Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
View All     RSS
October 30, 2014
arrowPress Releases
October 30, 2014
PR Newswire
View All





If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM Tech sites:


Free  Mass Effect 3  DLC to address complaints from fans
Free Mass Effect 3 DLC to address complaints from fans
April 5, 2012 | By Mike Rose

April 5, 2012 | By Mike Rose
Comments
    45 comments
More: Console/PC, Business/Marketing



BioWare is set to add free new content and scenes to the end of Mass Effect 3, as a direct response to the calls from fans who requested more closure to the game's story.

Mass Effect 3 launched earlier this year, and is the final game in the Mass Effect trilogy, ending the story of Commander Shepard. However, a number of fans of the series are not happy with the way in which the story ends, and even petitioned for Bioware to add alternate endings to the game in order to provide better explanations and closure.

BioWare has now revealed that it will release a special free downloadable content pack for the game, called Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut, as a way to answer these calls from fans.

The DLC, due to be released this summer, will feature "further clarity to the ending of Mass Effect 3" and "deeper insights into how their personal journey concludes," said the company. The free DLC offer expires on April 12, 2014.

Dr. Ray Muzyka, co-founder of BioWare, explained, "Since launch, we have had time to listen to the feedback from our most passionate fans and we are responding. With the Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut we think we have struck a good balance in delivering the answers players are looking for while maintaining the team's artistic vision for the end of this story arc in the Mass Effect universe."

Casey Hudson, executive producer of the Mass Effect series, added, "We have reprioritized our post-launch development efforts to provide the fans who want more closure with even more context and clarity to the ending of the game, in a way that will feel more personalized for each player."


Related Jobs

Square Enix Co., Ltd.
Square Enix Co., Ltd. — Tokyo, Japan
[10.30.14]

Programmers
Infinity Ward / Activision
Infinity Ward / Activision — Woodland Hills, California, United States
[10.30.14]

Senior Sound Designer - Infinity Ward
Treyarch / Activision
Treyarch / Activision — Santa Monica, California, United States
[10.30.14]

Multiplayer Level Designer - Treyarch
Nexon America, Inc.
Nexon America, Inc. — El Segundo, California, United States
[10.29.14]

Localization Coordinator










Comments


Jim Perry
profile image
So the question becomes, what if fans aren't happy with the additional content? Does Bioware just keep dumping stuff into ME3 until they are? At what point do you start saying to players "We've done all we're going to do"?

Fergus Watson
profile image
At some point it has to be faced up to that there's a significant portion of the protest movement which will not be satisfied with anything less than a complete retcon of the events of the ending as originally told by Bioware. And that's not going to happen.

Ryan McClure
profile image
About as good a decision as BioWare could've made. Glad to see them listening to the feedback of their most-passionate fans.

For those trotting out the tired "entitlement" line, please take the time to familiarize yourselves with the outcry over the endings before making assumptions. BioWare made some very major fundamental missteps with the crafting of their story and player experience with the third and ostensibly final game in a trilogy that has been crafted around significant player investment. BioWare owed a revision to *itself,* their fans recognized that and reacted to it.

We should all hope to engender such passion in our playerbases.

Tom Baird
profile image
So they were reported to the FTC/petitioned/protested/planned lawsuit because people felt that Bioware owed itself to craft a better ending to their own story? Sometimes stories have plot holes/weak endings, and threatening to report/sue them is not the best way(or even what I would consider a valid way) to say 'We hoped you would do better'.

