[Marquis T]

That doesn't only makes ME3 to end bad.It makes it so any motives the player could have to replay through the trilogy are gone.
ME3's ending had an effect to the other games of the franchise too,in ME1 and ME2,because now you know that no matter what you do in these games,it is all futile and pointless.

Well it's kinda similar to Morrowind. Within a century after the game takes place the entire province

Spoiler

will be destroyed in a volcanic explosion.

Which makes the majority of the things you do in that game pointless in a sense.

[amhain]

Well it's kinda similar to Morrowind. Within a century after the game takes place the entire province

Spoiler

will be destroyed in a volcanic explosion.

Which makes the majority of the things you do in that game pointless in a sense.

Well it's kinda similar to Morrowind. Within a century after the game takes place the entire province

Spoiler

will be destroyed in a volcanic explosion.

Which makes the majority of the things you do in that game pointless in a sense.

Yep,that's true.
But you know what ?
At least each Elder Scrolls game has its own story,with each own hero,characters,and plot.
But in Mass Effect you play with the same hero,you meet the same faces,organizations and all the games of the series follow the same plot. And also don't forget that ME3 has lots of plot holes and doesn't respect the estabilished lore,it's that bad.

Let me give you an example using the Elder Scrolls series to let you have a better picture of how bad it is:
Imagine that you play Skyrim and want to kill Alduin. When you go to Sovngarde,Alduin talks to you and tells you that it's time to learn the truth.He then does some kind of magic and you see your dovakin in a new place so weird and so disrespecting to the lore,in a human like lab of the 21st century,full with computers... You wake up in a bed having cables attached to your body,and you find out that the person that awakes to the next bed of yours is... Alduin who was actually a human that was impersonating Alduin.
Then he turns to you and tells you that there is no Nirn,and that Nirn is a virtual world made by scientists in some lab,and that you wher e in this experiment and that the reason you don't remember anything is because you had amnesia.. And then the scientists tell you that the world they build wasn't good enough,and thus they delete it (The whole universe of The Elder Scrolls) from their hard drive.


If Skyrim had an ending like that that just breaks lore and makes no sense,and ends up with the universe being f@cked up,would you then want to play Morrowind,Oblivion or Skyrim the same way you did until that time ?

[Nadia Nad]

I would say that Bethesda's admittance of having they put fun and exploration immediately before canon and lore is a serious crime, particuarly when it wasn't their series. Consiously bending someone else's work to suit your forte in total disregard of the rest of the series is a serious crime.

Bethesda may have changed some of the lore but FO3 still felt like Fallout, the changes they made to make DC work as an environ in FO3 aren't franchised destroying.

Though our inability to kick a rat in the groin... thats serious.

Anyways...

With the departure of many of BWs "old guard" writers/producers I am starting to worry about the quality we can expect from them. Mac Walters was lead on DA2 and ME3, he has become their new go to guy with Drew Karpyshyn gone, but in both games it seems he is far more obsessed with trying to be clever than constructing a solid narrative.

I mean it would be hard for me to say "I am not buying another bioware game evar!", but at this point I can't see myself getting excited about their next product until after its out and reading about it from other gamers. This whole Retake Mass Effect thing has me convinced that most (if not all) the gaming review sites are corporate shills. I mean it has was Forbes who addressed the ending first and without bias, it seems the most balanced takes on the situation have come from outside the gaming community.

Though some gaming sites (like joystiq) aren't getting involved, which gives credence to the idea that they are afraid to give games like this a poor review in fear of retribution from publishers down the line.

Edit: @puvoholo, but isn't the Neveraine still alive and kicking?

[Rachie Stout]

Well it's kinda similar to Morrowind. Within a century after the game takes place the entire province

Spoiler

will be destroyed in a volcanic explosion.

Which makes the majority of the things you do in that game pointless in a sense.

It's different in the sense that the event that "undoes" your actions happens a century down the line and isn't directly your doing. Other [censored] is always going to happen. That doesn't mean preventing the [censored] happening now is pointless. It'd be more like if the only way to defeat Dagoth Ur was to detonate Red Mountain, killing huge swaths of the population in the process, and then for some reason every single race became stranded in their own provinces with no means of contacting or reaching the others.

The problem is in the immediacy of the ending consequences. Would there be nearly as much of an outcry if a year later Bioware announced Mass Effect 4: "After the defeat of the Reapers, all reaper tech in the galaxy is slowly falling into disrepair. Faced with the loss of the interstellar travel network and a new, foreign threat, can you save the people of the galaxy, etc etc." That's not what happens though. Moments after solving every significant political and ethnic sturggle in the galaxy, we are forced to do something that renders it entirely irrelevant.

