Soooo....Mass Effect 3

[Taelas]

I can't explain it in any way other than to say it doesn't "feel" as 'art'. It is a horrendously vague thing to base such on, but it remains regardless.

I agree that they don't really have a foot to stand on, legally, regarding the 'false advertising' claim -- but no one can deny that, even if it may not be so legally, the spirit of those developer statements was not fulfilled.

In my opinion, BioWare has an obligation to meet the expectations that arose as a direct result of those statements. If they can just hide behind 'artistic integrity', then that sets a precedent I don't care for.

It is not as if art hasn't changed due to the response of the fanbase before. Broken Steel, a DLC for Fallout 3, altered the ending of that game. Arthur Conan Doyle brought his protagonist back from the dead due to pressure from fans and his editors. Charles Dickens altered the ending of Great Expectations due to fan outcry as well.

Jester, I have seen the 'Amazon refunds' claim a lot and haven't seen a single refutation, so I'd say it's probably true (on the other hand, I haven't seen any proof, either)--but it's probably simply a publicity thing by Amazon, even if it is correct. The PR gained from allowing refunds probably outweighs the cost of the few refunds they actually have to pay for.

The claim is that they advertised "multiple endings", which we sure as hell didn't get, assuming you define 'ending' as 'the ending of the game'. If you define 'ending' as 'the ending of the trilogy', then you can squeeze a lot more in (as you can consider the entirety of ME3 'the end' of the trilogy), but that is, in my opinion, intellectually dishonest.

It obviously doesn't have any real legal standing; I'd be very surprised to see anything resulting from it. I'd still say they have a point, though.

[Jester]

In my opinion, BioWare has an obligation to meet the expectations that arose as a direct result of those statements. If they can just hide behind 'artistic integrity', then that sets a precedent I don't care for.

Hardly a precedent, hyping a game and failing to meet your promises is par for the course in this industry, and in most industries. Where would Peter Molyneux be, if people could sue him for promising one thing, and delivering another? Almost all commercially available works are like this - you buy it as is, the parts you like and don't like just the same. It is very rare for a product to be radically changed after release. Video games more than most, but still not very much.

They have also said they're going to fix it, which is more than you'd get from the overwhelming majority of games companies.

Jester, I have seen the 'Amazon refunds' claim a lot and haven't seen a single refutation, so I'd say it's probably true (on the other hand, I haven't seen any proof, either)--but it's probably simply a publicity thing by Amazon, even if it is correct. The PR gained from allowing refunds probably outweighs the cost of the few refunds they actually have to pay for.

Looking into this, it is apparently standard Amazon policy for all items. This is not unique to ME3.

It obviously doesn't have any real legal standing; I'd be very surprised to see anything resulting from it. I'd still say they have a point, though.

They have a point that the ending sucks? Or they have a point that BioWare owes them for having made an ending they didn't like? Because those are very different propositions.

-Jester

[Lissa]

Let's face it, consumers have a right to argue something is inferior and either get their money back (which won't happen in this case due to how the game is setup) or get the product changed due to the inferior make up (which is happening in this case).

I'm pretty sure the legal rule is "caveat emptor." There is no right to consumer satisfaction, only a game played between producer and consumer. Bioware has signalled they're listening and want to respond. They have no inherent obligation to do so, nor to refund your money.

-Jester

Sorry, but bait and switch is not allowed under US law (while some of the posters here are not from the US, a good number are). As noted in a post already, this could institute false advertisement. Also, due to the wait multiplayer works, you can't really return the game as the next person is now screwed in being able to play multiplayer after you've done it. So say want you want, but Caveat Emptor does not fit here.

[Lissa]

They have a point that the ending sucks? Or they have a point that BioWare owes them for having made an ending they didn't like? Because those are very different propositions.

