Mass Effect 3 - New content will offer "more clarity"

CountChocula said:

The thread you linked to is locked.
…

Click to expand...

My bad on Bethesda. Nevertheless, Bethesda does not constitute "the majority" of game publishers. Note also that the Bethesda mod did direct the poster to an official link to get information regarding a refund. Bethesda also strictly enforces a policy against flaming, and enforces that policy against posters who attack ppl criticizing Bethesda games.

Eidos does allow refund discussions BTW.

As to your other comments, about the only thing clear is that BioWare has done a poor job of dealing with the ending controversy, just as they did a poor job of handling the DA2 controversies. In the latter case they managed to sufficiently polarize the fan base that the product essentially lost commercial viability and couldn't be revived. IMO BioWare is moving down an identical path here. Demonizing and arguing with customers is an elementary PR 'no no'. BioWare is close to a point where ME3's future is jeopardized. It may be too late already.

__

RPGFool said:

As to your other comments, about the only thing clear is that BioWare has done a poor job of dealing with the ending controversy

Click to expand...

What exactly would have constituted a good job? They've already announced that they are changing the ending, right?

RPGFool said:

just as they did a poor job of handling the DA2 controversies. In the latter case they managed to sufficiently polarize the fan base that the product essentially lost commercial viability and couldn't be revived. IMO BioWare is moving down an identical path here.

Click to expand...

I don't quite understand what you mean concerning DA2.

There were a lot of people who simply didn't like the game. Their forum was filled with mostly negative comments around the time of DA2's release.

Bioware devs attempted to address some of the concerns in their DLC by opening up some of the levels a bit, but honestly, the problems with the game were not something that could be easily fixed with a patch. What else would you have had them do?

RPGFool said:

Demonizing and arguing with customers is an elementary PR 'no no'.

Click to expand...

Are the Bioware devs really demonizing people who didn't like the ending?

CountChocula said:

What exactly would have constituted a good job? They've already announced that they are changing the ending, right?

Click to expand...

Thought I made it clear above. They announced they would clarify the ending while also making a big deal about 'artistic integrity', attempting to divide the fan base into a majority and the other "some fans", and criticizing other fans who don't behave properly. They made the whole thing personal, even though its not a personal issue. Simply put there was no need to generate all of the negative emotion and arguing that has followed.

Good Job — "We hear you and are working on a solution. You are important to us. Please give us a bit of time to do a proper solution. We love the game every bit as much as you. Thank you for helping us make RPG history." Or some such.

Great PR people turn lemons into a refreshing, chilled, lemon-aid beverage.

CountChocula said:

I don't quite understand what you mean concerning DA2.

There were a lot of people who simply didn't like the game. Their forum was filled with mostly negative comments around the time of DA2's release.

Bioware devs attempted to address some of the concerns in their DLC by opening up some of the levels a bit, but honestly, the problems with the game were not something that could be easily fixed with a patch. What else would you have had them do?

Click to expand...

Things weren't nearly so negative at the beginning. Laidlaw gave interviews basically trashing DA:O in favor of DA2. Gaider repeatedly argued with fans. Finally Laidlaw showed up on the forums and did the same.

Meanwhile BioWare actively promoted the idea that fans were divided into two groups; one group that loved the game and one that hated the game. The fan base was "polarized" they said over and over again. Those criticizing simply weren't willing to accept innovation, according to BioWare. BioWare was trying to improve the RPG.

And the true fans followed suit, attacking the "haters" who wanted to prevent innovation. etc. etc.

Hell you could write a book or teach an entire semester course about the numerous ways BioWare mishandled the whole affair. They could have done lots of things short of rewriting and reissuing the game to save lots customers and fans.

Start by not dividing the fan base and trying to ostracize a large portion. Try to bring these guys back; don't push them away. Don't belittle their views as reflecting rejection of innovation, etc. Respect their views. Do something, anything, as fast as possible, to let the disgruntled fans know you care and are trying. etc. etc.

Bring in some of those great PR people who have a track record of turning lemons into a refreshing, chilled, lemon-aid beverage.

EDIt — As to the question of demonizing fans, IMO the following sentence by Muzyka does just that (and I can assure you it alienated plenty of previously loyal and on-the-fence fans):

"Some of the criticism that has been delivered in the heat of passion by our most ardent fans, even if founded on valid principles, such as seeking more clarity to questions or looking for more closure, for example – has unfortunately become destructive rather than constructive."

Click to expand...

Why? It's nothing but self-indulgence. Accomplishes nothing beneficial. Why not just shoot an arrow into your knee (credit Skyrim)? What I'm trying to say is that BioWare already had enough problems at this point. Creating or possibly creating additional problems is poor business judgement.

Here's an article by Eric Kain at FORBES BioWare Co-Founder Apologizes To Fans For The Mass Effect 3 Ending - Sort Of
__

I don't think there is a way to make a completely satisfactory conclusion to this problem.

