Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

BioWare Announces Free DLC To Add More To the Mass Effect 3 Endings

Comments Filter:
  • by Githaron (2462596) on Friday April 06, 2012 @03:59PM (#39601211)
    If you feed someone crap with frosting on it, you are still feeding them crap.
    • by lattyware (934246) <gareth@lattyware.co.uk> on Friday April 06, 2012 @04:47PM (#39601723) Homepage Journal

      That's where you are wrong. It was never about 'liking' the ending - to have a 'Shepherd rides off into the sunset happily ever after' ending would be terrible, as it doesn't fit the games. It's about an ending that gives you closure, shows you what happened after and how the choices you made affected the world. That's what they are adding, and they are doing it right in that way.

      An ending you don't like is a fact of any work - be it a book, film or game. An ending that doesn't fulfill is another thing, and that's what people have a problem with. It's the rough equivalent of Sam and Frodo getting to Mt. Doom and it just ending as the ring falls in. Sure, you know it ended, you know the main thing, but all of the little stuff surrounding it, the characters you got invested in, the places and events you cared about, you want to know how it all mattered in the end.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        It was never about 'liking' the ending

        Some people seem to think they're speaking for everyone. For some people, it was the endings that were the problem. Some people didn't want galactic civilization ruined. Others might have wanted a happy ending. Still others might have liked the current endings.

        • by lattyware (934246) <gareth@lattyware.co.uk> on Friday April 06, 2012 @05:11PM (#39601969) Homepage Journal
          I'm just talking about why there was such an uproar. Plenty of films, books and even games have endings lots of people don't like, but the endings that don't answer questions and give closure are the ones where everyone has a problem with them. People can live with an ending they don't like - but an ending that doesn't leave them feeling like it's done? People do this kind of thing. It's the difference between some people not liking it, and virtually everyone who played the game being dissapointed by it.
          • by grumbel (592662) <grumbel@gmx.de> on Friday April 06, 2012 @07:39PM (#39603227) Homepage

            I'm just talking about why there was such an uproar.

            Well, I can't say why the uproar reached this magnitude, but the fact is that the ending is broken more then a few ways. It's not just that it doesn't give closure or answers all the questions, it's that it is lazy (i.e. color swap) and doesn't even make any sense on a very basic levels, it has characters showing up in places without explanation for how they got there and no time for them to have gone there. So it's not just bad, it's broken, which especially considering that the rest of the game and the rest of the series is perfectly fine is just a little weird.

            • by Elldallan (901501)
              *SPOILER ALERT*

              Yes all of what you are saying as well as the fact that the ending breaks with a lot of previously established canon content. For example, the protheans re-engineered the keepers which delayed the reaper invasion, how could that matter when the citadel itself is the sentient overlord of the reapers?

              Arrival also establishes that the destruction of a relay is really bad news for every living being in the same star system.

              And exactly how would destroying all synthetics prevent the galaxy f
          • by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Friday April 06, 2012 @11:59PM (#39604451)

            *SPOILER ALERT*

            So the over arching story in the ME universe is, of course, "Stop the Reapers, save the galaxy." That's what the major theme is. Even when you think it has deviated, it in fact hasn't. The Reapers are the baddies, we don't know why and maybe we can't even understand (Sovereign says it is beyond our comprehension). also a big motivation behind this is the connection to the characters in the game. It features a lot of sitting and talking, and the reason is you get to know and care about your characters.

            Then, in the last 10 minutes of the game, in 14 lines of dialogue, all that is changed. Now we are supposed to accept, from a character we've never met, that the Reapers aren't evil, and that we can't stop them or save the galaxy really, we just have to make a completely out of context choice. We are now supposed to make a decision about the value of organic and synthetic life, something that has never been part of the series.

            Now such a change could happen validly in a story. You can have something going one way and then change... but not in the last 14 lines. This shit would have needed to happen shortly after ME3 started, you discover that all along your goal was the wrong one or a false one or whatever. You have time to come to terms with that, learn about it, and then work towards the new goal. That is valid in story telling. Not just completely changing shit right before the end.

