If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the Forum Rules. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Welcome to RPGamer's new forums running under Vanilla Forums! If you're run into any odd or strange issues after our software migration please see this thread for details

Mass Effect 3 Ending Clarified for Free

OcelotOcelot is not declawedRPGamer Staff
edited April 2012 in Latest Updates
Electronic Arts fails to live up to its expected evilness quota with this free Extended Cut DLC for Mass Effect 3. Do not panic: we suspect this will not be a major paradigm shift for the company.
Becky Cunningham, Staff-at-Large
Twitter: BeckyCFreelance
«134

Comments

  • DarkRPGMasterDarkRPGMaster A Witness to Destruction Moderators
    edited April 2012
    I always knew that even EA knew when to cut their loses and give into fan demand. As I said in another thread, it would be a good business move to pull this off, to save the long-term profits. Now here's the real question...about how long do you think it'll take EA to make another mistake on the level of ME3's ending?
    User Database Check
    Pages cleared: 98
    Users cleared: 2940
    Current Year: 2010
    Spammer-Banning Battle Theme: You Will Know Our Names
    Number of Spammers banned: At least 2000 at this point.
  • OcelotOcelot is not declawed RPGamer Staff
    edited April 2012
    ME3's ending was all BioWare, man. Honestly, the only BioWare stuff I'd blame EA directly for are the stupid armour DLC packs for Dragon Age 2 and possibly the too-short development time for DA2 as well.
    Becky Cunningham, Staff-at-Large
    Twitter: BeckyCFreelance
  • DarkRPGMasterDarkRPGMaster A Witness to Destruction Moderators
    edited April 2012
    Unfortunately for me, I see Bioware as a part of EA at this point (since EA owns them), so I'm starting to call errors from people in Bioware on EA. Sorta like how I see Career Soft as nothing more than Atlus at this point. They've had them long enough to where I don't see the difference in calling them one name or another.
    User Database Check
    Pages cleared: 98
    Users cleared: 2940
    Current Year: 2010
    Spammer-Banning Battle Theme: You Will Know Our Names
    Number of Spammers banned: At least 2000 at this point.
  • OcelotOcelot is not declawed RPGamer Staff
    edited April 2012
    Eh, I still think BioWare is relatively autonomous. If it wasn't, we'd see a lot more EA crap jammed into Bio's games. Also, BioWare (Edmonton, at least, I don't know about the Baby Bios) is still a pretty good place to work, unlike EA Central.
    Becky Cunningham, Staff-at-Large
    Twitter: BeckyCFreelance
  • King Jowy XXIIKing Jowy XXII Regnus Obscura Full Members
    edited April 2012
    You can't listen to Casey Hudson talk now without hearing how EA has influenced his management style. He also seems to have taken a few cues from Peter Molyneux when it comes to hyping product.

    The new ending is nice, but Ocelot is right: this does not signify a change in EA's control over IPs.
  • MasterChiefMasterChief I didn't learn anything! Full Members
    edited April 2012
    Ocelot said:
    Electronic Arts fails to live up to its expected evilness quota with this free Extended Cut DLC for Mass Effect 3. Do not panic: we suspect this will not be a major paradigm shift for the company.
    This is the thing I don't get with people's hatred of EA. The Online Pass, while a poor PR move, usually doesn't lock anything of substance, usually a bonus piece of nonsense created for the purpose of the pass. At least when the game doesn't have multiplayer, which is whatevs because you kinda need to be online to play online multiplayer anyway. *Laughs*

    They've not done anything as despicable as WB holding Catwoman back.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    "What the f--- is a Shakespeare?"
    -Rico Valasquez, showing off why no one likes him.
  • King Jowy XXIIKing Jowy XXII Regnus Obscura Full Members
    edited April 2012
    MC, do you work for EA, or something? I don't think I have ever seen anyone so rigorously defend a corporate interest that was not offering them a sizable paycheck to do so.
  • MasterChiefMasterChief I didn't learn anything! Full Members
    edited April 2012
    King Jowy XXII said:
    MC, do you work for EA, or something? I don't think I have ever seen anyone so rigorously defend a corporate interest that was not offering them a sizable paycheck to do so.
    I wish. >.>; Someone gimmie moneeeeeeeeeeeeey.... :(
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    "What the f--- is a Shakespeare?"
    -Rico Valasquez, showing off why no one likes him.
  • King Jowy XXIIKing Jowy XXII Regnus Obscura Full Members
    edited April 2012
    By my estimate, they owe you big.
  • The DoomhammerThe Doomhammer Prod with the Prod Full Members
    edited April 2012
    But what could this possibly mean for the future of image?