Wylie Garvin
profile image
Agree about passion, disagree about mis-steps. I did a lot of reading about the endings last night and this morning (though I haven't seen them myself yet, I'm only about half way through the game) and it seems to me they did a decent job with the endings. Past player decisions all contribute in minor ways to the military strength, which limits which endings you can get. Depending who is alive or dead, and who you use the most in your playthrough, you'll see different survivors emerge from the Normandy. Your Shepard will probably die, but in some of the endings it is possible to see a hint that he or she survives. Most importantly, the player gets to choose one of several futures for the rest of the galaxy, and the choices are interesting. None of them is the Hollywood "the heroes all ride off into the sunset and everyone lives happily ever after" ending, but one option lets you utterly destroy the Reapers, and another option lets you permanently neutralize their threat without killing them. To me personally, the Synthesis option seems like the most interesting choice, effectively "uplifting" the organic beings and turning them into something else.

Few games have ever offered players these kinds of choices. Deus Ex: HR might be the closest example, though it also reminds me of the "weird" set of possible endings for Farenheit/Indigo Prophecy. I think its great that Bioware made this the way they did, and left out the Hollywood ending.. whatever choice you make, the galaxy is forever and irrevocably changed.

Ryan McClure
profile image
*One* guy did that, and the bulk of the movement surrounding the ending publicly distanced itself from him. Please don't assign the actions of one person to an entire group. That has only ever ended poorly.

Please don't blow it up to be bigger than it was, either. It was a complaint filed with the FTC objecting to false or misleading advertising. There was no threatened lawsuit (of which I'm aware, at least), no action taken pursuing this course beyond the original complaint, etc.

John McMahon
profile image
@Wylie

I agree the endings were very interesting choices. But my biggest complaint is that the third option just "magically" changes organics (and not synthetics?) without describing how it happened and what it actually does.

I understand they had a hard time trying to determine how to depict the effect Shepard had, but the whole war assets seems to be, to be a choice out of time-constraint than intention from the beginning. Overall, I just love this world that BioWare created.

Jim Perry
profile image
"BioWare made some very major fundamental missteps with the crafting of their story and player experience with the third and ostensibly final game in a trilogy that has been crafted around significant player investment."

That's one opinion and, as such, not necessarily correct or true. You can take just about any story and find flaws with it, even if it's won numerous awards.

Duan Bailey
profile image
@Wylie,

I have to disagree. In my opinion, the endings are clearly a misstep (but then again, I hated the ending of Deus Ex: HR too, so I'm clearly stating my bias).

We often like to deride what we term the "Hollywood" ending, but I just don't think that an any media is improved simply by throwing in a "rocks fall, everybody dies" ending. Darkness has its place, but it feels misplaced in the final game of the Mass Effect trilogy. The only thing I get from the ending is that Bioware wanted to pull me out of the game by exposing the lack of choice you really have.

It also seems like a massive tonal shift. Things were grim, there have been sacrifices, but Shepard managed to go one-on-one with the avatar of a Reaper, take out a couple of honest-to-God Reapers on foot, and survive being blown up and reentry, etc. The game had been training us that things were tough, but that a victory of sorts was possible if you played your cards right. That this was a Hollywood blockbuster kind game. Well, that all goes away at the end for a poorly explained deus ex machina in the Catalyst at the end and being forced to choose three unpalatable endings.

Honestly, I wasn't expecting Shepard to survive the trilogy, but the ending being so nonsensical and grim really soured me on that idea.

Eric Geer
profile image
This decision is bad for games and game developers. Are developers going to have to cave into all mass online protests now?

The ending is the ending they chose....keep it that way.

PS. A majority of game endings blow ass anyhow--not sure why this is such a big deal.

I've played through every ME and I didn't really have an issue with the endings. It was one last choice. And in the end, to me, it just says that no matter what you do in the ME world--all your minor actions all your major actions all lead up to one final decision whether you like it or not. Some good things happened/ some bad things happened, but in the end it didn't matter. The thing that really matter is this last choice. Not everything in life has a resolution--and if it does its not always good or bad. It might just be, but it was a hell of a ride getting here--Did you enjoy the journey!?!?

Alexander Jones
profile image
Now, I understand that you might fine the ending "okay" as life does not always end in closure, but we, the consumers, do not have to tolerate that from the products that we buy.