-Jester

Ok, I'm going to discuss the ending, if you don't want to be spoiled, turn away... (Bolty, we really need a spoiler tag that covers the spoilers up)




















Ok, this will show you how bad the ending is. When you get to Earth, you and all squad members go down to London. During this, Joker has the Normandy in the battle with the reapers in orbit. During the entire time you're fighting on Earth, you're squad members are involved, a couple directly with you, the rest helping out with the fighting in some way in the back drop.

Now, when you finally get to the final sequence, you're running for a transport beam up to the citadel. During this, you're getting shot at by Harbinger with your two chosen squad members from the prior fight still in tow (you take out Destroyer class reaper, they're must smaller that the Soverign class, about 160m to 2km for size comparison). During this run, you take a "glancing" blow from one of Harbinger's beams (which leaves you barely alive). You then make your way to the beam having to kill 3 husks and a marauder before entering the beam while barely alive. Once you get up to the citadel, you make your way to a confrontation with the Illusive Man with Anderson being there. You either kill the Illusive Man or he commits suicide (depending on if you go paragon or renegade in your choices). In this confrontation, the Illusive Man forces you to shot Anderson. Once the Illusive Man dies, you get the crucible docked to the citadel and have a short rest with Anderson where you talk a little before Anderson dies. Hackett then informs you that the crucible is not firing and you have to do something on your side. You go to do so and pass out from all the damage you've taken and blood loss.

Next you wake with what looks like a ghostly hologram human child, the child informs you that it is the catalyst. In then goes on to explain that you have to make a choice, you can destroy the reaper, control the reapers, or, if your war assets are high enough, combine organics and synthetics together. Further, the child explains that the whole reasons the reapers exist is to remove the advanced civilizations because said advanced civilizations would create sythentics that would eventually turn on their creators and go to war (much like the Quarians and Geth, although you have the opportunity to solve that earlier in the game or look at EDI turning on everyone as another possibility). And the child further explains that the reapers are there to harvest the advanced civilizations to "save" them by turning them into reapers as well (so to save the organic civilization, the reapers have to turn them into synthetics effectively). And then the reapers leave, let the younger civilizations advance, and then do it all over again!

So, that whole setup convoluted enough for you? Ok, it's gets better. Once you make your choice, either to destroy the reapers, controll them, or combine organics and synthetics into a new life form, you now cut to a beam firing out of the citadel at the Sol relay. The Sol relay then explodes and the beam continues on throughout the relay network. The next thing you see is a cut to the galaxy as you watch relay after relay blow up with the beam effect going outward (now, given what happened in the Arrival DLC, a relay blowing up is s'posed to be like a supernova going off, so effectively, Sheppard making the choice would do more to kill off all life in the galaxy than what the reapers were doing given all the young civilizations would have relays in their home systems or near by anyway). Now we cut to Joker flying the Normandy in relay space (why he left Sol is anyone's guess). The beam catches the Normandy and it looks like the Normandy blows up, not so.

The next thing we see if the Normandy has crash landed, amazingly, on a garden world. Joker, opens the airlock and goes outside, he's then joined by Sheppard's love interest, and one of the squadmembers that was with Sheppard on the run to the citadel beam.

So, now having read that, can you see the gigantic plot holes? Can you see how insipid the ending is compared to what BioWare alluded to in their various media events and commentary? Now do you see why everyone is up in arms about the ending? The game is great up to that ending, and then the ending chucks everything that everyone has done out the window with a load of tripe. The ending makes no sense and it is not the kind of ending that BioWare alluded to in interviews and the like. Pretty much everyone was given a bate and switch situation with the game.

I see ample room for them to be hit with a false advertising suit due to what they said in interviews vs. what the final product ended up.

[Jester]

Sorry, but bait and switch is not allowed under US law (while some of the posters here are not from the US, a good number are). As noted in a post already, this could institute false advertisement. Also, due to the wait multiplayer works, you can't really return the game as the next person is now screwed in being able to play multiplayer after you've done it. So say want you want, but Caveat Emptor does not fit here.