            Also there's the fact that you feel that absolutely everything you've done amounts to precisely nothing.

            • So the over arching story in the ME universe is, of course, "Stop the Reapers, save the galaxy.

              [...]

              Then, in the last 10 minutes of the game, in 14 lines of dialogue, all that is changed. Now we are supposed to accept, from a character we've never met, that the Reapers aren't evil, and that we can't stop them or save the galaxy really, we just have to make a completely out of context choice.

              Except: That's not true.

              We have the choice to stop the Reapers, even destroy them.
              And yes, that comes at a terrible price (destruction of the mass relays), but did you really think it would come cheap?

              • by stewartjm (608296)
                Destroying the Mass relays to stop the Reapers would be a perfectly acceptable renegade ending, if it was Shepard who was destroying the mass relays to stop the Reapers, preferably by running a combat mission where you hacked into the relay control network with EDI's help, possibly on the citadel.

                One of dozens of gaping flaws with the end is that Shepard is no longer the protagonist, that role is assume by the star child deus ex machine, who was introduced 5 minutes previous with 14 whole lines of dialog
            • by AmiMoJo (196126)

              Also there's the fact that you feel that absolutely everything you've done amounts to precisely nothing.

              Hay, some of call that a "rewarding career". *Sob*

        • Some people seem to think they're speaking for everyone. For some people, it was the endings that were the problem. Some people didn't want galactic civilization ruined. Others might have wanted a happy ending. Still others might have liked the current endings.

          And amongst those people, there's a lot of nuance in the position - don't generalize just to feel superior. "Dark and angsty" is not profound, and in a lot of cases is just lazy writing.

      • by bitt3n (941736)

        It's the rough equivalent of Sam and Frodo getting to Mt. Doom and it just ending as the ring falls in.

        SPOILER ALERT!

  • by stewartjm (608296) on Friday April 06, 2012 @03:59PM (#39601225)
    It's not just a disappointing ending. It's an ending that was obviously duct taped onto the end to shove it out the door 6-12 months before it should have been released.

    And the only response from BioWare is typical PR spin, with wonderful PR phrases such as "we value our fans" and "artistic integrity".
    • by Nrrqshrr (1879148) on Friday April 06, 2012 @04:10PM (#39601333)
      Not to mention that whole stock photo fiasco...
      You take one of the most popular, loved, masked characters. She was in all three episodes, and there have been numerous speculations on what she could possibly look like. Entire threads with hundreds of posts were just discussing what lies under that mask of hers.... and in the end? It's just a poorly photoshopped stock photo they found on google and bought for 10 bucks.
      Bioware is beyond redemption.
      • by Khyber (864651)

        Not Google, DeviantArt.

      • To be perfectly honest, I never understood the hatred over this. What did people really expect? Was BioWare supposed to hire some well known supermodel to be Tali or something?

        I've been pretty upset with ME3 with the rest of them but this particular instance just feels like people are now just looking for any way they can to rag on Bioware for the game.

        • by McGuirk (1189283)
          You kidding? The people upset wanted an in-game model actually shown. They teased the face reveal in at least 3 places, then ended with the crappy 2D image. It was a big let-down.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by manwargi (1361031)

          I'd heard another major complaint about that photo was that it's a plot hole-- the last time the quarians were able to safely live on a planet without their suits was a thousand years ago.

          I figured that there were too many people expecting a sexy secret, but I however was hoping they wouldn't just make the quarians into purple humans. It was bad enough the asari looked almost exactly like humans. I would have liked quarians to be very alien looking in some way, and perhaps in particular Tali's appearance n

        • They could have, at the very least, made the photo's hands match the character model.

          They took the picture, and 'shopped out the ring and pinky fingers. Only when you look at a quarian's hands, they have a thumb, a finger, a large gap, and another finger. Like chopping out the middle and ring finger.

