'm one of five people who gets the joke.

Oh please, get over yourself. We all got the joke. However, unlike you, we also got that there was a fundamental disconnect between the comic and the text. We also realized that, given Grey's previously established stance on the subject matter as well as the people in question, it was a joke made in bad faith, not meant to entertain but to demonstrate. To undermine.

Yeah. Subtle.

 

[ShadowyMOON]

I get it.

You guys are still late to the party and beating a dead horse at this point in either case though. So... still dropping to Kotaku level but for a different reason?

Blergh. Just bring us back on track with Erin getting drunk please.

 

[lacktheknack]

Then explain why I'm one of five people who gets the joke.

Oh please, get over yourself. We all got the joke. However, unlike you, we also got that there was a fundamental disconnect between the comic and the text. We also realized that, given Grey's previously established stance on the subject matter as well as the people in question, it was a joke made in bad faith, not meant to entertain but to demonstrate. To undermine.

Yeah. Subtle.

Oh, the "established stance" defined by fan speculation, deliberately ignoring the use of puns and word-clinging?

Hmmmmmmmmmm.

At any rate, if what you're saying is true, then it only highlights to me that people take everything too goddamned seriously.

 

[Dr.Nick]

You seem to be taking the same approach to this so called "gamer entitlement" that IGN is. I don't think you realize the shallowness of this approach.

 

[Erttheking]

Wait a bloody minute, why the hell is this on the front page twice?

 

[nothingspringstomind]

I see what you did there...

And, hot damn, are the comments endlessly amusing.

Personal note; loved the game, hated the ending, would love them to change it, (or confirm indoctrination theory as the biggest, riskiest move in videogame storytelling) but they probably won't.

I'm off to play some more games i love instead.

 

[Lawlhat]

That was enjoyably witty.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

And the thread explodes again.

 

[LetalisK]

Subtle, I like it.

By subtle I mean obvious.

It's retardedly obvious. And that makes me worry about some of the people commenting.

 

[DeMorquist]

Old Topic is Old


Can you move along and make some real comics or do we want to just keep beating the dead horse known as Bioware....


Also...Im immune to this... I didnt play ME3....

 

[kouriichi]

*standing applause*
I would buy 1 of those shirts for everyday of the week, plus one of each button.

 

[Alice Solis]

Duh, not really mad but sad... Escapist suddenly dropped to kotaku level here.

You're so close to getting it. Keep thinking!

The worst part of this, and the biggest flame starter is that this person is incredibly smug and condescending. I would say that this turns me off from the comic, however that would mean very little as I know that the enjoyment of the art will improve once this whole Mass Effect debate ends.

 

[Dr.Nick]

Suggesting people be civil to keep from sabotaging their own arguments is retarded?

Commenting solely on the failings of one side when the disproportionately vast majority of the uncivility, immaturity and 'intellectual dishonesty' is coming from the other is pretty retarded, yes.

The vast majority? Really? I've seen maybe 20-30 full-fledged journalists take a negative stance on the issue, maybe half of which were insulting. I take more personal insults than that from readers on a daily basis, just for doing my job. The female journos I know take maybe twice that. Journalists should remain professional, of course, hence today's strip. But that's because I care about journalistic standards, not readers' hurt feelings.

I've noticed this same thing. Many "journalists" have taken a stance supporting Bioware where as the vast majority of non journalists and fans are heavily protesting the ending. I think the journalists are in the wrong on this issue. Not only that but you seem to lauding over the belief that these "journalists" opinions are somehow more valid than non journalists. These are the SAME people who rated the game so highly despite its many flaws that caused huge controversy among consumers. Game journalists themselves admit that they often don't have much time to even play through a game completely. Are you sure their limited time gives a better representation compared to a player who spends hundreds of hours exploring a game? Who really understands the game better?

The ending was bad. Just plain bad. I'm not just talking about the last 10 minutes but many parts of the mission on earth as well. A turret scene that pops out of nowhere....a comms station where you can magically have a few meaningless lines of dialogue with everyone. Then there was the reported controversy of the ending being written solely by the one writer while the rest of the game was worked on by the whole team. Even if you don't think it's bad you have to at least mention all the flaws and sloppiness the game has. The funny thing is that journalists seemed to miss these gaping narrative wounds but when hundreds of thousands of players point them out they are attacked as being "entitled." Every time a journalist defends the ending of Mass Effect it makes them look like an idiot. It ruined one of the best science fiction stories ever.