Good luck arguing that this is bait and switch. One feature of the game was not exactly as advertised, in a creative industry soaked in hype. The amount of entitlement on display here staggers me. You can hate the game, you can even hate BioWare if you're so inclined, but the idea that this entitles you to legal redress is preposterous. If this was grounds for a legally enforceable refund, the entire video games industry would close its doors tomorrow. (How many million things has Blizzard promised over the years, that it hasn't delivered on? How long would they last if WoW subscriptions were refundable when patches don't deliver on promises?)

The chances of this flying in court, or with any regulatory body, are zero.

-Jester

Afterthought: Haven't played the game, not interested in spoilers, won't read. Don't bother, if I'm your intended audience.

[Taelas]

Looking into this, it is apparently standard Amazon policy for all items. This is not unique to ME3.

Ah, that makes sense. All right, then.

It obviously doesn't have any real legal standing; I'd be very surprised to see anything resulting from it. I'd still say they have a point, though.

They have a point that the ending sucks? Or they have a point that BioWare owes them for having made an ending they didn't like? Because those are very different propositions.

On some level, yes, I feel BioWare owes their players for not delivering on the ending. Not to a legal degree, and perhaps it is 'entitlement', but the difference in quality between the ending and the entire rest of the game is so staggering that many people think it was deliberately bad, so they could come up with a DLC ending that people would have to pay for. (They also added that they would pay.) I don't hold to that theory, but who knows.

[[wcip]Angel]

If you're unhappy with the official ending, there's a better one here. I actually got chills just reading it. Worth a look!

[Lissa]

Sorry, but bait and switch is not allowed under US law (while some of the posters here are not from the US, a good number are). As noted in a post already, this could institute false advertisement. Also, due to the wait multiplayer works, you can't really return the game as the next person is now screwed in being able to play multiplayer after you've done it. So say want you want, but Caveat Emptor does not fit here.

Good luck arguing that this is bait and switch. One feature of the game was not exactly as advertised, in a creative industry soaked in hype. The amount of entitlement on display here staggers me. You can hate the game, you can even hate BioWare if you're so inclined, but the idea that this entitles you to legal redress is preposterous. If this was grounds for a legally enforceable refund, the entire video games industry would close its doors tomorrow. (How many million things has Blizzard promised over the years, that it hasn't delivered on? How long would they last if WoW subscriptions were refundable when patches don't deliver on promises?)

The chances of this flying in court, or with any regulatory body, are zero.

-Jester

Afterthought: Haven't played the game, not interested in spoilers, won't read. Don't bother, if I'm your intended audience.

That's just it Jester, it was advertised that everything you did mattered in the end when in fact it did not. That is the heart of false advertisement and bait and switch. There is commentary on record from the people in charge of ME 3 about what would happen and how your choices mattered in the end and the fact that it is the exact opposite of what they said on record. That would stand up in court for false advertisement, why do you think BioWare is scrambling right now to come up with some kind of DLC that makes a better ending that what is in the game? They've looked back on what they have on record, looked at what they have, and looked at what the fans have pointed to, and guess what, it's not as they have on record.

[[wcip]Angel]

Perhaps, but you could also argue that they're addressing the issue, not to avoid legal liability, but to appease and please their fan base.

[Jester]

That's just it Jester, it was advertised that everything you did mattered in the end when in fact it did not. That is the heart of false advertisement and bait and switch. There is commentary on record from the people in charge of ME 3 about what would happen and how your choices mattered in the end and the fact that it is the exact opposite of what they said on record. That would stand up in court for false advertisement, why do you think BioWare is scrambling right now to come up with some kind of DLC that makes a better ending that what is in the game? They've looked back on what they have on record, looked at what they have, and looked at what the fans have pointed to, and guess what, it's not as they have on record.

BioWare would blow this one out of the water in court. Doing so would be an entirely phyrric victory, and they would be idiots to go down that road. They are in a consumer-driven industry, and alienating their fanbase like that would be death by self-inflicted gunshot wound. That's why they're back-pedaling, not because they're afraid of fraud litigation.

