• Aaryn Flynn is leaving BioWare, Casey Hudson is coming back
    14 replies, posted
[url]http://www.pcgamer.com/aaryn-flynn-is-leaving-bioware-casey-hudson-is-coming-back[/url]
[U][B]CASEY [I]HUDSON?![/I][/B][/U] That lying motherfucker is coming back? Rest in pieces of pieces EAware.
[QUOTE=Damjen;52482226][U][B]CASEY [I]HUDSON?![/I][/B][/U] That lying motherfucker is coming back? Rest in pieces of pieces EAware.[/QUOTE] What did he do? :v:
[QUOTE=J!NX;52482240]What did he do? :v:[/QUOTE] Something something "every ME3 ending will be unique" and stuff. Also probably lots of other things :V Even without dramatics, Casey isn't really the kind of person you want in any studio you'd like good games out of.
Is anyone really surprised by this? Thought that Casey Hudson stated that he was working on Bioware's Anthem game prior to this announcement, so seeing him come back to the studio is not that surprising. [editline]18th July 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=J!NX;52482240]What did he do? :v:[/QUOTE] [t]https://i.imgur.com/QzR5uQB.jpg[/t] This is not really the case when it came to Mass Effect 3 overall ending and the choices regarding the ending.
Bioware is literally going to have to [B]complete[/B] an entirely new trilogy of games that have actual meaningfulness before I ever trust them or invest in their worldbuilding again.
I'm glad he's back. ME3's ending sucked, time to move on now, it was 5 years ago. He's directed the entire Mass Effect trilogy, it's not fair to hate him so much because he was partly responsible for messing up the ending. [editline]18th July 2017[/editline] Expecting 27X to come here to tell us how Casey Hudson is a no-good son of a bitch who's never done anything right in his entire life.
except the problem with the first me trilogy goes beyond just the ending to 3. many of its story problems are rooted in 2, and 1 suffered some gameplay issues as well.
That doesn't really justify giving him more slack than, say, Todd Howard who makes games that are more and more flawed as time goes on.
[QUOTE=Loadingue;52482488]That doesn't really justify giving him more slack than, say, Todd Howard who makes games that are more and more flawed as time goes on.[/QUOTE] For the most part you can do what Tod Howard says. Casey Hudson for 5 years said our choices had meaning in Mass Effect 3. Mass Effect 3 had 5 years of hype leading up to it.
My favorite is how your choice with the rachni queen in 1 has no effect on 3. In either case there's a rachni queen.
Well no it has an effect if the Rachni in 3 betray you (killed them in 1) or not if you recruit them.
[QUOTE=imadaman;52485714]Well no it has an effect if the Rachni in 3 betray you (killed them in 1) or not if you recruit them.[/QUOTE] I killed the Rachni, they should have stayed dead. Or as Shamus Young put it [quote]They went to all this trouble to give us this branching outcome, when I think that what people really wanted was for that initial decision to stand. If I kill the queen she should stay dead, not be replaced with a color-swapped doppelganger. It’s this strange mindset that players must value content more than choice, that we’d rather see our decisions negated than miss out on one mission. Heck, if you don’t want to cut a mission then just fill the cave on Utukku with… I dunno… other mooks. Whatever. Just don’t un-do the earlier decision, and then turn around and offer the player the same decision again. This is something that harmed Telltale’s The Walking Dead. Negating a major player decision doesn’t just harm that particular moment of the game, it harms every subsequent decision. You’re asking the player to ponder this uncomfortable decision with complex ethical implications and unknowable outcomes, but now in the back of their mind they have this nagging doubt, “Bah. It probably doesn’t matter what I choose anyway because nothing I choose makes any difference. I’ll just do whatever gives me paragon points.” It’s destructive to one of the core promises of the game, which is that the player will get to “make choices that matter”. Players are hungry for even a little authorship over the world. I think we value that far more than one more stupid gunfight. [/quote] What you choose in 1 has nearly no effect. A gut wrenching moral decision is rendered pointless, to either a few "war assets" (which were useless padding in 3, but that's a whole other problem)
I thought hack walters was the one most responsible for the ending
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.