I played it knowing about the firestorm over the ending. It is still a great game, just a great game with a meh ending. Not an unusual thing in the video game world IMHO.

You guys realize that the extra content was a totally optional DLC, right? If you’re a fan of the old ending you can just, you know, not download it.

It was him, and here’s why:

While at PAX he (Patrick Weekes) was interviewed by a fan. Yeah, fan is vague, but Weekes confirmed the interview happened on his twitter account, and while he claimed some of the answers the fan attributed to him had a negative spin he never denied the following:

(Mr. Weekes dropped a lot of hints that he really didn’t like the ending. He also said something that was almost 100% verbatim from the Penny Arcade Forum post often attributed to him
Then there is this:

But here’s where the “huge amount of controversy” comes in: the writer, knowing the amount of trouble his statements would cause, deleted his posts and requested that nobody attribute his statements to his name, asking them to simply say “I heard” or “I bet”. These posts were also taken down by Penny Arcade at the behest of the author (well-known in the forums as Takyris), though Gameranx both published the writer’s name (Patrick Weekes) and received an anonymous screenshot of the posts in question, dated March 11.
Takyris is an account that has been on the forums since ME1, linked to Weekes’ LiveJournal where he discusses his work, and Penny Arcade users noted that he would sometimes bounce light ideas off of them. Some of the posts referencing what Takyris said are also still up, like this one (imgur), and this one (imgur), also from March 11, thereby making it clear that Takyris is the source of the denunciation and later redaction. One of the posts states:
So, whether he denied it after the fact or not, he said the same thing on multiple occasions. In the case of that PA post, and others, he said it from the account he’s been using since ME1 and had used the account to talk about his work and bounce ideas of members on previous occasions. That was 100%, no doubt it, indisputably Patrick Weeke’s PA account.

Here’s the actual posts where he realized he might have fucked up and starts worrying about his job:

The reason why everyone started crying, “imitation” after the fact is because people from other forums copied his words and it spread. In fact there are posts from people pissed off that he was “outed” and left the PA community.

The only reason people are saying it’s fake is so that [Takyris], a genuinely nice dude who just wanted to give some of his friends some insight on why the ending turned out how it did, won’t get fucking FIRED because you decided to fucking call him out by name you absolute pile of fuck juice and human compost

The Scarab already mentioned that people at Something Awful and other places read the forums and copy/pasted his posts at their shitholes weeks ago . and it was around that time that taky left. it makes me sad and I’m angry at the fuckers who took advantage of his trust in us.
So we know it was his account (that’s a fact), he said the same things on the PA forum that he said to someone at PAX, and the people at PA knew who he was and who they were talking to in that thread when he was posting.

There is enough evidence it was him that a jury of his peers would convict him of making those posts. If you want to let him, and Bioware, off the hook because they later claimed different, feel free. I understand completely why he would lie to Casey Hudson and say he didn’t write it, but this is far more that a mere he said/she said.

I think this statement is the crux of why there is a huge chasm between the two sides of the arguement, and why we keep cycling our points. Thinking invainly we can get the other side to see reason.

If I went to a restaurant, and loved it but had one thing that really bugged me, say they had no deserts. I would say to them "hey my party and I REALLY enjoyed the dinner…but…we are desert eaters. We really think you are hurting yourself by not serving deserts.

We would love to come back, but this is a big draw for us, in a place we keep coming back to. "

I think Pogue and Tom’s point, is that they philosophically judge that doing that is harmful to the intent of the creators.

I also feel that they keep mislabeling us in this discussion in that we demanded that they change ‘the menu’. The petition i supported and linked and had the support of 60K users didn’t demand (though it did morph into eventually some positions I didnt agree with, like a request for a happy ending). It did state "We are here to show a company that their devoted fanbase has been hurt, and alienated with some of their actions, and to ask for an explanation, and hopefully a solution"

That’s not changing the menu, that’s more in line of my example…and while i understand, and respect. Tom and Pogue philosophically disagree with that stance. I hope they can also recongize that for us that didn’t demand, but simply wished to state “hey we’re disapointed” wasn’t intent on encroaching on their artistic vision, just seeking either illumination or if defect (which honestly it was from their pre release promises) to address it.

To the best of my knowledge no one disputes that it was posted from his account, the claim that Weekes has made is that his account was hacked. I don’t know if it was and I don’t care to speculate. The way I see it, one of two things happened: some guy from Bioware risked tanking his career by posting sour grapes about his involvement in the ending of Mass Effect 3, or his account was hacked.

Let’s say for the hell of it that the first one is what happened: so what? You’ve found a comment from a disgruntled employee that he was unhappy with the ending. I would imagine on an internal team that you could find a lot of varying opinions on a lot of topics. You aren’t understanding my point if you think this is some kind of slam dunk. I don’t believe for a moment that every employee agrees, drone-like, with every decision that goes into every game Bioware creates. I also don’t consider that any kind of justification for players thinking that they can strong-arm a company into rewriting the ending the way they want. You apparently do. Well cheer up then, dude, because you won this battle!