I agree the whole thing could have been dealt with more tact by Bioware. Throwing that "artistic integrity" out there probably had no other purpose but to ask for sympathy and show the unhappy fans in an unfortunate light --really, is Bioware new to making changes to their scripts because of financial reasons? I've seen several interviews by staff writers who have talked about extensive cuts in their earlier games. In fact, it is most likely the current ending is the result of some serious culling. Either that, or they've been purposely deceiving people with their talk about "multiple varied endings".

either way, we now have a 3-game series with a "rocks fall, everyone dies" kinda ending, and any sort of attempt to have an actual discussion about it is being derailed by irrelevant and even untruthful claims. This is not how it's supposed to go.

RPGFool said:

Thought I made it clear above. They announced they would clarify the ending while also making a big deal about 'artistic integrity', attempting to divide the fan base into a majority and the other "some fans", and criticizing other fans who don't behave properly. They made the whole thing personal, even though its not a personal issue. Simply put there was no need to generate all of the negative emotion and arguing that has followed.

Good Job — "We hear you and are working on a solution. You are important to us. Please give us a bit of time to do a proper solution. We love the game every bit as much as you. Thank you for helping us make RPG history." Or some such.

Great PR people turn lemons into a refreshing, chilled, lemon-aid beverage.



Things weren't nearly so negative at the beginning. Laidlaw gave interviews basically trashing DA:O in favor of DA2. Gaider repeatedly argued with fans. Finally Laidlaw showed up on the forums and did the same.

Meanwhile BioWare actively promoted the idea that fans were divided into two groups; one group that loved the game and one that hated the game. The fan base was "polarized" they said over and over again. Those criticizing simply weren't willing to accept innovation, according to BioWare. BioWare was trying to improve the RPG.

And the true fans followed suit, attacking the "haters" who wanted to prevent innovation. etc. etc.

Hell you could write a book or teach an entire semester course about the numerous ways BioWare mishandled the whole affair. They could have done lots of things short of rewriting and reissuing the game to save lots customers and fans.

Start by not dividing the fan base and trying to ostracize a large portion. Try to bring these guys back; don't push them away. Don't belittle their views as reflecting rejection of innovation, etc. Respect their views. Do something, anything, as fast as possible, to let the disgruntled fans know you care and are trying. etc. etc.

Bring in some of those great PR people who have a track record of turning lemons into a refreshing, chilled, lemon-aid beverage.

EDIt — As to the question of demonizing fans, IMO the following sentence by Muzyka does just that (and I can assure you it alienated plenty of previously loyal and on-the-fence fans):

Why? It's nothing but self-indulgence. Accomplishes nothing beneficial. Why not just shoot an arrow into your knee (credit Skyrim)? What I'm trying to say is that BioWare already had enough problems at this point. Creating or possibly creating additional problems is poor business judgement.

Here's an article by Eric Kain at FORBES BioWare Co-Founder Apologizes To Fans For The Mass Effect 3 Ending - Sort Of
__

Click to expand...

Interesting quotes - yes, it seems they might have mitigated some of the bad will had they handled it a bit differently.

At any rate, for those of us who played the game, it becomes a somewhat more philosophical question of whether one can replay the game and pretend the ending is different.

I can't speak for everyone, but from my perspective, I feel as though I've already experienced the ending and I can't pretend I haven't. Adding a few extra scenes that detail what happens to your squadmates afterward, etc., might be interesting, but it doesn't move me to go back and play through the entire game again.

I would be much more interested in expansion of the multiplayer or fun DLC content that you can actually play through from the start of the game, rather than additional cutscenes at the end when you don't even have control over your player anymore.

In the case of FO3, the Broken Steel DLC didn't exactly change the fundamental details of the ending as it was originally written; rather, after you play through the same ending scene, then you wake up and there is additional content afterward that allows you to continue playing in the open world setting as long as you like.

Thought provoking comments, Count.

Agree with your sentiment that clarified ending would not enhance re-playability for me. Like you I'd need more than that.

Your comment on Fallout 3 precipitated a thought I've been mulling over for ending modification.

Shepard Wakes Up. S/He's in the medical area of the Citadel. Learns that most of what s/he experienced after the laser explosion was in her/his head. Shep and squad mates and Anderson did go to Citadel, but Shep got hit by a light beam like the beams associated with Reaper messages in ME1 and ME2. The reaper message beam in the Citadel attempted to trick Shep into not destroying the Reapers, Anderson and Shep's squad mates were paralyzed by message beam and could only look on in horror (although Anderson did manage to yell "Don't listen to them") —- [Shep then learns more details on that 'final encounter'] and [details on what actually happened as a result, including most ppl on Citadel were hiding in some safe area, lots of fighting etc.].

So, now mix in suggestions flowing from CountChocula, and add to the above, [Then Shep gets a briefing from Anderson on a new mission].

Now here's the really strange thing that hit me after seeing The Count's post and that prompted me to go ahead and write this stuff down. It's crazy. In Fallout 3, The Lone Wanderer wakes up after the first ending in the same damn place; in The Citadel.

Some ppl have said that the ending of ME3 was literally ripped off from Deus Ex Machina — three choices; control, destroy, or merge human and machine. If so maybe there's a planned post-end story ripped off from, or strongly influenced by, FO3. The Citadel as a beginning would be a strange coincidence.

Regards.

__

Here's a very good video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MlatxLP-xs&feature=player_embedded

The problem isn't artistic integrity or the lack of clarity. It's that C&C throughout the game hardly affected the final missions and/or the ending.