Who Really Owns Mass Effect 3?

RaNDM G

New member
Apr 28, 2009
6,044
0
0
KingsGambit said:
RaNDM G said:
The intellectual property always belongs to the publisher. BioWare makes the games, but EA has the final say in all things.

Why does there have to be a discussion about this? It's a simple fact.
There has to be because of how badly the ending was cocked up. We're not talking about the IP here. The points are creative control vs. player-driven narrative and such a badly thought out mechanic. The premise, if you re-read the article, is that as players, we've guided the story/movie the entire time until that point and are then left without suitable options, reward or closure. THAT is a simple fact.
It's a ploy by EA and BioWare's writers to set-up future DLC expansions, like I said in the rest of my post you so diligently failed to mention. BioWare practically admits that right at the end of the game.



It's a marketing ploy. They're basically saying this:

"Hated the ending of Mass Effect 3? 1200 Microsoft points gives you an extended final mission lasting a WHOOPING [insert number of hours here]! Also comes with [insert complimentary in-game item(s) here] as well as [new multiplayer game mode(s) here]!"
The real problem is that this ploy is going to work. EA is going to make bank from gamers wanting a satisfying ending for Mass Effect 3. They will pay any amount of money to get that contrived ending out of their heads, which is the dickiest move of all.

I'm not even sure that's a real word. I'm kinda surprised it's in the dictionary.

Also, you messed up that second quote.

RaNDM G said:
This is exactly the destroy option.
@Nimcha wrote that. Not me. Just want to make that clear.

mfeff said:
Excellent article, shame it has so few hits and or comments. I wonder how long this kind of "honest opinion" will last?

Integrity, is generally not conductive to prospering.

Had "this game" been any other game, it would of been just another game. The fact of the matter is, the real value is in the I.P. That all aside, clearly the I.P. belongs to the Publisher and Developer and how they choose to handle their product is clearly up to them.

Questionable or not, clearly ME 3 "strikes" one, upon a detailed introspection to be a mediocre "pump and dump". Perhaps as a cash infusion? Who knows... Moving away from a single player narrative was the idea all along, but this presents some interesting problems in an already crowed FPS market place.

Bioware as a brand, has demonstrably taken a black eye from this.

Mass Effect as a franchise, is a wait and see, if the DLC moves, it's all ok one supposes... if it doesn't perhaps a lesson learned... (again), about cannon alterations and "artistic visions".

At 70 plus percent sell through being on the x-box, maybe the gamble will pay off? (Shrug).

Ultimately, it is all about money. That is what the real score is kept in.

Concluding, humorously... who owns this?



A sea of lazy.
Glad to see someone shares my opinion.

It's a desktop landscape wallpaper called winter_snow_tree_fantasy. I bet they picked it because it's the first thing that showed up on Google.

Using stock photos without Photoshop. It doesn't get cheaper than that.
 

PurePareidolia

New member
Nov 26, 2008
354
0
0
Nimcha said:
This is exactly the destroy option. You could also choose not to believe the Catalyst, do nothing and watch galactic society being wiped out by the Reapers. I don't think I have to explain why this was not an option.
I disagree. If the reapers wipe out society, the mass relays survive, the cycle continues and civilization will rise once more. It will also have Liara's messages to help it. As opposed to the relays being obliterated, everyone dying anyway of starvation, infighting or vaporisation, and every system with a relay in it being disintegrated by the resultant explosions including most of the home worlds. Any of the choices Shepard is given must obliterate significant chunks of the galaxy, ruin the potential for a galactic civilization unless the survivors build their own relays (this could take millenia) and kill most of its advanced life anyway, making the reapers the superior option. On the one hand, everyone you now and care about dies (this will happen regardless), on the other, there's actually hope for the future of the galaxy.
 

Lord Doomhammer

New member
Mar 20, 2021
430
0
0
Country
United States
I'm not gonna dive into the war that seems to be in progress in this thread...

But I do want to give the author of this article MAD PROPS for such a well articulated explanation as to why so much of the Mass Effect player base is unsatisfied with the current ending.
 

FedericoV

New member
Apr 17, 2011
34
0
0
Great article. I agree completely and there's nothing to add.

I just ask one thing that should be edited in the current endings: no Casper the ghost and no heavy exposition. Put Harbinger in the place of Casper and show us (don't tell us) the history of the Reapers.
 

Dennis Scimeca

New member
Mar 29, 2010
217
0
0
Dennis Scimeca said:
Who Really Owns Mass Effect 3?

The ownership of a story belongs to its editor, as well.