-Jester

[Lissa]

That's just it Jester, it was advertised that everything you did mattered in the end when in fact it did not. That is the heart of false advertisement and bait and switch. There is commentary on record from the people in charge of ME 3 about what would happen and how your choices mattered in the end and the fact that it is the exact opposite of what they said on record. That would stand up in court for false advertisement, why do you think BioWare is scrambling right now to come up with some kind of DLC that makes a better ending that what is in the game? They've looked back on what they have on record, looked at what they have, and looked at what the fans have pointed to, and guess what, it's not as they have on record.

BioWare would blow this one out of the water in court. Doing so would be an entirely phyrric victory, and they would be idiots to go down that road. They are in a consumer-driven industry, and alienating their fanbase like that would be death by self-inflicted gunshot wound. That's why they're back-pedaling, not because they're afraid of fraud litigation.

-Jester

They've already alienated their fan base Jester. Why do you think the fans are up in arms over this ending? As I also said, there is commentary on record by BioWare's people stating that the ending would be based on your overall actions in the game and the opposite is true in the game. What I noted earlier is true, ME 3 ends up being like an M Night Shamalaya movie, it's got this good pacing and good story and then you hit the ending and it comes out of left field with everything up to that point being for naught.

[[wcip]Angel]

On my second playthrough now. On my first ME2-save, Mordin hadn't made it the Suicide Mission. He did however survive another of my playthroughs, and is present for ME3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcKCnsxFgZM

Nice touch, Bioware It almost excuses the ending

[Lissa]

On my second playthrough now. On my first ME2-save, Mordin hadn't made it the Suicide Mission. He did however survive another of my playthroughs, and is present for ME3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcKCnsxFgZM

Nice touch, Bioware It almost excuses the ending

I take it you never talked to him about doing Gilbert and Sullivan in ME 2?

Scientist Silarian

[Jester]

They've already alienated their fan base Jester. Why do you think the fans are up in arms over this ending? As I also said, there is commentary on record by BioWare's people stating that the ending would be based on your overall actions in the game and the opposite is true in the game. What I noted earlier is true, ME 3 ends up being like an M Night Shamalaya movie, it's got this good pacing and good story and then you hit the ending and it comes out of left field with everything up to that point being for naught.

"The record" is not some magic commitment zone wherein everything said is legally enforceable in court. It's video game hype. There is extremely broad latitude given to describing the artistic content of one's works. People describe their future projects in overhyped terms all the damn time. Peter Molyneux has made an entire career out of it, and best I can tell, nobody's ever taken him to court for Fable. Arguing that you have been sold a nonfunctional or fraudulent product on grounds that weak isn't even going to get you in the door in court, let alone your money back.

I get that you feel cheated out of what was promised you. But this has gone way over the top in entitlement drama. They don't legally owe you everything they said would be true about their hypothetical future game. They just don't. Hype is not a contract.

Alienation is not binary. How BioWare responds to this will either make things better, or worse.

-Jester

[[wcip]Angel]

I take it you never talked to him about doing Gilbert and Sullivan in ME 2?

Scientist Silarian

Of course That's why I was happy to see its inclusion in #3 as well

edit: Just finished the last mission on Tuchanka....

I actually felt something here.

[Thenryb]

They've already alienated their fan base Jester. Why do you think the fans are up in arms over this ending? As I also said, there is commentary on record by BioWare's people stating that the ending would be based on your overall actions in the game and the opposite is true in the game. What I noted earlier is true, ME 3 ends up being like an M Night Shamalaya movie, it's got this good pacing and good story and then you hit the ending and it comes out of left field with everything up to that point being for naught.