    All I know is that I never want to read the words 'Artistic integrity' or 'entitled' ever again.
  • King Jowy XXIIKing Jowy XXII Regnus Obscura Full Members
    edited April 2012
    But...but Doomhammer...everyone is entitled to artistic integrity!

    ...especially when you strip the words of any real meaning and use them as a vehicle to convey a generic sense of contempt.
  • MasterChiefMasterChief I didn't learn anything! Full Members
    edited April 2012
    The Doomhammer said:
    But what could this possibly mean for the future of image?
    Love that pic. And I agree with you, Artistic Integrity is a hilarious concept, at least at BioWare. Now we know all we gotta do is whine hard enough and we'll get what we want.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    "What the f--- is a Shakespeare?"
    -Rico Valasquez, showing off why no one likes him.
  • TG BarighmTG Barighm Member Full Members
    edited April 2012
    Now here's the real question...about how long do you think it'll take EA to make another mistake on the level of ME3's ending?
    How long until Dragon Age 3 comes out? ;)
    Unfortunately for me, I see Bioware as a part of EA at this point (since EA owns them), so I'm starting to call errors from people in Bioware on EA
    There have been a few staff purges at Bioware in the last two years. New owners ALWAYS bring in their own people. So, yeah, I agree. Not much Bioware left at Bioware. Not like this hasn't happened a million times before.
  • King Jowy XXIIKing Jowy XXII Regnus Obscura Full Members
    edited April 2012
    MasterChief said:
    Artistic Integrity is a hilarious concept, at least at BioWare.
    The ending would have to be artistic before it could actually have any integrity. They have just as much as they did before this whole mess started. Apologists aside, I'll never understand the defense they have received from people who actually paid real money for the game.

    Anyway, if you'll excuse me, my new mashing club just arrived in the mail, and there's this rotting horse carcass that requires it's undivided attention...
  • Confessor RahlConfessor Rahl Member Full Members
    edited April 2012
    Words really can't describe how much this choice disappoints me. Completely, utterly, incomprehensibly ridiculous.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    www.powerlinemag.com

    "I remember back when FF9 was coming out. People were rejoicing because it was actually a fantasy game and not a sci-fi game like 7 and 8. It's especially hilarious given modern context, with everyone wanking themselves to dehydration at the thought of an FF7 remake." - Masterchief
  • DarkRPGMasterDarkRPGMaster A Witness to Destruction Moderators
    edited April 2012
    Confessor Rahl said:
    Words really can't describe how much this choice disappoints me. Completely, utterly, incomprehensibly ridiculous.
    Why? The fact that they're ADDING ONTO the ending, thereby not changing it and keeping their artistic integrity intact?
    User Database Check
    Pages cleared: 98
    Users cleared: 2940
    Current Year: 2010
    Spammer-Banning Battle Theme: You Will Know Our Names
    Number of Spammers banned: At least 2000 at this point.
  • Iliya MoroumetzIliya Moroumetz Member Full Members
    edited April 2012
    DarkRPGMaster said:
    Why? The fact that they're ADDING ONTO the ending, thereby not changing it and keeping their artistic integrity intact?
    Artistic integrity's a misnomer.

    In fact, there's no artistic integrity to protect. This is a product. Meant for public consumption. When the public has a problem with it. The producers of the product have a problem. And when that problem interferes with the bottom line, it results in a big problem. A problem that's best solved by making the paying customers happy they gave you their money instead of insulting them by tossing a paltry 'extension' of that turd of an ending that does nothing to assuage the reasons why people have a problem with the ending in the first place!
  • MacstormMacstorm Ysy St. Administrators
    edited April 2012
    Iliya Moroumetz said:
    instead of insulting them by tossing a paltry 'extension' of that turd of an ending that does nothing to assuage the reasons why people have a problem with the ending in the first place!
    First, in all the complaining about the ending, there has yet to be a unified voice as to why the ending was hated. Some hated the choices, some hated the content, some hated the "epilogue" and others hated a combination of all of those. They are fixing the problem I had with the ending, and I'm happy for it.
    "The universe is already mad. Anything else would be redundant."
    Twitter @FinalMacstorm
  • Iliya MoroumetzIliya Moroumetz Member Full Members
    edited April 2012
    Macstorm said:
    First, in all the complaining about the ending, there has yet to be a unified voice as to why the ending was hated. Some hated the choices, some hated the content, some hated the "epilogue" and others hated a combination of all of those. They are fixing the problem I had with the ending, and I'm happy for it.
    That's fine, however, the primary reasons you listed for the rest are all pretty much one in the same. The lack of choice, the epilogue, it was all the same; just like the endings regardless of what you were forced to 'choose'.
  • Confessor RahlConfessor Rahl Member Full Members
    edited April 2012
    DarkRPGMaster said:
    Why? The fact that they're ADDING ONTO the ending, thereby not changing it and keeping their artistic integrity intact?
    Nonsense. This is a knee jerk reaction to a bunch of whiny, entitled cry babies. It sets a precedent that if you winge loud enough, a company will balk and change a perfectly good game to suit a vocal minority. This is the silliest, most absurd thing I have ever seen in gaming. And to those who are saying Mass Effect is a product, not art... that's idiocy incarnate. End of story.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    www.powerlinemag.com