Read Full Article
Bravo, it's nice to see a balanced and well thought out argument regarding the ME3 ending which doesn't require bring up "art" to validate their claims. It's been very worrying seeing people at various points online who have essentially dismissed anyone against Bioware and the ending as entitled pricks with no input whatsoever and trying to use "Games as Art" as the excuse for why an ending which is been shown to be confusing, filled with plot holes and makes all those hours spent pointless; is perfectly acceptable. Especially if they have not finished the ending...

I agree with the notion that while completely retconning the ending would require quite the hours and manpower and would be far too costly, opening the ending up to other options which keep it intact but better reflect the decisions you make and the impact you have had to bring your own personal story and narrative to a natural conclusion makes far more sense. Bioware get to keep their ending but then can actually deliver on those promises on many different endings and not taking the control the player had during the game out of their hands. I could happily tolerate that bloody Starchild if my Shepard had the option to call him out on his stupid ideas by pointing out examples like EDI and the Quarians/Geth and then saying that he will make his own choice.

However, as people have pointed out, that nice little note after the credits pretty much gives away the game. If we get DLC it's bound to make EA/Bioware huge sums of money due to the amount of unhappy voices. They have essentially played us all =/ and the fact is, people will buy it so they can give their Shepard the conclusion they feel is worthy of the games and their decisions. By taking away the very thing that has been emphasized since the games began, choices and player driven narrative. People are going to declare war, and EA profit from it.

So a great article, well written and said.
 

Grey Day for Elcia

New member
Jan 15, 2012
1,773
0
0
It's a product. They made it and they offer it for a price. You can choose to purchase it in exchange for money, or you can choose not to.

Where the hell did this entitled notion come from? I don't care how invested in the universe you are. They owe you NOTHING and they can make the game however the hell they want.

/rant
 

mfeff

New member
Nov 8, 2010
284
0
0
RaNDM G said:
snippity snip
The only DLC that was "planned" as a scam was the Prothean...

The other DLC were content crap that was already in the works, there is "NO" alternate ending incoming, or coming, or anything. May as well just forget that.

Bioware EA, are spending a tremendous amount of money to "re-spin" this situation into some more manageable, but it will probably come down to what happens at PAX, as that is a public event.

Thing it, clearly it is cheaper to buy the integrity of the journalist for video games, slap youtube accounts for copyright claims, and firewall the staff; than it is to "Re-take" the game... which would cost even more, and admit "wrongdoing" that shit... isn't going to happen.

These are products, they happen to be "artistic" sometimes, but they are industrially designed... and the "art side" is emergent.

Bioware has great PR, and sold a blue square as a Picasso, using a philosophy paper and nonsense... lesson learned.
 

Rainboq

New member
Nov 19, 2009
16,620
0
0
Nimcha said:
Crimson_Dragoon said:
Both will destroy the mass relays (and yes, this is not explained properly)
No, but it does make sense. In order to be completely free from the Reapers, all Reaper technology must be destroyed. The galaxy must be given a chance to advance to that level on its own.
I'm sorry, but that's just poppycock. WHY THE HELL WOULD WE NEED TO DESTROY THE MASS RELAYS? Without them, just about every colony is going to be without all but the most basic supplies, galactic supply and lines of communications would be GONE and galactic civilization would crumble. Not to mention the fleets around earth, probably scrambling to find suitable areas to resupply and refuel or colonize before they starve/suffocate in space.

I do agree this point should probably have been elaborated on by the Catalyst. While it doesn't really make a difference as to what choice Shepard makes, it does provide more insight and could've added more weight to the decision.
Coming soon, for only 1200 microsoft points!
 

Dennis Scimeca

New member
Mar 29, 2010
217
0
0
And remember guys, destroying a Mass Relay destroys the system it's in! Not to mention that Joker is apparently now a coward who can swiftly teleport up all your allies and abandon you to die. Plus the Krogan can't rebuild Tuchanka, the Geth/Quarians can never rebuild Rannoch, etc.

I could happily endure the notion of the Starchild, even those three "endings" we got if they were not the only ones we could pick, and ones that kept the story intact. The fact is that we were lied to by Bioware, that it completely threw away everything you had been working towards and derailed the series like that. While games can be considered art, art is also a very subjective trope and open to interpretation. Personally I find it hard to interpret something that completely disregards the entire point of the series and makes no sense, ergo I find it difficult to call it art.
 

RaNDM G

New member
Apr 28, 2009
6,044
0
0
mfeff said:
The only DLC that was "planned" as a scam was the Prothean...
I'm willing to believe that as optional. The whole Prothean side-quest isn't necessary in the final game, and I think having a Prothean squadmate detracts from the experience. The quest doesn't add much backstory to the game and Javik doesn't provide much help aside from being a hired gun. He practically admits he's got nothing to live for and will kill himself at the end of the game. You might as well shoot him the first time you see him.