I don’t think it’s a slam dunk validation of those that think the ending was crappy, but I do think it’s an interesting insight into why it felt so different from the rest of the story.

Let me clarify something Telefrog, just because every individual person in the thread has an argument that is different from everyone else’s in some fairly subtle ways: I originally asked for someone to find an indication that Bioware considered their original ending busted, that their ending DLC was essentially a bug fix that would resolve that. Because in my opinion, that’s the only real justification I can find for bowing to those who complained loud and long that the ending was all wrong and Bioware needed to change it. If Bioware agreed, if they had said you know we did this all wrong and we need to change it, that’s the end of it. Even if I didn’t consider the ending busted, in that case I would be wrong. But that’s not what happened. And this Penny Arcade post, even assuming it is what it claims to be, is not any kind of indicator of Bioware conceding that they screwed everything up.

But yes, the ending is different, it’s a big tonal shift, and it’s kind of weird. I don’t like everything about it. For what it’s worth, I consider it a fairly anticlimactic ending for everything that came before. If you love it or hate it or can’t be bothered to form an opinion on it, that’s your right. But I believe you are overstepping your rights as a consumer and player if you believe you can just force a company to rewrite the game because you don’t like what they did. I think there’s a clear line there.

This is not the same as participating in a beta test. Nor is it the same as gameplay balancing at the developer’s request, as we have established that Valve and Blizzard do constantly. Nor is this the same as providing feedback on your opinion to a company, which companies ostensibly solicit to get an idea of how their games are received. This is changing content. And if I have to make a choice between who I trust more to deliver Mass Effect content, I will always go with Bioware over a bunch of guys who are pissed about the ending.

Besides, if I were going to rewrite anything in the game, I’d take out space ninja.

First off, I have to say that I have been playing ME3 all this week and so far it has been amazing – I’m up to the point where I’m dealing with the Quarians and the Geth right now and there have been some moments where I have gotten seriously choked up. In addition, the gunplay feels much better than in either ME1 or 2, and I think they really hit the sweet spot for equipment choices/character customization in ME3. It’s not nearly as bland or frustrating to deal with as in ME1, but also not as limited as ME2. The only real complaint I can give about the game at this point is that keeping track of all the stupid “listen to someone at the Citadel for a throwaway mission” missions is really annoying, because unlike the last two games they aren’t tracked anywhere as far as I can tell (maybe I’m missing something).

But assuming that post from Patrick Weekes is true, I am not surprised. Everything there seems like something I would agree with as a writer (albeit mostly amateur) myself – and I can safely say that writing anything without peer review is a horrible idea. Honestly, based on the quality of the ME1, 2 and the parts of 3 I’ve played so far, I find it hard to believe that any of the writers for Bioware are “bad,” but without outside input it’s extremely difficult to see issues with your own writing. One of the most valuable things I took away from my time writing for CCP was the realization that I desperately need an editor. Not because I think I’m a horrible writer (I will leave that to the determination of others), but because it’s impossible to get enough distance from your work to judge its quality fairly. And, in my case, because sometimes 2000 words is a little excessive when 500 will bring the same point across. :)

Universally, whenever I’ve read something that was never really subjected to an honest peer review process, it feels lacking. I think it has a lot to do with why successful authors’ later works seem to be weaker than their earlier offerings – because they get out from under editorial insight as much and are free to indulge in their worst habits as a writer.

Pogue, yeah I understand where you’re coming from. Just to be clear, I agree that changing the ending was a cop-out. I’d hate to see it happen whenever a vocal group of people dislike a game ending. I disliked it myself, even with the DLC extended stuff, because I had a lot of issues with it just on principle based on what I’d played up to that point.

I think part of the issue between folks that think it’s okay for Bioware to change the ending based on feedback and others is the way they approach gaming. If you consider video games to be a consumable collaborative product like a Kickstarter or a meal, then I guess you’d feel it’s not only okay, but expected, to give feedback and get changes based on what you want. If you think games are more like movies or books that get made and shown as finished works, then you wouldn’t expect changes based on feedback. In fact, you’d admire the author or director for sticking to their vision.

I wonder how much the MMO feedback and development loop has contributed to the idea that games are collaborative?

I like this point. I’d also suggest that DLC is the double endge sword that has moved games more from pieces of art to more a product or service or your example of a meal. The story of a game has become more fluid and can be changed/ added to, with DLC. This creates a inherint expectation that the product is more fluid, and like any app, that can be updated. With patching, it already felt it was tipping into a more traditional product than a piece of art, but with advent of story DLC, it feels like its fully moved over to a fluid collobarative medium.