    "I remember back when FF9 was coming out. People were rejoicing because it was actually a fantasy game and not a sci-fi game like 7 and 8. It's especially hilarious given modern context, with everyone wanking themselves to dehydration at the thought of an FF7 remake." - Masterchief
  • King Jowy XXIIKing Jowy XXII Regnus Obscura Full Members
    edited April 2012
    Macstorm said:
    First, in all the complaining about the ending, there has yet to be a unified voice as to why the ending was hated.
    I think you're splitting hairs - a general sense of unhappiness with the ending can be focused on five core areas. Do ALL fans dislike each issue in the same manner? Of course not...but there is a very real and very deserved consensus that BioWare got lazy and cut corners in many ways.

    Still, I get what you are saying...there were a LOT of reasons to dislike it. There is a general sense of incompetence all over the end of the series, with sycophants tripping over themselves in a rush to defend BioWare's need to meet a deadline.

    In the end, BioWare bit off more than it could chew, and that's all there is to it.
    Confessor Rahl said:
    vocal minority
    Sorry, I just needed to quote one of the silly-williest things I have read in a long time.
  • PawsPaws Purr RPGamer Staff
    edited April 2012
    The level of civility is rapidly dropping. Let's keep it above the knees guys, thanks~
  • King Jowy XXIIKing Jowy XXII Regnus Obscura Full Members
    edited April 2012
    Cheerfully withdrawn.
  • WheelsWheels RPGamer Staff RPGamer Staff
    edited April 2012
    Confessor Rahl said:
    change a perfectly good game
    To be clear, there's no "change" here, this is add on, not too mention I think we should all wait and see exactly what it is before passing judgement on it.
  • EmeraldSuzakuEmeraldSuzaku Member Full Members
    edited April 2012
    Iliya Moroumetz said:
    Artistic integrity's a misnomer.

    In fact, there's no artistic integrity to protect. This is a product. Meant for public consumption. When the public has a problem with it. The producers of the product have a problem. And when that problem interferes with the bottom line, it results in a big problem. A problem that's best solved by making the paying customers happy they gave you their money instead of insulting them by tossing a paltry 'extension' of that turd of an ending that does nothing to assuage the reasons why people have a problem with the ending in the first place!
    Yes and no. As the creator of the work they get to end the story as they see fit. Staying true to the vision of where the story ends is artistic integrity. Whether they did that or not, of course, depends on if the so-called leaked emails of the "original ending" were true and said ending was changed after the leak. A bad ending is still an ending, though. It's possible they felt they needed a very specific ending period, which is why they neutered player choice at the end.

    Where they run into trouble that goes beyond "artistic integrity" is when they do a a bad job of executing the ending--they get the story to the point they want to, but in doing so they create a giant mechanical clusterbleep of poor form, bad composition, and horrid execution. The way I read the news is that the way the story ends will remain unchanged--all that's getting added is closure, and maybe a bit more explanation. Which is as it should be. There's no way to really justify *changing* the thing now. But they can certainly provide an extension that gives closure.

    Obviously what they're doing isn't going to please everyone, but the fact that they're doing it gets them back some of the respect they've lost, I think.
  • MasterChiefMasterChief I didn't learn anything! Full Members
    edited April 2012
    Iliya Moroumetz said:
    In fact, there's no artistic integrity to protect. This is a product. Meant for public consumption. When the public has a problem with it. The producers of the product have a problem.
    [QUOTE= Brendan Sinclair ‏ @BrendanSinclair]So if the government comes knocking, games are art. But when we hate the ending, they're products and the customer is always right. Got it.