          It was just half-assed and stupid. Make the face look like the voice actress. Or something. Something other than a stock photo with lens flare and poor 'shopping.

    • by wierd_w (1375923) on Friday April 06, 2012 @04:13PM (#39601357)

      This surprises anyone?

      For some reason, software companies feel that spaghetti wrapped in duct tape, (and in the case of game software), and that rough plots that are abrasive to the senses are "good enough", as long as they can "ship early!"

      Nobody takes pride in their work or product anymore when it comes to software, except for independent hobby programmers.

      It seems any time that *money!!* gets involved, quality slips, integrity dries up, and the bullshit gets deep. Really, it is just as much the public's insatiable desire for "WANT NAOW!" As it is the greed that feeds on it at fault.

      We can't stop EA from being stupid assholes that ruin franchises and abuse studios. What we can do is control our side of the demand chain, and make their antics unprofitable.

      The way to send EA the message is to buy their games used for 20$, and post pictures of the receipt on their forums as proof as part of the signature. If not their forum, any other forums you post at will do. Be sure the signature explains why you did this.

      This is WORSE than not buying the game. Your making use of their support services actually COSTS them money, that will NEVER receive payment from you for. Hit them in the wallet, where it hurts the most.

      • by Nrrqshrr (1879148)
        Why shouldn't they?

        Am one of those guys who touched a game pad for the first time at the age of 5 and knew from then that it gave birth to a fated passion. But if I, one dude who enjoys roguelikes and complicated storylines, boycotts a company, there will be a hundred more 12 years old kids who will happily buy the next Cawadooty because it got all kinds of tacticool weapons and flashy achievements.
        • by wierd_w (1375923)

          That is why you post the reciept, and a short explanation why you bought it used.

          There is a marketing saying: for every customer you satisfy, he tells 5 friends. For every customer you screw over, he tells 15.

          The internet let's you show your displeasure, and the proof of the pudding to potentially millions.

          There is no question about your legal purchase. There is no grounds to say you are a pirate. In fact, if you pay full price at gamestop for used, and post the reciept, the "you are a greedy cheepskate" a

      • One small nitpick:

        I don't think there is a credible and overwhelming demand from the users for an early release, as much as there is a credible and overwhelming demand from the beancounters and Board of Directors to release as early as practical (without screwing it up too badly... obviously they time that metric wrong on occasion).

        I mean, it doesn't have to have the timeline of DNF (oh, Lordy...) but the primary rule should be that, like the old wine commercial, no game is released before its time.

        Get the

        • by wierd_w (1375923)

          Oh, I agree. Their "think of all the money we will save by NOT PAYING PEOPLE by rushing development ahead 6 months! Uwee hee hee!" Antics are the biggest offender.

          But our complacentness about just blithely accepting this as status quo is what prompts them to think they will get away with it.

          Make that decision cost them money. Each and every time. It is the only way to reign in that madness.

      • by scot4875 (542869)

        The way to send EA the message is to buy their games used for 20$

        No, the way to send EA a message is to not buy their games at all. There is plenty of shit to do, and plenty of other games to play. You don't need any of EA's games.

        Unfortunately, gamers have about 0 resolve when it comes to 'sending a message' to some entity that sucks.

        --Jeremy

    • The biggest insult is, the ending was obviously rushed, but they had PLEANTY of time to tack on a shitty multiplayer function.
      • by dkf (304284)

        The biggest insult is, the ending was obviously rushed, but they had PLEANTY of time to tack on a shitty multiplayer function.

        Except the multiplayer isn't shitty (unless you're having network problems or you can't play shooters).