[michael flanigan]

It's different in the sense that the event that "undoes" your actions happens a century down the line and isn't directly your doing. Other [censored] is always going to happen. That doesn't mean preventing the [censored] happening now is pointless. It'd be more like if the only way to defeat Dagoth Ur was to detonate Red Mountain, killing huge swaths of the population in the process, and then for some reason every single race became stranded in their own provinces with no means of contacting or reaching the others.

The problem is in the immediacy of the ending consequences. Would there be nearly as much of an outcry if a year later Bioware announced Mass Effect 4: "After the defeat of the Reapers, all reaper tech in the galaxy is slowly falling into disrepair. Faced with the loss of the interstellar travel network and a new, foreign threat, can you save the people of the galaxy, etc etc." That's not what happens though. Moments after solving every significant political and ethnic sturggle in the galaxy, we are forced to do something that renders it entirely irrelevant.

It actually happens shortly after the Oblivion Crisis- which means within a decade after Morrowind.

Plus, it IS a direct consequence of the Nerevarine freeing the Heart, because without the Heart Vivec could not hold the Ministry of Truth aloft, and its fall caused the eruption.

That said, the comparison isn't a very good one. You have no 'choice' in Morrowind. You 'choose' to follow the main quest, but the main quest itself is fairly linear.

Morrowind is very much about experiencing a story and filling in the gaps in your head (why would my thief want to save the world, etc.). Mass Effect has always been about following the story and making decisions that have dramatic impacts. So naturally people are very much angered that in the end, their decisions, the entire marketing hype around the game, boils down to nothing.

I, personally, am fine with the Mass Relays getting blown up. I agree the ending SHOULD be bittersweet. But it should end with resolution, not opening more questions.

[Dawn Porter]

It actually happens shortly after the Oblivion Crisis- which means within a decade after Morrowind.

Plus, it IS a direct consequence of the Nerevarine freeing the Heart, because without the Heart Vivec could not hold the Ministry of Truth aloft, and its fall caused the eruption.

Was this from one of the books? I've not read them. What I've seen is that Vivec vanished and then they tried building some machine to keep the Ministry aloft, but that didn't work. I think it's hard to make the claim that it was a direct consequence of the Nerevarine when other solutions existed, but failed for unrelated reasons. In Mass Effect, the relays explode directly because of what you do, no matter what.

In any case, the destruction of Red Mountain and displacement of the Dunmer has no where near the sweeping consequences the destruction of the relays has. The former is more in line with losing a single planet. The latter means there can be no significant interstellar travel, many worlds will be left stranded without necessary resources, that massive galactic fleet is stuck orbiting Earth. It'd be like if the entire Imperial Army was stuck on a rock surrounded by lava in Morrowind with no means of ever leaving.

[QuinDINGDONGcey]

Uh huh. So many people were "done with them after ME2", then "Bioware is dead to mafter DA2", then it was "after ME3 im done with them".

I bet most people will go back to them eventully.
I havent touched their games since ME2, I actually dont even care about them anymore (I dont even hate them now). Im only watching these threads becuse the trainwreck is entertaining.

Vometia, Marauder shields is your salvation through destruction.

I don't go back to DA2. I played it for one-and-a-half playthroughs to justify my future hate and I was right: it svcks ass and I never touched the game again.

I'm not done with ME though. Despite the crappy ending the series is otherwise awesome from A to Z (well, X) and there is hope of a correcting DLC, price tag or no.

[Gwen]

We've made the http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17444719. Haven't had time to actually read the article yet, but huzzah for me. We've some so far from being some upstart little rebel scum. Hold the line.

I'll just quote one of the comments to that article:

As a game developer (programmer - not at Bioware) I find this story hilarious. Good to hear that they raised money for charity, but people really should put their energies towards worthwhile causes... not the fact they don't like the ending of a video game!

I agree.

[Ian White]

I agree.

But aren't they putting their energies TOWARDS a worthwhile cause? I don't see how charity can be called a 'useless cause', regardless of why they are donating.

[Tanya]

But aren't they putting their energies TOWARDS a worthwhile cause? I don't see how charity can be called a 'useless cause', regardless of why they are donating.

No, they're giving money to a worthwhile cause. Their energy is going toward getting new ME3 endings.