"The record" is not some magic commitment zone wherein everything said is legally enforceable in court. It's video game hype. There is extremely broad latitude given to describing the artistic content of one's works. People describe their future projects in overhyped terms all the damn time. Peter Molyneux has made an entire career out of it, and best I can tell, nobody's ever taken him to court for Fable. Arguing that you have been sold a nonfunctional or fraudulent product on grounds that weak isn't even going to get you in the door in court, let alone your money back.

I get that you feel cheated out of what was promised you. But this has gone way over the top in entitlement drama. They don't legally owe you everything they said would be true about their hypothetical future game. They just don't. Hype is not a contract.

Alienation is not binary. How BioWare responds to this will either make things better, or worse.

-Jester

I did not know anyone here (besides me) was a lawyer. Most juries I have observed over the last 40+ years would, in my opinion, conclude that the statements made by Bioware regarding what the players could expect in a choice of endings based on the choices they made in the first two games were more than mere hype. That said, I would be more than surprised if anyone receives any judicial relief.

[Lissa]

They've already alienated their fan base Jester. Why do you think the fans are up in arms over this ending? As I also said, there is commentary on record by BioWare's people stating that the ending would be based on your overall actions in the game and the opposite is true in the game. What I noted earlier is true, ME 3 ends up being like an M Night Shamalaya movie, it's got this good pacing and good story and then you hit the ending and it comes out of left field with everything up to that point being for naught.

"The record" is not some magic commitment zone wherein everything said is legally enforceable in court. It's video game hype. There is extremely broad latitude given to describing the artistic content of one's works. People describe their future projects in overhyped terms all the damn time. Peter Molyneux has made an entire career out of it, and best I can tell, nobody's ever taken him to court for Fable. Arguing that you have been sold a nonfunctional or fraudulent product on grounds that weak isn't even going to get you in the door in court, let alone your money back.

I get that you feel cheated out of what was promised you. But this has gone way over the top in entitlement drama. They don't legally owe you everything they said would be true about their hypothetical future game. They just don't. Hype is not a contract.

Alienation is not binary. How BioWare responds to this will either make things better, or worse.

-Jester

I did not know anyone here (besides me) was a lawyer. Most juries I have observed over the last 40+ years would, in my opinion, conclude that the statements made by Bioware regarding what the players could expect in a choice of endings based on the choices they made in the first two games were more than mere hype. That said, I would be more than surprised if anyone receives any judicial relief.

Exactly, while I doubt the court would force BioWare to refund money, the court would see that BioWare's statements were the exact opposite of what happens. Pretty much all your decisions up to that final choice are thrown out the window, they literally have no bearing on the final choice where as BioWare is on record stating that all your choices up to that point would have an effect on the final outcome. Also, from what I have read from other people that have completed the game, if you just do the minimum story quest missions thus getting miminum war resources, your choice is made for you in that your ME 2 choice (paragon or renegade) ends up being the choice you take automatically (paragon or renegade ending -- effectively you have no choice at the end of ME 3 and are dictated what your ending is based on how you ended ME 2).

[Jester]

Exactly, while I doubt the court would force BioWare to refund money, the court would see that BioWare's statements were the exact opposite of what happens. Pretty much all your decisions up to that final choice are thrown out the window, they literally have no bearing on the final choice where as BioWare is on record stating that all your choices up to that point would have an effect on the final outcome. Also, from what I have read from other people that have completed the game, if you just do the minimum story quest missions thus getting miminum war resources, your choice is made for you in that your ME 2 choice (paragon or renegade) ends up being the choice you take automatically (paragon or renegade ending -- effectively you have no choice at the end of ME 3 and are dictated what your ending is based on how you ended ME 2).

So, the court would offer what, moral support? It's not a fact-checking service. The question is whether you get some kind of legal redress. And I think the chances of that are so slim as to be hopeless. (As well they should be - I don't want consumers to be able to sue artistic producers over everything they ever promised over a development cycle!)