Now, I used generic economic terms here for a reason; This has nothing to do with anybody's creative vision. The developers haven't done anything but caved to their publisher who pay's their bills, same as always. That's the difference between a small indie company, and one of the most recognized dev shops from THE most recognized publisher in the world.

Bioware isn't doing this based on problems they or the fans have with the ending; they're doing this because EA's stock dropped based on the ending, and so now they have to "fix" their "product". I know this looks like a blow to someone's creativity, but what it really is is simply a business call. It's just part of the deal when you move from a small studio beholden only to your creativity to a big name that has investors to placate. And investors do not like it when the number one news about their big new product is how much it pissed people off.

John McMahon
profile image
I don't know, but I don't think they are changing the endings. But adding more explanations and detailing what happened with each ending.

I mean people that were on Earth, were now on a ship that somehow knew to try to outrun this wave. There needed to be an explanation as it was just left with a big "what happened there?". Unless that was their intent to leave mystery, but apparently it wasn't seen as an intention and more of an omission. But that's perception and everyone's is different.

Joel Nystrom
profile image
This is just appalling. More closure? Here I was thinking most mainstream media already had way too much closure... Guess not!

Joshua Darlington
profile image
I don't really understand the pushback against fan interest and fan collaboration. I see it as the logical extension of interactive media. BioWare deserves bragging rights instead of pity. This fan "backlash" is a major win.

Quintus Havis
profile image
But the game wasn't meant to be a collaboration. Maybe you're right, but this project doesn't seem to have been meant to go that far in terms of interaction, otherwise the fans would've been able to edit the script as they saw fit before the game went gold.

I think that it would be interesting to have a game that grew based on fan interaction with developers, but Mass Effect was just a different animal.

Joshua Darlington
profile image
"this project doesn't seem to have been meant to go that far"

Well, it's gone that far now. Which is an awesome "problem" to have.

"it would be interesting to have a game that grew based on fan interaction with developers"

Now Mass Effect *is* that game.

John McMahon
profile image
BioWare has done many things because the fans voiced a desire for it. Tali and Garrus as love interests yes. More Joker..oh god yeah...a little too much. But that's me.

DLC that gave the player more to do with Liara. They added same-sex romances in ME3 because of the fans desire to have that.

That is even more surprising as that was in the first game, but taken out for unknown reasons, maybe technical or maybe they thought they were pushing the envelope too much.

BioWare has always listened and responded to their fans. Why would they stop now?

Quintus Havis
profile image
Time to write to RA Salvatore, Paul S. Kemp, and other authors who've written books with endings I detested in hopes that they'll change it for me.

If this weren't as a reaction to the fan base, I'd feel alright about it. As it is, this just seems like a cynical move to keep people happy to ensure they pay for things. Or an overreaction to the hype about the ending. And for that matter, I Think the ending was elegiac and final. It was what the entire series lead up to.

Disappointing.

Michael Rooney
profile image
GRRM is going to get a very angry email about book 3...

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
I need yet to hear a compelling argument why game-developers shouldn't do this if its warranted.

All I'm seeing are the same old tiring slippery slope arguments of "soon we all will need to change our endings" - doom and gloom predictions, or better yet the artists-are-entitled-to-their-vision strawmen.

Just because there is a status quo on these matters for other media that doesn't mean the same rules apply for game-development.

As a genre, video-games, if you want to treat them as "art" or "entertainment", are inherently an interactive experience and the player co-creates the piece, to treat it as anything less would be just false.
So if you co-create with your user, you better make sure the end result is pleasing to the user that put in his own "work".

If you want to treat games as a product, then there is all the more reason to listen exactly to what your clients have to say.

Bruno Patatas
profile image
The precedent opened by this is daunting, and it doesn't contributes to a healthy industry. This game was not created in co-operation with players, despite what some people are saying. This game was developed by a creative team that I am sure have put their heart and soul in making this the best game it could be.