You may send all of your hatemail to [email protected]
 

Darkmantle

New member
Oct 30, 2011
1,031
0
0
SirBryghtside said:
I always found this kind of funny.

"Well SCREW YOU STARKID! I DON'T AGREE WITH ANY OF YOUR OPTIONS, BECAUSE I'M COMMANDER BADASS SHEPARD AND I DO WHATEVER I WANT!"

"Um... okay. Are you... are you sure you don't want to pick any of the options?"

"YEAH!"

"So what are you planning on doing?"

"I'LL SHOOT YOU IN THE HEAD!"

"I'm a ghost, Shepard."

"WELL, THEN... I'll... um... I'LL KILL ALL THE REAPERS WITHOUT YOU!"

"...yeah, good luck with that. I'm sure you have a snowball's chance in hell. Bye, then!"

Come on, the 'Shepard tries to fight the catalyst' idea makes even less sense than the current ending.
Well if you want to theory craft the ending how about this one.

"you cannot defeat the reapers Shepard, your defeat is inevitable."

Shepard: looks slowly towards the catalysts and says in an even tone "Just watch me"


If you want a real life version of how this went down, here you go
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Trudeau#October_Crisis

and, even if Shepard's forces are defeated, It could easily be turned into a pyrrhic victory for the reapers, for example shepard could say, "you and your reapers may have won here, but my fleet has taken out dozens upon dozens of your ships. The next cycle will build off of our victory and destroy dozens more, and so it will continue until you are wiped from the galaxy/ I may not have beat you here, but I have laid the foundation for your defeat"

cue Shepard being obliterated by a reaper or something.


damn, my first draft sounds better than all of bioware's endings.

EDIT: or hey, if you want an ULTRA downer ending, say if renegade shepard here has low war assets, have his fleet get it's balls rocked, and have shepard say something to the effect of, "we may have lost, but we decided how this was going to end not you" kinda like a last moment of defiance against the inevitable.

BOOM two well written endings, first draft! I like this sort of thing :)

EDIT2: fuck at this rate I might as well stop playing JUST before the catalyst and invent my own personal canon. :)I'm a big dnd player, sorry.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
endtherapture said:
Finally, a games journalist who understands the issue with the ending and doesn't babble on about "art".

You deserve a cupcake.
Well, yes and no. He does do a better job of discussing the ending itself, but this is a big deal because it's about more than that. The stuff *surrounding* the ending, such as the promises made by Bioware, and what was revealed in the interviews from that $3 app (which has it's own thread here on The Escapist, or did) contributed as well, as did the attitudes of most of the people covering this for the gaming media who were highly insulting towards those making the complaints to put it mildly.

I think to really be accurate in an analysis of this you need someone who is really willing to point a finger at EA/Bioware for the things going on around the ending, probably going back as far as "Dragon Age 2" to really capture the essence of it, and why people are so angry in this case.

Granted, an ending this sucktastic is an achievement all on it's own, most bad endings have people going "meh" or "I would have done things better" and don't wind up being reviled by everyone to this point. But even so the sheer level of anger and bile is because while this was a trigger, it's really about a lot of things besides the ending.

Truthfully I predicted an explosion last year when DA2 came out, saying that I expected something to happen with ME3. I did not think the ending was where the line was going to be drawn though, even if I was pretty confident something was going to happen.

I also think a point reviewers and other article writers need to consider, and own up to when it comes to the questioning of scores in some cases, is that "Mass Effect 3" is kind of a dog when it comes to it's writing to begin with. The ending was just so bad that it eclipsed the rest of the game and it's problems. Effectively countering claims that it deserved a high review "for being great up until the last 5 minutes". For example "Kai Leng" and all the stuff surrounding him (JRPG auto-winning cut scenes, and of course him not fitting the setting at all, starting with his costume) has generated it's own "this sucks hard" following which illustrates problems with the writing to begin with. Ultimatly Mass Effect 3 failed not just in the writing of it's ending, but for the ending of Act 2.. and really pretty much every scene Leng was involved in just on the merits of him being such a totally abysmal character. Mass Effect 3 did more to create a divide where "cut scene Shepard" and "gameplay Shepard" exist in what amounts in totally seperate realities than
ever before... and that's NOT a good thing for a game that is supposed to be lionizing it's writing and how well intergrated it is with the gameplay.

Or in short, while this article is better than most, and it's refreshing to see a pro-protester type slant for once in an article, I don't think it quite goes far enough or really digs into the meat of the situation.
 

mfeff

New member
Nov 8, 2010
284
0
0
RaNDM G said:
mfeff said:
The only DLC that was "planned" as a scam was the Prothean...
I'm willing to believe that as optional. The whole Prothean side-quest isn't necessary in the final game, and I think having a Prothean squadmate detracts from the experience. The quest doesn't add much backstory to the game and Javik doesn't provide much help aside from being a hired gun. He practically admits he's got nothing to live for and will kill himself at the end of the game. You might as well shoot him the first time you see him.