    [QUOTE=Kevin VanOrd ‏@fiddlecub]The Internet accused Bioware of selling out. Then, it demanded Bioware sell out. Congratulations, Internet: you got what you wanted.

    Sorry, but no. This is clearly an artistic endeavor, however competent or not it may be. We're not talking about socks or potatoes or anything like that, but a story that took years to complete and probably would have turned out crap from start to finish if it weren't for a vision. That BioWare is basically bending over is saddening, and only serves to reinforce the feelings of entitlement by a loud, whiny few whenever they dislike a game's ending.

    Personally, ME3 itself isn't the issue. It's what happens after. Will there be campaigns for every game whose ending the internet dislikes? If so, then bring on the government, because these things have no meaning anymore.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    "What the f--- is a Shakespeare?"
    -Rico Valasquez, showing off why no one likes him.
  • RebochanRebochan Who needs Rinoa anyway? Full Members
    edited April 2012
    Look, I'll wade in and say this - the "entitlement" argument goes out the window when BioWare ended the game by, literally, putting their hand out and asking the player to continue investing in the game via DLC. Fans are NOT obligated to spend money on anything they don't want. So they very loudly and clearly stated that the only DLC they intend to buy is a new or clarified ending. In other words, they're doing EXACTLY what a customer is supposed to do - voting with their dollars. Plus, BioWare deliberately cultivated a fanbase that they kept swearing up and down was part of the process, so of COURSE they feel like they have a say when they really don't like something. If they don't want that reaction, they need to watch how they market their stuff (and how they market their stuff is another problem they have right now...)

    All this ending backlash shows is that if you expect to keep monetizing your $60-$80 title, you cannot cut corners at the last minute and then expect the cash flow to continue. EA's plunging stock price probably did a lot more to make this happen than any "fan entitlement" - they completely failed to take into account how the PR of a rushed product would affect their press, and the non-gaming press has been having a field day with it. In other words, the press their investors actually read. Considering that at this point, they're probably losing money because they have to do this new DLC for free instead of moving on to the paid content they expected, I imagine any gains they expected to have by making the game ship in March have been either lost entirely or severely reduced.

    Normally I roll my eyes at stuff like Retake Mass Effect, but this time, I'm pretty much on their side (except for the FTC guy or the guys trying to take back their Child's Play donations :P). Someone on the other side really dropped the ball, and it's not "voiding artistic integrity" to ask them to use their own preferred format of content delivery to try and fix it. Movies, books, and other video games have reshot, rewritten, and re-patched bad endings in the past. There's is no "precedent" being set, only precedent followed.
    "One original thought is worth a thousand mindless quotings." -- Diogenes
  • DarkRPGMasterDarkRPGMaster A Witness to Destruction Moderators
    edited April 2012
    Confessor Rahl said:
    Nonsense. This is a knee jerk reaction to a bunch of whiny, entitled cry babies. It sets a precedent that if you winge loud enough, a company will balk and change a perfectly good game to suit a vocal minority. This is the silliest, most absurd thing I have ever seen in gaming. And to those who are saying Mass Effect is a product, not art... that's idiocy incarnate. End of story.
    To be honest, I have to know, how do you tell what is a vocal minority and what isn't when it comes to a game this big? For all we know the people complaining could have been the vocal majority. By the way, I think your argument for setting a precedent to changing the game to suit a vocal minority died years ago, when DLC was first introduced in the gaming market.
    User Database Check
    Pages cleared: 98
    Users cleared: 2940
    Current Year: 2010
    Spammer-Banning Battle Theme: You Will Know Our Names
    Number of Spammers banned: At least 2000 at this point.
  • FrozenbabylonFrozenbabylon POW! Full Members
    edited April 2012
    I'm really sad about how utterly meaningless this is for Bioware to actually do. Really. Bioware actually came to the call and said, look, we know that you have issues with what we did, we're going to clarify and extend the whole thing for free. And it's just not good enough. No matter what they do, it won't be good enough. Because some a-hole on the internet is always going to complain because he can and other internet jackasses are going to listen to him and cheer him on because, for some reason that's beyond me, that they think the game was made entirely just for them.

    One day, I hope one of you puts out a work of art, A book, A movie, A game, whatever... and some other internet toolbox comes around and says he doesn't like it and you have to change it because it bothered somebody and other people jumped on the bandwagon. See how you like it then.