    • by Edsj (1972476)
      Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic 2 had the same problem. Unfortunately, EA will get away from this since they were not expecting to have a Mass Effect 4. The Mass Effect brand is damaged, so what? They made a quick buck and that's how it works there. I saw studio after studio being sucked dry by EA and Bioware is no different. I suggest you all never pre-order something EA branded until you get player comments about it. You can't even trust "professional" game reviews of the game (like it happened w
      • by Githaron (2462596)
        They might not make a Mass Effect 4 but they will make other games. I am fed up with EA. While I am sure plenty of people will keep doing business with them, I will not. They don't respect their customers.
        • This will end up very much damaging Bioware though (as it probably should). I mean, they will still sell games, but I'm very sure that I'll be waiting till player reviews hit before thinking about buying them.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      To be totally fair, EA doesn't do this stuff out of malice. EA's acquisitions fail because their executives are miserably incompetent.

      Basically this is what happens: some manager plays a game made by a beloved studio or minor competitor, and they get all starry-eyed about the amazing things the studio could do with some extra money. EA buys them, and it works fine for a little while. Then, some executive realizes that their subsidiary's games are really profitable, so they order the subsidiary to expand and

  • by raydobbs (99133) on Friday April 06, 2012 @04:22PM (#39601453) Homepage Journal

    ...the distinction is clearly not important to EA or what's left of Bioware. I can honestly say that given this news, I have -zero- desire to play the series again as-is. This was a journey best not taken at all, and it has made me reflect on all the time I've wasted playing games in general. If I am being told a narrative, then it should do so - if I am part of the narrative, don't yank the control of it from me at the end because you don't like the possibility I will chose something you don't want to do. Also, you don't go all 'werewolf' and torch everything in the end - it makes people's investment a fruitless one. Until game makers figure that out, I am done with 'interactive fiction' titles - ESPECIALLY from these two.

    • by Githaron (2462596)

      I have -zero- desire to play the series again as-is.

      Nor do I. I was a little annoyed by some of the choices that were made for me in Mass Effect 3 since I did not load a save (because I had reformatted my hard drive); however, prior to finishing Mass Effect 3, I was planning on going back and replaying the whole series from the beginning so that I could get the outcomes that I wanted. After getting to the crapping ending of the series, ALL desire to replay ANY of the Mass Effect games died. I had even planned to buy the DLCs that had come out after I had fin

  • Read the fine print. What the hell are they going to do, start charging extra for it after 2 years?

    • by Haedrian (1676506)

      So if you buy it after the price drops to a low level, you'll have to stay with the crappy ending.

    • No, they'll just stop offering it, like they did with the "ME1 comic book" DLC for PS3 ME2 that I never got to go through because I just bought ME2 about a month ago... which means I'm stuck with the 'default' choices from ME1.

      That is, unless I'm blind and missed where to download it?
      • by X0563511 (793323)

        This [masseffectsaves.com] lets you get saves for ME1, while this [masseffect2saves.com] does the same for ME2. I know you can get these onto a 360 with some work, but I don't know about the PS3.

        But that's what you get for running with a console - your flexibility to work around publisher idiocy such as you mention is significantly reduced.

    • by sdnoob (917382)

      that's when the online authentication servers for their fucked up drm go offline....

  • by sl4shd0rk (755837) on Friday April 06, 2012 @04:41PM (#39601667)

    Most people never finish these games and they know it, so why spend a lot of time on a great ending? For return customers? HAH! when you're the only game in town, you don't need to worry.

    The second part is they really only care about the first couple months of the user experience. They put just enough effort into the game so they can still make high volume sales before anyone has a chance to get the shitty parts where they "duct taped" stuff on. By the time anyone figures it out, they've already made a ton of cash on it.

    I just quit buying the new titles until they are a year or so old.

  • Just have me wake up after being hit by the beam in ME1. It's a horrible way to think about it, but at least that ending will have been erased. It then puts you in a nice recursive replay loop, and that I can accept.
  • by wazzzup (172351) <astromac.fastmail@fm> on Friday April 06, 2012 @04:51PM (#39601775)

    ...it's the way the ending was implemented.

    Battle Readiness high or low? Doesn't matter, same cutscene.
    Geth or Quarians alive? Doesn't matter, same cutscene.
    Rachni queen alive or dead? Doesn't matter, same cutscene.
    Renegade or Paragon? Doesn't matter, same cutscene.