You may send all of your hatemail to [email protected]
Which is fine, assuming that the Prothean as the DLC was intentional from a design standpoint, and not "removed" later at the behest of someone higher up in the chain.

If that where the case, then the systemic "break" of the games narrative would be catastrophic, as the game has to be "functionally coherent" (cough) without him. As it stands, it is "out of place" without him around. How much is there, how much is taken out?

Ultimately he comes off as pointless. That... is a problem in a character driven narrative.

Though it was just another completely missed opportunity.

P.S. ME3 writing is poor.
 

TheCaptain

A Guy In A Hat
Feb 7, 2012
391
0
0
This, sir, is by far the most reasonable article ever. For the first time since this started I feel my position being taken seriously.

Thanks for that.
 

Aisaku

New member
Jul 9, 2010
445
0
0
Dennis Scimeca said:
Who Really Owns Mass Effect 3?

The ownership of a story belongs to its editor, as well.

Read Full Article
I'm surprised the author glossed over the PR fallout over this. Yes, these are the points the Retake Movement tries to make, but what about the realities from the developer and publisher side?
 

RaNDM G

New member
Apr 28, 2009
6,044
0
0
mfeff said:
RaNDM G said:
mfeff said:
The only DLC that was "planned" as a scam was the Prothean...
I'm willing to believe that as optional. The whole Prothean side-quest isn't necessary in the final game, and I think having a Prothean squadmate detracts from the experience. The quest doesn't add much backstory to the game and Javik doesn't provide much help aside from being a hired gun. He practically admits he's got nothing to live for and will kill himself at the end of the game. You might as well shoot him the first time you see him.

You may send all of your hatemail to [email protected]
Which is fine, assuming that the Prothean as the DLC was intentional from a design standpoint, and not "removed" later at the behest of someone higher up in the chain.

If that where the case, then the systemic "break" of the games narrative would be catastrophic, as the game has to be "functionally coherent" (cough) without him. As it stands, it is "out of place" without him around. How much is there, how much is taken out?

Ultimately he comes off as pointless. That... is a problem in a character driven narrative.

Though it was just another completely missed opportunity.

P.S. ME3 writing is poor.
True that.
 

Dennis Scimeca

New member
Mar 29, 2010
217
0
0
I'm glad to see so many comments from people who feel their point of view has been legitimized here. My biggest issue with the discussion of Mass Effect 3's ending in the press so far has been the outright dismissal of negative fan reaction. If someone doesn't want to try to understand the narrative issues with the ending that's fine, but then I think admitting ignorance and/or disinterest in investigating the question is the proper course of action, versus mocking the people who *do* care.

But hey, that's just me. :)
 

370999

New member
May 17, 2010
1,107
0
0
Dennis Scimeca said:
I'm glad to see so many comments from people who feel their point of view has been legitimized here. My biggest issue with the discussion of Mass Effect 3's ending in the press so far has been the outright dismissal of negative fan reaction. If someone doesn't want to try to understand the narrative issues with the ending that's fine, but then I think admitting ignorance and/or disinterest in investigating the question is the proper course of action, versus mocking the people who *do* care.

But hey, that's just me. :)
God yes. I think it's fine to either not be interested in the topic or to have an opinion without much information to go on, that's fine. But if you are going to produce content then you damm well better at least educate yourself.

Just squawking the word "precedent" over and over is not an argument.
 

Alexnader

$20 For Steve
May 18, 2009
526
0
0
mfeff said:
Excellent article, shame it has so few hits and or comments. I wonder how long this kind of "honest opinion" will last?

Integrity, is generally not conductive to prospering.

Had "this game" been any other game, it would of been just another game. The fact of the matter is, the real value is in the I.P. That all aside, clearly the I.P. belongs to the Publisher and Developer and how they choose to handle their product is clearly up to them.

snip
Ownership of the IP gives us the concrete answer to the question of who legally owns the ending. That's it. That in my opinion does not work to the exclusion of any more artistic interpretations of ownership.

I don't think anyone actually thinks the players have the legal right to get a different ending.
 

008Zulu_v1legacy

New member
Sep 6, 2009
6,019
0
0
I think we the fans have a partial ownership of the franchise, ever since the end of Mass Effect 1 when they started listening to our input and using our suggestions and ideas did we become part owners of it. So if we don't like something in it, then as part owners we have the right to effect change.

If they had ignored us and made the game without any community input, then I would be the first in line to say "You had no part in it, you don't get a say."