There are games, likes the big profile ones being funded on Kickstarter, that *will* be developed with direct input from fans. And that's great! But Mass Effect is not a kickstarter project.

There's a lot of media products I got disappointed to when I reached the end. TV series, comic books, books, video games, etc.To give a recent example, remember the public backlash of "The Tree of Life" from Terrence Malick. People left the theaters, demand ticket refunds... What did Fox (the distributor of the movie) did? Nothing! The movie is what it is. This Mass Effect case would be like asking Terrence Malick to change the ending on the DVD version. If video games want to be treated as serious entertainment products, this is the worst type of things that could happen. Another famous case: Star Wars. Lucas does what he wants, what he sees is best for the product he created. Remember the public outcry and petitions against the blu-ray release of the original trilogy? What did Lucas did? Nothing. It's his movie, it's creation. Just like Mass Effect is a creation of BioWare, and not of the fans.

In the end, all this accomplishes one thing: publishers will become even more risk averse of creating compelling new experiences and pushing forward storytelling in video games. Why? They will not want the risk of fans demanding new endings as they please. Prepare to see even more brainless shooters as the future of video games.

This case together with the mass vote from gamers for EA as the worst US company, sincerely makes me sad with the state of things.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
"To give a recent example, remember the public backlash of "The Tree of Life" from Terrence Malick. People left the theaters, demand ticket refunds... What did Fox (the distributor of the movie) did? Nothing! The movie is what it is. This Mass Effect case would be like asking Terrence Malick to change the ending on the DVD version."

A movie is not a game.

Just make a compelling argument -why- this is bad for the industry or designers, don't just state this like its a fact and self evident that the same applies to games.

Bruno Patatas
profile image
??Yep, a movie is not a game. Just like a book is not a movie. A song is not a book. What's your point? Did you read everything I wrote?

"publishers will become even more risk averse of creating compelling new experiences and pushing forward storytelling in video games. Why? They will not want the risk of fans demanding new endings as they please. Prepare to see even more brainless shooters as the future of video games."

This is the risk with this case. It's bad for the industry as a whole. And I can bet there will be quite some writers who will prefer to avoid writing for games altogether from now on. If you cannot understand the sense of authorship of a creative piece, then this whole post is pointless for you.

Best article about this case: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2012/03/mass-effect
s-fans.html

"A mature audience for an art form would never do this, which shows us what a predicament gaming is in. To further the HBO analogy, compare this situation to another famously dissatisfying ending of a beloved series: the final episode of “The Sopranos.” Although many fans complained that the episode was confusing and inconclusive, no one seriously suggested that HBO reshoot the show. Sophisticated audiences understand that while they might hate any given plot decision, they ultimately have to respect the creative wishes of those who made the thing great in the first place; this is what gives the medium integrity."

Ditto!

Michael Rooney
profile image
Aleksander: That's kind of a pointless argument. You could extend it to say, "That's an RTS not an FPS," or "That's 2D not 3D," etc. They are both story driven entertainment. The standards for that should extend beyond medium.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
"Yep, a movie is not a game. Just like a book is not a movie. A song is not a book. What's your point? "

None of those are interactive.
None of those have input from the consumer.

Its the difference between riding a roller-coaster and free-climbing, both will get your adrenaline up but only in one are you actually doing anything.

If people can't see the difference, then no wonder the games-industry is all up in arms about this.

"This is the risk with this case. It's bad for the industry as a whole. And I can bet there will be quite some writers who will prefer to avoid writing for games altogether from now on. If you cannot understand the sense of authorship of a creative piece, then this whole post is pointless for you."

Agency is the keyword.

If you can't understand that interactive mediums like games are -not equal- to authored mediums like movies and books (and they are simply not, this whole situation -proves- this) then yes, those writers and designers that think the same way will not write for games.

And good riddance.

I am quite frankly surprised that people do not seem to grasp this, especially on this website with professionals supposedly 20+ years in the business.