    Regardless of plot holes and deux ex machina, what pissed me off was that the last 10 minutes of the game was antithetical to the way the entire series - hundreds of hours of playtime - functioned up to that point. The whole frickin' point of Mass Effect was that your choices mattered but ultimately they just didn't. And the fact that choosing control, destroy or synthesize only ended up changing the color of the explosions (okay plants had circuit boards in their leaves if you chose synthesize) was a fart in a bathtub.

    I had a Paragon save and a Renegade save from Mass Effect 2 and played the Paragon first. There is no incentive whatsoever to play the Renegade save. I'm not even interested in any DLC because it's all pointless.

    • It wasn't as though they just had all that forced out of them by EA completely. ME3 had plenty of good implementation in it. You had story lines that differed depending on who was alive coming in to ME3, and the choices you made. You could have some real different experiences and outcomes.

      Like man was the Tuchanka mission beautiful. If both main characters had died in previous series (and probably not coincidentally both were easier ones to lose) it could be kinda shitty, you really felt compelled to take t

    • They dropped the ball completely on amny thigns (beside the fact we don't know anything as epilogue on what happens to the races/friends/etc...).

      A MUCH better way to handle the 3 endings would have been :
      1) you are paragon/renegade indicate which ending is openned (blue/green para ; red/green/renegade)
      2) who you let alive as species and the battle readiness indicate whether you get the basic ending of your type (red/blue) or ALSO the green one. Or whatever.


      But an ABC choice at the end ? That was.... Pi
  • by damnbunni (1215350) on Friday April 06, 2012 @05:06PM (#39601919) Journal

    The ending to Mass Effect 3 was nowhere NEAR as annoying as all the whining about it.

    • Annoying?

      I haven't even played ME (any part), but I would like to heartily thank Bioware for providing an epic drama for teh internets. Lulz were had, a great many of them!

  • The ending was fine (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 06, 2012 @05:07PM (#39601935)

    Should say "whether or not the ending is disappointing" rather than "the disappointing ending," because I wasn't disappointed by it. I felt it was a perfectly fine ending to the trilogy, and a very large number of people feel the same way as me. The difference is that those of us who enjoyed the ending aren't necessarily going to be vocal about it, whereas the goal of those who dislike it is to make as loud of a shout as possible so they can try and get their way. As much as people think they want a different ending (by and large they want a hollywood ending as opposed to the artistic ending, which is what their real problem with it is), sacrificing the integrity of the art for the sake of consumer demand is a far worse crime in my opinion.

    • by Githaron (2462596)

      Should say "whether or not the ending is disappointing" rather than "the disappointing ending," because I wasn't disappointed by it. I felt it was a perfectly fine ending to the trilogy, and a very large number of people feel the same way as me. The difference is that those of us who enjoyed the ending aren't necessarily going to be vocal about it, whereas the goal of those who dislike it is to make as loud of a shout as possible so they can try and get their way. As much as people think they want a different ending (by and large they want a hollywood ending as opposed to the artistic ending, which is what their real problem with it is), sacrificing the integrity of the art for the sake of consumer demand is a far worse crime in my opinion.

      How about everyone here who like the ending be vocal about it. Explain to the rest of us why you think the ending was in any way good. I am genuinely interested why you think crap tastes good.

      • No shit (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Saturday April 07, 2012 @12:15AM (#39604501)

        I have seen many good deconstructions of why the ending is a bad one from a literary point of view, cinematic, story telling, logical, and so on. There are tons of faults and I've seen them talked about at great length and with solid backing.

        Everyone who says they liked it can't seem to elaborate. It was just "a good ending and you people are morons for hating it." Personally I think the reason id they fall in to one (or maybe more) of three categories:

        1) Bioware fanboys. They think everything Bioware does is great and thus this must be great. A Stockholm Syndrome of sorts. They defend it because the need to feel that Bioware has done right be the series and didn't fuck it up, not because that is deep down how they feel. Their defense is reflexive.