[Patrick Gordon]

No, they're giving money to a worthwhile cause. Their energy is going toward getting new ME3 endings.

It is a good cause. Donating to charity. Just because we can simultaneously work on a "worthless" cause at the same time seems to make peoples brains explode. They just don't get it. But any publicity is good publicity, our numbers are swiftly growing and hopefully our critics will be silenced when we get the ending that makes sense.

[Francesca]

But aren't they putting their energies TOWARDS a worthwhile cause? I don't see how charity can be called a 'useless cause', regardless of why they are donating.

Yeah, I found that comment really strange. "It's good to hear their supporting a worthwhile cause, but people should really put their energies towards worthwhile causes."

It also really bothers me when somebody says someone else isn't doing enough good. Like I can only only care about something if it meets somebody else's criteria. Or that if I care about one thing that means I'm unable to care about others in an equal or greater capacity. It's good to hear that you're posting comments to BBC news articles on video game controversy, but maybe you should put your energy toward worthwhile causes...

[Jesus Sanchez]

It is a good cause. Donating to charity. Just because we can simultaneously work on a "worthless" cause at the same time seems to make peoples brains explode. They just don't get it. But any publicity is good publicity, our numbers are swiftly growing and hopefully our critics will be silenced when we get the ending that makes sense.

No, your critics will be wondering why you can't be arsed to put this much effort into helping homeless people or sorting out drugs and gang violence or... To watch this much effort go toward a video game, and then think of all the other problems there are... It's just stupefying that people put so much effort toward a piece of (let's face it: B-grade) entertainment. Humans: we are... funny little creatures.

[clelia vega]

Yeah, I found that comment really strange. "It's good to hear their supporting a worthwhile cause, but people should really put their energies towards worthwhile causes."

It also really bothers me when somebody says someone else isn't doing enough good. Like I can only only care about something if it meets somebody else's criteria. Or that if I care about one thing that means I'm unable to care about others in an equal or greater capacity. It's good to hear that you're posting comments to BBC news articles on video game controversy, but maybe you should put your energy toward worthwhile causes...

Except he's not going about claiming that his posting on a BBC article about video games is a worthwhile cause.

[Sian Ennis]

No, your critics will be wondering why you can't be arsed to put this much effort into helping homeless people or sorting out drugs and gang violence or... To watch this much effort go toward a video game, and then think of all the other problems there are... It's just stupefying that people put so much effort toward a piece of (let's face it: B-grade) entertainment. Humans: we are... funny little creatures.

It's mathematically impossible to solve the worlds problems. I tend not to worry about it. Perhaps someday. But it sure as hell won't be recognizable as human. Help when and where you can.

You make it seem like these people do no good and that this is all we are. Haven't considered that perhaps many of these people do help.

Psychologically humans designed to be somewhat selfish. It's necessary to survive. Barring exceptional exceptions many people might not cope well if they were somehow forced or coerced into giving 100% of their life to making others better. Has to be a balance.

[Flesh Tunnel]

Uh huh. So many people were "done with them after ME2", then "Bioware is dead to mafter DA2", then it was "after ME3 im done with them".

I bet most people will go back to them eventully.
I havent touched their games since ME2, I actually dont even care about them anymore (I dont even hate them now). Im only watching these threads becuse the trainwreck is entertaining.

Vometia, Marauder shields is your salvation through destruction.

While I played DA2, I did not buy it and in fact never completed it, I have yet to purchase ME3, the only reason I care about it is because I enjoy both ME1 and ME2. If they fix the ending for free or it drops below $20, I'm game, otherwise, my Sheps will all just die on the Suicide run

[Dawn Farrell]

Except he's not going about claiming that his posting on a BBC article about video games is a worthwhile cause.

He's arguing that they should be putting that energy towards worthwhile causes. It's incredibly hypocritical. Unless you're committing one hundred percent of your time to "worthwhile causes" (defined as whatever JimF, game programmer, decides are worthwhile), then you can always do more. So unless JimF is actually committing one hundred percent of his time to "worthwhile causes", what the [censored] does he care what other people do when not committing time to "worthwhile causes"?

[Music Show]

He's arguing that they should be putting that energy towards worthwhile causes. It's incredibly hypocritical. Unless you're committing one hundred percent of your time to "worthwhile causes" (defined as whatever JimF, game programmer, decides are worthwhile), then you can always do more. So unless JimF is actually committing one hundred percent of his time to "worthwhile causes", what the [censored] does he care what other people do when not committing time to "worthwhile causes"?