Using narrative like you would in TV/Books/Movies just does not work in the interactive medium, exactly because you run into the problems like Bioware did.
This isn't some entitlement issue of some whiny people online (its easy to dismiss this as such), its a systemic failure of writers used to writing for authored content writing for interactive content without the regard for player agency.
Bioware and the Mass Effect fiasco is just a big blip on our radar because the production is large and the developer well known, but this is not the first time this has happened.

The sooner writers get their head out of their ass and start adapting to the medium, the better.
This situation might do just that, force a change and evolution -long- needed in the industry.

@MichaelThe point is exactly that they don't.

Joshua Darlington
profile image
"there will be quite some writers who will prefer to avoid writing for games altogether from now on."

Artists should choose a medium that best suits their creative ability and artistic ambitions.

Some narrative designers might love to work in a medium that includes player/audience agency as part of a mix of top down narrative, bottom up narrative, socially mediated narrative, and computational narrative. Other narrative designers may want to use video games as a one way top down narrative medium.

I don't see why there can't be multiple interpretations or uses of the same medium. Does the mere existence of kinetic sculpture malign sculpture as an artform?

Bruno Patatas
profile image
@Aleksander

For me it tells everything when you spend the time talking about player agency, and on the other side that writers should get their head out of their ass (your words). You have the exact same attitude of the people who are "demanding" BioWare to fix things. Do you want to know one thing? It doesn't matter how many DLC's BioWare releases. There will be always people who will not be pleased.

Oh, and if you think that interactivity in storytelling only appeared with video games, then you should study quite a lot more on that subject.

Bruno Patatas
profile image
@Christian

The Blade Runner case is different to ME3. The Blade Runner ending – and the terrible, terrible voiceover – were a result of test screenings. Luckily, this travesty is gradually being forgotten, as the director’s cut minus the tacked-on ending gradually takes precedence in people’s movie collections. So there is some justice in this world. The important is that in the end the view of the creator prevailed. With ME3, they want the gamers voice to prevail.

ME3 is a huge undertaking. A fantastic epic told as a trilogy. And, when something like this is created, there will always be plot holes and disagreements regarding how the story should have been unveiled and ending. Star Wars, Matrix... Just a few franchises of note that suffered criticism for that. The task of creating the game systems for something with the scope of ME3 is daunting, and I'm afraid that any DLC will feel like it will be shoehorned into the main story line.

I gave the example of "Tree of Life" as I could have said "Matrix Reloaded". It polarized audiences completely. Some people loved it, others hated it. And if you read interviews with the Wachowsky's from that time, they stick to their guns. They did what they thought would be best for their product, their vision, and then continued with Revolutions. A lot of people say that the "real" Matrix is only the first one. I loved all the trilogy. Every media product has the capability of polarizing audiences, and if we start changing our products based on popular feedback, we will kill innovation. People will always want things they are comfortable with. The duty of an artist (being him a designer, writer, etc...), is also to educate, and show to the audiences new ways of experiencing a story.

Regarding the Spiderman clone saga, Marvel did quite a lot of wrong things with it. It was supposed to be a small story arc, the whole storyline, which was supposed to simplify Spider-Man's mythos and ultimately bring him "back to basics" ended up complicating everything beyond what anyone imagined! But the things is, that even un-popular, it sold very well, and some elements from the story arc are now part of the whole Spiderman universe.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
"For me it tells everything when you spend the time talking about player agency, and on the other side that writers should get their head out of their ass (your words). You have the exact same attitude of the people who are "demanding" BioWare to fix things. Do you want to know one thing? It doesn't matter how many DLC's BioWare releases. There will be always people who will not be pleased."

Who cares if some people will not be pleased?
Thats not what we are discussing here, its not an argument why this is a bad thing, its a deflection via slippery-slope, the sky isn't falling here.

You have yet to provide anything even resembling an argument here beyond logical fallacies and ad-hom.