Then to make matters worse you have journalists that all seem to be jumping on the band wagon of bashing gamers for this made up thing called "gamer entitlement." Gamers do feel strongly about these products but it is NOT entitlement. We spend hundred of hours and hundreds dollars on these games. We put huge investment into these games. I think we deserve some say.

Times have changed with consumer feedback in games just as they have in journalism. We have a direct line of communication with game publishers and developers via electronic means. We can make our voice heard instead of just being a blind crash test dummy who just sits there after a game comes out whether it was good or bad. We can let the developer know whether the made a great game or screwed up and we can do it in force.

Journalists and developers should care what readers and players think. We are the force that supports this industry.

PS: I might be completely misinterpreting your post but I mainly just wanted to state how I felt about the whole issue and how I think it's very complex.

 

[Immsys]

Fans point out plot holes and inconsistencies with the ending and how it doesn't fit in the story

Game journalists and their websites that are plauged with EA ads call us entitled

Real journalists from Forbes, BBC News, CNN, NY Times, NY Daily news, etc... say the fans have a point and point out all the quotes Bioware said about the ending and how it ended up being lies.

Yeah, and you wonder why no one takes game journalists seriously anymore. I bet most of you game journalists cringe seeing more credible sources like Forbes rip you apart while you have nothing but petty comments to respond with.

Gotta' agree with this. Sarcasm or not, this strip reminded me that gaming journalists have handled this horribly. Instead of "let's look at both sides of this" it's devolved into "well, I didn't see anything wrong with the ending so you guys are just entitled asswipes." On the other hand, a shitload of non-gaming journalists have handled this with the tact expected of them. They looked into the technical details, identified how the situation could be "fixed", if it should be fixed or not and so on.

So, yeah. Not bothered about gamers being entitled or not, I'm more bothered about the piss poor excuses we have for gaming journalists nowadays. Oh, and Escapist, I'm talking about you too.

I think there's a problem here, in that you might be confusing "Not looking at both sides of the argument" with "disagreeing with my opinion". Possibly because you possess the belief that no one who considered your argument could disagree, possibly because you don't see that that these people may have looked at both sides, just that they haven't PUBLISHED their looking at both sides. Usual journalists can't just come out with an opinion about games, they have to show how they got there, because it isn't their medium, they don't have the confidence to just throw a judgement about it when they have no expert knowledge. Gaming journalists do not suffer this problem. Is Mathew Paris going to bother explaining his thought process behind his view that Neo-Conservative interventionism is a bad idea? Of course not, he doesn't need to, anyone with an understand of what he's on about is already going to know what he means. Does Jeremy Paxman need to explain WHY he thinks that the Home Secretary needs to know what the National Insurance rate is? Of course not, anyone with a rudimentary understanding of British politics will know why.

Also, I would advise you to look at what the journalists of other mediums (literature, film etc) said about the movement, it may be a much more informed opinion. Oh and you know your argument is falling foul when you appeal to people with a more limited understanding of the subject just because they agree with you.

EDIT: A very well done to the Cory and Grey, though I think this thread is proof enough that "the idiot trap" was very successful. It seems very refreshing to find that comic strip writers are willing to express their opinions undeterred by the moaning that inevitably ensues.

 

[Awexsome]

*chuckles* quite a well played troll there.

IMO, the retake side has some good points but have come off closer to the entitled crying stereotype rather than the reasonable upset customer side they want to be seen as.

There are plenty of logical calmer people that bring up sure plotholes in the ending but the movement was started and filled by far more of the overreactionary stereotype than they'd like to believe.

 

[Hagi]

I probably don't get it. I'm not actually sure if I do. Either way, it's a bit disappointing.

If I do get it then well... that's just sad...

If I don't get it then well... there's this thing about having to explain your jokes...

I suppose it's a bit like having to explain your endings.

 

[The .50 Caliber Cow]

Cause he knew NONE of you would read the last panel and get it. Well done sir, I salute you.