Then don’t download and install the “Enhanced Ending DLC”. There, wasn’t that simple? :)

I don’t really get how someone could believe this though.

Developers are spoiled by the ability to release patches to fix various issues. It is common place to release games that have major issues and then fix them later. For example, Sword of the stars 2, completely broken on release but now through many patches that the entitled bastards known as fans demanded, it is playable.

I’m still waiting on the x-com patch to fix their major bugs as well. I guess i should have signed the “Don’t freeze me bro” petition…

This isn’t about games being collaborative (because other than games like wo and elder scrolls which count on users making contents in order to sell, most games aren’t), this is about feeling like we deserve some support for products that need support and if we feel they don’t get it, complaining in an attempt to encourage it through negative feedback.

The idea that some have that as gamers we should just hand them our money, bend over and grab our ankles is even more offensive than the crappy original ending bioware inflicted upon us.

It basically comes down to…

Fans (who didn’t like the ending): We feel that the ending of mass effect 3 was extremely disappointing to such a degree that the game felt rushed/unfinished at the end
Bioware: Ok, it looks like there are enough people pissed off that we should release a statement and throw together a more coherent ending, but not enough that we have to fall on our sword and admit fault. Doing otherwise might increase the chances these people don’t buy our next game.
Fans (who didn’t like the ending): This ending makes thing a bit more clear and polished. This raises our chance of buying your next game a bit.
Bioware: Yay potential crisis averted, mostly!

Oh, please. No one said bend over and take it. This isn’t about bugs or incomplete games like Sword of the Stars 2. I have no problem making my feelings known to game makers when a game is broken or has bugs.

My comment was directed at the story presented in a game. For good or ill, the story in Mass Effect 3 ended in a way that felt sour to some people, me included. Some of those people took it upon themselves to ask Bioware to change that ending, which is where I part ways with them. I don’t ask authors to change the endings to books that don’t please me. I don’t call up Hollywood studios and harrass them to change the ending of movies. The story is the story.

I think there is a difference between asking for bug fixes and asking for a writer to change their story.

So you feel that changing absolutely anything in the plot, levels or general campaign in a game is always bad?

If you’re familiar with it, the kotor restoration patch(es)? Bad?

I guess the difference between us is that to me, story is a feature and right up there with gameplay or not crashing. If your story was compromised because you had to rush the game out the door at the last second or because of organizational problems, i think you should fix it and i don’t see patching it as any different than patching a bug that makes Adepts able to summon ogres from dragon age if they pat their head and rub their stomach at the same time.

In fact i’d prefer more obvious game bugs. I can deal with x-com freezing every so often and it doesn’t bother me that much. Restarting mass effect 3 won’t make the ending not disappointing though sadly. Life goes on though.

If i bought a book and just didnt like the end, i wouldn’t do anything about it.
If i bought a book and it just cut off at the end like the author put it out before it was done, i’d probably give it a 1 star review and advise others not to buy it.

Also, sorry, some of that was just a general quote. I wasn’t trying to say you were doing that. Mostly others that view any sort of public complaint about a game as a bad thing (unless they agree with it, then it is fine).

Okay, but it didn’t just cut off did it? You got an ending in the original Mass Effect 3 conclusion. It just wasn’t a good one.

I think if you create a controversial end to a longstanding series, and there isn’t a fan petition, then you are not doing your job right. So either:

  1. The writers looked back and saw actual improvements to the ending that they’re happy with or
  2. Blame EA/Bioware management for forcing the change on them.

Not sure why we’re even talking about the fans here, it’s pretty much a given.

Your point is valid, but your example is bad. There have been more than a few books that had their content and/or ending changed as a result of fan feedback/outrage…movies and art are better examples…

Well sure, it worked out fine in Misery.

To me, that was only part of the issue.

I’m guessing you’ve seen Star Wars. What if the last 30 minutes went like this:

-Escape from Death Star.
-Scene where Vader explains that the tracking device was installed aboard the Falcon was cut.
-Leia explains that there’s important info in R2-D2
-Falcon arrives at Yavin
-Scene where Han is leaving to pay off Jabba was cut.
-Battle planning scene explaining the weakness of Death Star was cut.
-Rest of movie plays out as is. (could probably make some more cuts, but this is enough).

Questions if this was the version:

  1. How did the Death Star figure out where the Falcon was headed?
  2. Why wasn’t the Falcon part of the battle, and why did people seem so suprised when it showed up?
  3. Why on Coruscant are they firing torpedos at a small hole?

This is more akin to the biggest issue I had with the original ending. It wasn’t the story (although I wasn’t happy about that either), more that there were plot holes that you could try to fill in yourself, but shouldn’t have to.

I keep waiting to play through again to see what changes Leviathan made (keep hearing good things even in relation to the ending), but want to wait until all DLC is out.

http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/novel_19c/dickens/ending.html