-Jester

[Thenryb]

Exactly, while I doubt the court would force BioWare to refund money, the court would see that BioWare's statements were the exact opposite of what happens. Pretty much all your decisions up to that final choice are thrown out the window, they literally have no bearing on the final choice where as BioWare is on record stating that all your choices up to that point would have an effect on the final outcome. Also, from what I have read from other people that have completed the game, if you just do the minimum story quest missions thus getting miminum war resources, your choice is made for you in that your ME 2 choice (paragon or renegade) ends up being the choice you take automatically (paragon or renegade ending -- effectively you have no choice at the end of ME 3 and are dictated what your ending is based on how you ended ME 2).

So, the court would offer what, moral support? It's not a fact-checking service. The question is whether you get some kind of legal redress. And I think the chances of that are so slim as to be hopeless. (As well they should be - I don't want consumers to be able to sue artistic producers over everything they ever promised over a development cycle!)

-Jester

Well, I doubt the "court" would offer anything including a "judgment" on the issue of whether Bioware's statements constitute deliberate misleading of customers or mere hype. I used the concept of a "jury" simply to advance my belief that a group of persons who are fully informed of the promises made and the actual content would find the promises misleading and not mere hype. The only "sanction" Bioware will ever suffer, if any, is consumers not buying its products.

[Lissa]

Exactly, while I doubt the court would force BioWare to refund money, the court would see that BioWare's statements were the exact opposite of what happens. Pretty much all your decisions up to that final choice are thrown out the window, they literally have no bearing on the final choice where as BioWare is on record stating that all your choices up to that point would have an effect on the final outcome. Also, from what I have read from other people that have completed the game, if you just do the minimum story quest missions thus getting miminum war resources, your choice is made for you in that your ME 2 choice (paragon or renegade) ends up being the choice you take automatically (paragon or renegade ending -- effectively you have no choice at the end of ME 3 and are dictated what your ending is based on how you ended ME 2).

So, the court would offer what, moral support? It's not a fact-checking service. The question is whether you get some kind of legal redress. And I think the chances of that are so slim as to be hopeless. (As well they should be - I don't want consumers to be able to sue artistic producers over everything they ever promised over a development cycle!)

-Jester

As Thenry points out, they mislead their consumers. That is the problem here. And Jester, I agree to a point with your statement in parenthsis. That point ends when you are less than a month from release and you make a sweeping statement, as BioWare did, that your choices matter when in fact they do not. That's outright misleading your consumers, that's not hype. If that same comment had been made earlier in the development cycle and then later retracted, then I would say it was hype, but that is not what happened here.

And Jester, just to show you what I mean, this is a question and answer to/from Casey Hudson, the overall lead on ME 3 on Feb 17th of 2012 (just a little over 2 weeks from launch of ME 3 and pulled from the last link in the BioWare forums that Armin linked to):

Interviewer: Are there alternative endings depending on what you do in the game?

Casey Hudson: It's not so much that there is a fixed set of alternative endings, but all of your choices really determine how things end up in the universe. So, how you approach the end-game, for every player, you're going to have a different set of results in terms of who is alive and who is dead, and which civilisations survived and which ones were wiped out.

There is a huge set of consequences that start stacking up as you approach the end-game. And even in terms of the ending itself, it continues to break down to some very large decisions. So it's not like a classic game ending where everything is linear and you make a choice between a few things - it really does layer in many, many different choices, up to the final moments, where it's going to be different for everyone who plays it.

If you had played the game as I and others here, you'd see Hudson's comment for the bold face lie that it is. This is not hype, this is an outright falsehood at this late a stage of the development cycle. It is a fixed set of alternate endings and the only thing that changes is you get a third ending choice if your war assets are high enough. Every player will have the same definite ending with a minor differences between the three potential choices. So, you can sit here and say that it's hype, but less than three weeks to go and the head of the development team says one thing when something completely the opposite of what they say is the truth is false advertisement of the product. A court would definitely rule against BioWare in this instance.

That being said, outside of the ending, it's a great game. Where it falls flat on its face is the ending as it's presented now.