    Maybe it is following precedent, Maybe you are right about that. But think about this for a moment, Ridley Scott wanted to change the ending and editing of Blade Runner. That was his prerogative. He wasn't influenced by anything but his artistic discretion to do so and it made the movie better by a hundred fold. That same director came out against a recently (at the time) released edition of Alien to say that the new director's cut was simply a marketing ploy, that the original theatrical version was actually his artistic vision. Two movies by the same man getting the same treatment and yet, he felt like the editing done to Alien was `design by committee` and marketing ploy and was worse off because of it. It was out of his hands, much like I think that this whole `Extended Cut` is out of Bioware's hands. And I believe that whatever artistic vision was there will be all the worse for it.

    Just because there is a precedent there, doesn't mean it's a good thing and that you have to follow it.

    However, I wash my hands of this whole thing... I love Mass Effect. I love the universe. I love the games. I love the books. I love everything about it and there's not one damn thing that I'd change and there's not one person or one word out there that can make me feel otherwise. I had no problem with the ending of the game because the entire game was an ending. But, in the end, I'm done talking about it. While there isn't a thing that could convince me otherwise, there isn't a thing that could convince the detractors otherwise either.
  • RebochanRebochan Who needs Rinoa anyway? Full Members
    edited April 2012
    Frozenbabylon said:
    One day, I hope one of you puts out a work of art, A book, A movie, A game, whatever... and some other internet toolbox comes around and says he doesn't like it and you have to change it because it bothered somebody and other people jumped on the bandwagon. See how you like it then.
    Right, well, first off - I have put out works of art for years, some for fun, some commercial. Sometimes I get praise, sometimes I get torn a new one. I am amused that there is a subtle implication that clearly nobody leveling these complaints understands ART. I have little patience for creators with thin skins, so I personally try to learn from it.

    Second? If I wrote a work that pissed off such a large part of my loyal fanbase to such an extent? I would rectify it. You are NOTHING without your fans, and if they were so invested in my works to come back over and over...and then actually ask me to create MORE work to fix a problem instead of abandoning me entirely? I think they deserve it. Many of the fans were actually willing to pay for more DLC to correct the issue. That's right - they were going to fork over MORE money to show BioWare that they still believed in Mass Effect and BioWare's ability to deliver on it.

    Oh, and as a creator, I believe it's my job to make sure what I'm turning out is my BEST work, not what I threw together at the last minute to meet a financial deadline. Because people can spot a rushed work a mile away and it costs you both your reputation and your livelihood in the long-term even if the short-term gain is good. Especially if my intent is for those very people I'm creating the work for to continue funding it in the immediate future.
    Maybe it is following precedent, Maybe you are right about that. But think about this for a moment, Ridley Scott wanted to change the ending and editing of Blade Runner. That was his prerogative. He wasn't influenced by anything but his artistic discretion to do so and it made the movie better by a hundred fold. That same director came out against a recently (at the time) released edition of Alien to say that the new director's cut was simply a marketing ploy, that the original theatrical version was actually his artistic vision. Two movies by the same man getting the same treatment and yet, he felt like the editing done to Alien was `design by committee` and marketing ploy and was worse off because of it. It was out of his hands, much like I think that this whole `Extended Cut` is out of Bioware's hands. And I believe that whatever artistic vision was there will be all the worse for it.
    And contrariwise, Bethesda rewrote the ending of Fallout 3 to address the poor quality of the initial release. Nobody claimed "artistic vision" then. Hell, even Mark Meer, who's been the voice of Commander Shepherd since this entire journey began, pointed out there was precedent in that. Ubisoft similarly expanded upon the rather unpopular ending of Prince of Persia (the 2008 one) in response to bad feedback.

    And going way back, Charles Dickens rewrote the ending of what is now considered his finest work, Great Expectations, because of feedback that it was awful.

    Sorry, it is just as much the artist's prerogative to decide feedback from his readers can affect his work as it is his prerogative to blow them off. I don't see why accepting criticism and actually being given the chance to correct it ruins "artistic vision", but it's clear nobody using the term in this debate to deride people actually understands what that means. I can guarantee Uwe Boll has "artistic vision", but I doubt any of us would be appalled if he actually listened to feedback and tried making a GOOD movie.
    "One original thought is worth a thousand mindless quotings." -- Diogenes
Sign In or Register to comment.