[sub][sub]Moo. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FavUpD_IjVY&feature=related][/sub][/sub]

 

[Sparrow]

I think there's a problem here, in that you might be confusing "Not looking at both sides of the argument" with "disagreeing with my opinion". Possibly because you possess the belief that no one who considered your argument could disagree, possibly because you don't see that that these people may have looked at both sides, just that they haven't PUBLISHED their looking at both sides. Usual journalists can't just come out with an opinion about games, they have to show how they got there, because it isn't their medium, they don't have the confidence to just throw a judgement about it when they have no expert knowledge. Gaming journalists do not suffer this problem. Is Mathew Paris going to bother explaining his thought process behind his view that Neo-Conservative interventionism is a bad idea? Of course not, he doesn't need to, anyone with an understand of what he's on about is already going to know what he means. Does Jeremy Paxman need to explain WHY he thinks that the Home Secretary needs to know what the National Insurance rate is? Of course not, anyone with a rudimentary understanding of British politics will know why.

Also, I would advise you to look at what the journalists of other mediums (literature, film etc) said about the movement, it may be a much more informed opinion. Oh and you know your argument is falling foul when you appeal to people with a more limited understanding of the subject just because they agree with you.

EDIT: A very well done to the Cory and Grey, though I think this thread is proof enough that "the idiot trap" was very successful. It seems very refreshing to find that comic strip writers are willing to express their opinions undeterred by the moaning that inevitably ensues.

Are you serious? You don't even know my opinion on the subject and you've opened up with "well, your opinion is wrong." You're either a troll or narrow minded. I can't believe you have the audacity to tell me my opinion (which you don't know at this point) is wrong and therefore you must be right based on zero evidence.

Well done for being part of the problem. And for the record? I give zero fucks about the ending, I liked ME3. Just looking out for the little guy over here.

 

[Immsys]

" Every time a journalist defends the ending of Mass Effect it makes them look like an idiot. It ruined one of the best science fiction stories ever.

Really? One of the best science fiction stories EVER? In the entire of history? You must be quite the science fiction aficionado to claim to know what the best science fiction stories ever are, I mean even to be able to name one of the best science fiction stories of all time would make you an absolute master of the medium! Not to mention how you must have overcome all that business about there being no such thing as a "best" anything, because to think that something is "better" is an opinion while claiming that something is "best" would be a fact, but I'm sure you know that representing an opinion as a fact is incredibly short sighted.

Then to make matters worse you have journalists that all seem to be jumping on the band wagon of bashing gamers for this made up thing called "gamer entitlement.".We spend hundred of hours and hundreds dollars on these games. We put huge investment into these games. I think we deserve some say.

So, just to be clear: you are denying the existence of so called "gamer entitlement" while two sentences later claiming that you, as a gamer, have some entitlement? Jesus lord in heaven.

Times have changed with consumer feedback in games just as they have in journalism. We have a direct line of communication with game publishers and developers via electronic means. We can make our voice heard instead of just being a blind crash test dummy who just sits there after a game comes out whether it was good or bad. We can let the developer know whether the made a great game or screwed up and we can do it in force.

Again, you seem to be claiming some entitlement. I mean really, come on now. I really can't be the first one to tell you this, but just in case:

Let the developer know that you didn't enjoy the game (remember, calling it bad is an opinion, you want to state facts!): Great! please do, feedback can only make games better.

Asking that a game you spent money on should be changed because you personally didn't enjoy it: No, don't do that, that's a stupid idea. Games are already an investment, just like films. The reason there are many, many more obscure interesting and "cult" novels out there is because good novels generally cost relatively little to make in comparison to other mediums. Video games, films, T.V shows: all cost a lot of money in today's world. Even Indie games cost a lot more money to make than it does in paper and time for someone to write a book. Point is, since it costs so much more time and effort and equipment to make these things, people require a return of their investment in order to continue not only making these things, but also eating, paying rent and all those other fripperies.

So, the crux: If developers think that the only way to gain back an investment on something is to make it as safe, pandering and familiar as they can, in an attempt to pander to the majority, then we lose what is arguably the best that can be made. People need to know that they can take risks and be prepared to alienate a few people in an attempt to create something interesting and different free from the anger and disgust of those that they may alienate, if they feel that they have to remake everything that they try to take in a different direction because people can force them too, then they won't bother making anything new or interesting at all, will they?

What is often considered to be the many great works of literature will, I would argue, all share one common trait: None of them will be written to make money, all of them will be written because it is the story that the writers wanted to tell. It is certainly possible that the greatest novel of all time COULD be written as a cash in, yet I feel safe betting that it won't be.