        2) Emo kids and wannabe ITGs. I've seen this with regards to movies and shit where people claim to hate "happy endings" and so on and act like the more things suck the better it is. They believe "dark" means "good". Of course they are usually fooling only themselves and you find if you examine the things they like, there are plenty of happy endings in it. They just play tough, or are pulling the emo crap.

        3) People who don't really give a shit about RPGs. For them Mass Effect was just a shootie like Doom with more talking. They space through cutscenes, ignore dialogue, and so on. They are all about the action. So they have no real investment in the story at all, and thus the ending is fine. "Oh hey I blew a bunch of shit up! Go me! Good ending!"

        I would think if the ending was truly so good, at least one person would be able to provide a competent defense as to why. Showing the things that were done well in terms of telling the story, providing closure, and all those kind of things an ending is supposed to do. That they can't well that tells me a lot right there.

    • "by and large they want a hollywood ending as opposed to the artistic ending, which is what their real problem with it is" - 100% entirely incorrect. We don't want a "happy" ending. Nobody seriously expected to see Shepard and Garrus on a beach somewhere drinking mai tais at the end. We know shepard's destiny is destroy the reapers at the cost of her (his) own life. Sure as hell we don't want a hollywood ending. We want an ending that 1. doesn't introduce a blue glowing deus ex machina child 5 minutes befor
  • BioWare strongly believes in the team’s artistic vision for the end of this arc of the Mass Effect franchise. The extended cut DLC will expand on the existing endings, but no further ending DLC is planned.

    Translation:

    EA believes we've spent enough money on an ending. We're getting dinged on fan review sites like Metacritic so we're going to throw another bandaid on it for as little cost as possible.

  • Everyone who is going on trying to defend the ending and BioWare's laziness is missing the point. If I go to an art gallery, I want artistic integrity. If I buy a game, I want entertainment. It's not that the two can't overlap, it's that the place to express your inner postmodernist isn't at the end of a mainstream entertainment product where you promise the players (and they are players, not participants in your interactive art project) that their choices matter only to say "haha, I lied" at the end and

  • The best ending mechanic for RPGs is the fallout method.

    They had single image and short voice over for EVERY major quest. How hard is it to knock out 40 or 20-30 second voice overs along with maybe 15 still images? Easy. Do that.

    Mass Effect players tweaked their games endlessly to get a perfect ending across THREE games one into the next all culminating at that final point.

    And after all that it turns out that all that tweaks was totally wasted. Why import the ME2 game into ME3 if ME3 won't do anything cool

  • A definite plot hole and lack that will certainly get no help from this DLC is the fact that there was no fighting within the Citadel at the end. The endgame of ME1 established that the Reapers don't have any sort of 'kill switch' to clear the Citadel, and it's a huge city with a large population and a well-trained defense force (well-equipped, too, if you do certain side missions). They might have taken the indefensible central tower easily enough as in ME1, in order to close everything up, but taking th

  • Brown shooter of the year didnt bother to flush out story and will now charge stupid fanboi's for appropriate ending found free on troll forums.

  • If you search for 'Indoctrination Theory' on youtube, you'll find a 20 minute video that addresses the plot holes and stuff that just makes no sense at all. It not only changes the ending, it changes how I looked at the game.

    But if it's true—and it might very well be—then BioWare failed at ending presentation, because it was too subtle for most of us to figure it out without referencing a video on youtube.

    I'm on my second playthrough, and I've decided that the Geth are the thing that makes the least sense in the game. Why do Geth ships have hallways and railings? Consoles to type at? Guards? Why bother with any of that stuff? And the 'renegade' options near the end of that mission-line are stupid. They present a false dichotomy. You can be a renegade, but not only do you throw away a potential war resource, but they're no danger at all to the Quarians if you pick the paragon options. It's infuriating.

    (Disclosure: I worked for BioWare for many years. I do not work for BioWare or EA anymore.)

FORTH IF HONK THEN

Working...