This logic is also good. Many reasons, people don't think. You do think. Makes me feel less depressed.

[Eibe Novy]

He's arguing that they should be putting that energy towards worthwhile causes. It's incredibly hypocritical. Unless you're committing one hundred percent of your time to "worthwhile causes" (defined as whatever JimF, game programmer, decides are worthwhile), then you can always do more. So unless JimF is actually committing one hundred percent of his time to "worthwhile causes", what the [censored] does he care what other people do when not committing time to "worthwhile causes"?

He's arguing that the large amounts of effort being expended on organising around a worthless cause, should instead be put toward something that is worthwhile. That's not the same thing as saying that someone should be putting 100% of his or her effort toward combatting the world's problems.
There's a difference between trivial pursuits, like posting on these forums or a BBC article; and an organised international campaign to get new video game endings (not to mention filing complaints with the FTC, mass burnings, etc.)
You're being disingenuous, and you know it. Stop trying to defend the indefensible.

[Lady Shocka]

He's arguing that the large amounts of effort being expended on organising around a worthless cause, should instead be put toward something that is worthwhile. That's not the same thing as saying that someone should be putting 100% of his or her effort toward combatting the world's problems.
There's a difference between trivial pursuits, like posting on these forums or a BBC article; and an organised international campaign to get new video game endings (not to mention filing complaints with the FTC, mass burnings, etc.)
You're being disingenuous, and you know it. Stop trying to defend the indefensible.

I'm not at all. Do you honestly think the campaign for a new ending is especially organized (in any sort of meaningful sense)? It's not like people are flooding the streets. It's just people online, talking, agreeing, submitting a letter or two. If they weren't talking about this, they'd just be talking about something else. It's not as if them sitting at a computer and emailing Bioware is taking up time that'd normally be spent curing cancer in kittens. And again, who the [censored] are you to tell anyone else how they should spend their time? The arrogance is astounding.

"Breaking Story: Some people care about things that others don't. News at 11."

[Donatus Uwasomba]

It's not as if them sitting at a computer and emailing Bioware is taking up time that'd normally be spent curing cancer in kittens.

No? If they put this much outrage towards there not being a cure for cancer yet, they could help scientists reach that goal just a little bit faster.

And again, who the [censored] are you to tell anyone else how they should spend their time? The arrogance is astounding.

Are there any other meaningless cliches you'd like to kick my way?

[Veronica Flores]

I argee, I've never been adverse to buying more DLC; it's more content for a game I presumably want to keep playing, even if it is like the Day One DLC (which was a [censored] move actually but whatever, you got to pay for it if you want it).

But DLCing the ending, that's just cheap and a massive [censored] move, you just don't do that; especially not for such a long epic like Mass Effect.

The Shadow Broker and the Arrival DLC are DLC that affect the overall plot of the game(What happened to Liara and why you are court marshalled on Earth at the beginning of the game), so there is evidence of Bioware already using DLC to"finish" the game.

They've done it once, they'll do it again.

With the ME3 ending.

[Nadia Nad]

No? If they put this much outrage towards there not being a cure for cancer yet, they could help scientists reach that goal just a little bit faster

Please, explain this to me, I wanna know how a bunch of gamers rating could help the progress of finding a cure for cancer that hundreds of fundraisers, non-profits, doctors, scientists, and various other people could not...

[Hayley Bristow]

No? If they put this much outrage towards there not being a cure for cancer yet, they could help scientists reach that goal just a little bit faster.

I've already addressed this. It's a total non sequitur. How do you know they don't spend 90 percent of their time running soup kitchens or volunteering at hospitals or aiding flood victims or whatever. You seem to believe that if anyone does anything that doesn't meet your own criteria for worthwhile, and if they do it with any sort of enthusiasm, that this is somehow poor form. That they should instead be contributing this energy towards causes you feel are worthwhile. So why are you on this forum? Why aren't you contributing this time towards worthwhile causes? Or is it acceptable for you to set aside time for things you personally care about, but not okay for others?

Are there any other meaningless cliches you'd like to kick my way?

Are you for real? Your whole argument has been, "It upsets me that some people care about stuff that I don't care about."

[quinnnn]

"Breaking Story: Some people care about things that others don't. News at 11."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhTiJEYqqY8http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhTiJEYqqY8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhTiJEYqqY8http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhTiJEYqqY8