kadayi

@CaptainCody said:

I'm a sucker for the protagonist dying in games. But, to sum it up, I would say I'm happy that it actually ENDED. Something that is becoming a marvelously impossible feat to do in so many videogames.

Pretty sure most story driven games END as a rule (I'm hard pressed to think of any that don't, that's for sure), so I'm not seeing much in terms of the way of a defence (for wont of a better word) being offered up here.

Dark souls speed run = bad ass.

I totally missed Micheal Clarke Duncan dying. Most unfortunate.

@Zirilius said:

One could argue that they are doing this now with Dragon Age 3 with it being delayed to next gen consoles and release date somewhere in 2014. Personally I haven't lost any faith with Bioware as I still think they put out quality product. I for one liked Dragon Age 2 overall. Yes dungeon design was bleh, but I personally liked Hawke and the more personal focused story they did. Did it get bat shit crazy? Absolutely it did but it's all the more reason I liked it more.

I think they really are taking the criticisms to heart though and that Dragon Age 3 and whatever future Mass Effect titles will be better because of their predecessors.

Agreed. I'm actually pretty positive about DA3. Similarly I liked the Hawke character, I think it added a lot more engagement to the experience having a name and a voice. One of the issues I felt with DA:O was that the lack of a name/voice to the protagonist really hindered any degree of emotion to the conversations as everyone skipping around your lack of name or using the rather neutral 'grey warden' to refer to you ('yes grey warden take me like the stallion you are to love mountain' ). Sure it was great that they gave you so many starting options in DA:O, but there was definitely a cost to it. Certainly the repeat dungeons and WTF moment towards the end of DA:2 weren't particularly stellar, but I'd say their offensiveness has been overplayed. Also I preferred the more showy combat of DA2 (even if the waves aspect was a little hokey at times) Vs the slog-a-thon nature of the combat in DA:O. The characters felt a lot more bad ass in the hero stakes in DA2, where as in DA:O I felt like it was just a case of that the protagonist wasn't any better than anyone else in a fight save for the fact that they were under my control and I had better equipment.

It's not in anyone's interest (EA, EAs shareholders, Biowares developers) to make lackluster games going forward and like you I'm confident that lessons will have been learnt as a result of events and future titles will benefit from it.

@believer258 said:

Especially everything about the indoctrination theory.

The main problem with the IT was the simple fact that the game ended. If they'd done a rug pull where you go through an elaborate sequence and then it's all revealed to in fact be a case of you battling against indoctrination and then you wake up to finish the game proper...that would of actually been utter fucking genius (up there with the system crash sequence in Batman:Arkham Asylum in terms of gaming gotcha's). However the plain simple fact that that doesn't happen pretty much was the nail in the coffin to the whole thing. The idea that they were going to sell the 'real' ending as DLC down the road was just the most idiotic thing ever. Even the press would of been in uproar over that idea.

@ExplodeMode said:

Positivity and negativity are both infectious.

Before an anticipated game is received negatively, it is usually received positively. Especially so before release.

When you get an early copy and are all hyped up, and you write a glowing review and then you put your name on it, it's probably hard to accept that you might have had hype blinders on if your reputation is now invested in the opinion of this game.

True enough. I think GTA IV suffered from this, with a lot of reviewers declaring it the best thing since sliced bread and then the game releasing to less than stellar reaction by the larger player base.

Doom 3 also got hyped to the gills by reviewers IIRC and similarly underwhelmed when it hit the shelves.

I think the big difference this time is that Bioware had a forum where people could air their grievances and also realise they weren't alone in being underwhelmed by the whole thing and thus get organised to vocalise their issues . Rockstar don't do forums, and Doom 3 was released in a period when forums were the exception rather than the rule.

TBH I didn't think Bioware did a particularly good job with any of the new romance options. They all felt kind of weak Vs the established romance characters. I just can't conceive that many people threw over any of their previous romances for any of the new ones aside from curiosity before reloading an earlier save.

@CaptainCody said:

I never said that, I said 90% of endings are bad. When they are, to me, the most important part and reasoning behind enjoying the story.

Yet here you are giving ME3 a pass? An ending that has been the most controversial of the year. What exactly did you like about it?

I wouldn't say I hated the ending, but I was underwhelmed by it and I didn't think it was up to the overall standard of the rest of the game. However saying that I didn't like a lot of what was going on in ME3 overall. For all the peaks of certain parts of the narrative (Thane and Mordin for instance) there was a lot of drek thrown in as well.

I think this video summarizes a lot of the games core problems, that fall outside of the ending tbh: -

They definitely cut back on a lot of the conversational options and it did really drag away from the sense of 'Your Shepard' Vs 'Bioware's Shepard' as a result. it's easy to get caught up in the minutiae of these things, but I'm with Jeff in that the game wasn't as good overall as ME2 in terms of cohesiveness.

As regards the high horse issue, the attitude by several members of the gaming press to vilify the unhappy fan base Vs putting even a modicum of effort into at least attempting to understand their concerns rather than give them short shift definitely stands out as a low point in the year for sure. I don't hold that Bioware owed it to anyone to make a completely new ending, and that they at least attempted to address some of the problems people had with the original with ending via the EC is kind of a positive move in a way. Ultimately I don't think there would of been any way to salvage things entirely without abandoning the whole god/child choice issue and although that makes a lot more sense to me (I'm entirely down with the activate catalyst, sit down and bleed out with Anderson fan cut), I recognize that that degree of capitulation would set a dangerous precedent for future development.

I don't particularly agree with Tom Chicks decision here (although the man admits to not having played TWD yet). However I do agree with his sentiments in that there's likely a silver lining to this whole situation in terms of future game narrative. I doubt EA were particularly happy with the ending furore and certainly they're going to be more interested in rebuilding the reputation of Bioware going forward by ensuring that future titles deliver on expectations and promises.

Best ending: Mass Effect 3
Whether you liked the ending of Mass Effect 3 — I liked it, but that’s neither here nor there — the reaction to the ending raised important questions about how games end, about what fans are owed, and about a developer’s responsibility to its audience. I disagree with the answers that many fans concluded from Mass Effect 3, but I’m glad the topic was raised and I’m glad Electronic Arts pretty much stuck to their guns. If the end result is gamers expecting better writing and more meaningful payoffs in their games, the ending of Mass Effect 3 is a win for everyone concerned

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/12/12/2012-the-year-in-gaming/

I kind of take them as a year in review, plus they're pretty entertaining as the death march to GoTY progresses.