The second Bioware gave the player agency in their narrative, their narrative became interactive, it was not "Biowares baby" anymore.
How everyone keeps acting surprised at this notion, that players now were unsatisfied with an authored ending, when before it was interactive, is really beyond me.

Its like making a shooter where you give the player agency over the guns, except the guns don't do anything, and then you act surprised when the player decides that your combat is shit.

The sooner writers/designers recognize the crap they are doing narratively in games, the better.

Biowares case might just be the long needed wake-up call.

Bruno Patatas
profile image
Ha, now you must be joking...

"Who cares if some people will not be pleased?"

Did you read the title of this article, "Free Mass Effect 3 DLC to address complaints from fans"? This whole question is exactly about that!

"...that players now were unsatisfied with an authored ending, when before it was interactive."

*Everything* in the game is authored, not only the ending, whether you want it or not . Your character does what the designers/writers want him to do. Your character only can pronounce the words that the writer wrote, not you. Not the player. The dialogue trees are supported by complex dialogue systems that the designers envisioned. Every type of interactivity is limited by the rules that the designers created for that whole universe.

"The sooner writers/designers recognize the crap they are doing narratively in games, the better."

Haha! Oh well, looking forward to see some of your games then.

Oh, and btw, if you can show me that "..."shooter where you give the player agency over the guns, except the guns don't do anything", I would like to take a look.

Bruno Patatas
profile image
@Christian

Balancing game systems post-launch is something that is widely used. I spend a lot of my days looking at spreadsheets doing exactly that :)

For me the problem with this case is the demand of new endings based on some people not liking it and finding plot holes. And the new DLC will not fix that, as there will always be people that will want things differently. This is a story issue (btw, I agree with some of the problems in ME3).

Numbers balancing post-lunch (like balancing economy systems) are critical withing game design, as a lot of times only when you have a big number of users you will start detecting it's flaws.

I agree that the whole subject is tricky, but I would split story and gameplay. In ME3 we have story issues, and not any kind of gameplay issue that would make the game unplayable. It's a matter of taste.

Bruno Patatas
profile image
@Christian

I do not see the split as unfair. The concept of "story balancing" based on customer feedback is very tricky. Basically because liking a story or not, it boils down to a question of taste. You, as a person, you create empathy with a type of characters much easier than with others. And vice-versa.

The creation of the world, all the world building, characters, dialogues... That needs to be rock solid on an RPG. Then in terms of gameplay we can balance character stats, items, loot drops ratio, etc... But the whole background story is the glue that supports an rpg, back from the table-top times with D&D's and the figure of the Dungeon Master, the storyteller.

And a gameplay mechanic change on an RTS does not change the mechanic per se. It fine tunes it. Designers can do that for several reasons, including making the game more "fair", balancing difficulty or even gameplay blockers.

Joshua Darlington
profile image
"I do not see the split as unfair."

It's one approach that will give one type of results. As opposed to various models of game/story unificaiton such as game as story and story as game.

"The concept of "story balancing" based on customer feedback is very tricky. "

The ideal would be dynamic "story balancing" based on tech tools that model player agency (task selection, affect, engagement/interest etc).

"D&D's and the figure of the Dungeon Master, the storyteller."

Or one could look at a Game Master as the dynamic story balancer. Top down "storytelling" is only one aespect of classic tabletop RPGs.

Bruno Patatas
profile image
@Joshua

Hi Joshua,

Tech tools that model player agency sounds great. I want to see all this as growing pains of the medium maturing. There is a long road ahead in terms of technology to help designers and writers to model character behaviors and dynamic "story balancing". The classic choice of you being a good or a bad guy is not enough. If we want compelling narratives that will shape your character persona and where every decision you make impact how the story and the gameplay unfurls, we need to have the technology to do that. As it is right now it's a titan's quest to create a game like Mass Effect.

Since we have those type of restrictions, I would love to see BioWare exploring more the sense of exploration from the first ME.

Kenneth Bruton
profile image
I have not played the game as of yet (I do have it, though) I realize that the ENTIRE trilogy was BIOWAREs baby. Sure, the fans can be angry all day long, petition, holler and scream until they are blue in the face, but this was BIOWAREs baby. I can understand the frustration of playing a series of games and you finish and you say "That is it? For all of my hard earned cash, emotional investment in the characters, time spent building to this climax...and THAT is IT?!" Oh well...I wonder how the are going to maintain the integrity and artistic vision but still not sell out on account of the baby not growing up the way the village saw fit. I am glad I didn't see the endings, so I will not be jaded. I will download the DLC when it comes out, only after I finished it THEIR way...

Forrest Glithero
profile image
I was dissapointed with the lack of clear-ending closure too, but for goodness sake, it IS Bioware's creative choice as to how to write their own story. Sometimes I think Bioware worries too much about what we the fans think. Having said that, it would be fun to play some DLC adventures that take place after...might be a challange with no more mass relays though. XD

Joshua Darlington
profile image
Stories come from the word of mouth tradition. Professional storytellers would mod their tales on the fly to please their audiences.

It used to be common for audiences to mod and retransmit their favorite narratives. Have you heard the latest gossip? Hear any good jokes lately?

Mass produced entertainment and landscapes are mostly a creation of the industrial era. Remote replication leads to alienation. One way central authority in narrative may appeal to some that prefer the mass media of the 19th and 20th century. Exclusive control (of others experience) feels powerful.

Digital media is plastic and social. It allows for a return to customization/personalization. It allows developers to engage with customers and please them on a more personal level. Games can support pre 21st century modes of communication, but some developers might prefer new modes of communication or at very least exploring the possibilities.

John Flush
profile image
I think the real news here is Bioware and EA are releasing a DLC isn't a direct money grab at every "fan's" wallet, well at least for the first year.

Harlan Sumgui
profile image
bah. Mass Effect was written in an ad hoc manner, by different teams, over the course of 5 or 6 years. Artistic vision? wot a joke. And art? not bloody likely. Tetris, now there is some gaming art.

Darcy Nelson
profile image
I still have suspicions that Mass Effect 3's writing went the same route as "The Forgotten" (yes, I am comparing games and movies) and therefore was received poorly as such by fans. Just a theory though.

Jonathan Murphy
profile image
So they chose the path that they felt would have the most gain. Idiots! I said in a previous post. Best choice now is to double down, be evil, or leave it be and let people forget.

Reminder: Mass Effect 3's ending was stolen from Xeno Saga 3. Reapers, Gnosis and many many more comparisons.

Ian Miller
profile image
There are many in authorial roles (read: critics, designers) that are a hard on the community of players that feel the Mass Effect series ended in a great big belly flop. Many have stated that Bioware's integrity is at stake if they change the ending to appease their audience. But games are a collaborative medium in that they require direct participation from the player in an active way. Mass Effect 3, in regard to story telling, doubles down on this aspect.

The ending of Mass Effect three from a narrative perspective does a few things very poorly at the end of the game, (no spoilers). The writers undermine the very logic of the entire series in a glib, deus ex machina, gesture. Some players by this point crave catharsis, others don't mind an ambiguous and thought provoking ending. The payers were trained to expect as much from such a outstanding series. Bioware provided neither. The ending was dashed off and cheep. Had it maintained it's integrity, the forums would be debating the meaning rather than it's lack of meaning or closure, or logic.

Fred Marcoux
profile image
ahhh the precedence this will create....

[User Banned]
profile image
This user violated Gamasutra’s Comment Guidelines and has been banned.

Bart Heijltjes
profile image
Some people both here and elsewhere seem to be conflating or confusing 'interactivity' with 'co-creation'.

They are far from the same, please keep them apart.


none
 
Comment: