385 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

dkear1 wrote...

Um.....all companies pander to fan whims or they go bankrupt.

Untrue. Or rather, an exageration that is equivalently untrue.

Companies that only pander to fans will go bankrupt simply because fan whims are often not only impossible or unreasonable, but also contradictory. Even among the 'the endings suck' camp, there are notable differences between what people think the endings should have been: those who just want Disney endings, those who wanted attention to Love Interests, those who wanted epilogue slides, those who wanted the Relays to not be destroyed in any ending, etc.

Companies that don't consider fan sentiment can lose their base, but companies that don't make positions despite fan sentiment produce nothing at all.

[PrettyD3f]

Let the windbag flap in the wind and move on.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

"Companies that only pander to fans will go bankrupt simply because fan whims are often not only impossible or unreasonable, but also contradictory."

Sure, but the inverse idea of sticking it to your fans is also just as bad. There's a balance between doing things not to troll the hell out of your audience and over adjusting your vision to every nitpick.

[Marta Rio II]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Successful artists don't go to the crowd: successfull artists create products that bring the crowd to them.

Pretty sure that the only crowd that ME3's ending is currently drawing in is people who like to gawk at train wrecks.

[piemanz]

dkear1 wrote...

piemanz wrote...
Awesome, so in 20-30 years when every story starts and ends the same we can all rejoice.

ROFL.........if that was the case it would have already happened now wouldn't it have?

No, because up until now a story stays the way it is regardless of whether you personally like it or not.  And thats why I hope Bioware doesn't cave and change theirs.

I would see it as huge slap in the face if they changed the ending now just becasue it made a certain portion of the community feel bad.

Modifié par piemanz, 15 mars 2012 - 02:01 .

[Dean_the_Young]

PKchu wrote...

"One of the remarkable things about culture is that products that seek popularity varely rarely achieve it: for the same reason that politicians can't pass themselves for 'regular folks', art that appeals to everyone actually appeals to very few."

This is why pop music is so deep and musically brilliant. And why advertising is worthless, people just accidentally walk into success.

This is why pop music is one genre amongst many, and not a standard. And why effective advertising is tailored toward specific demographics.  Music and advertising are actually two of the most nuanced, least-uniform forms of communication you could have selected.

The last actually does happen, so it actually doesn't sit well in your attempt.

Seriously, the arguments used against "doing things your fans will like" are so out there...

Indeed, though not as you were thinking.

[Morgz-23]

I'd read it all but in the end....

Your opinion simply doesn't matter to me.

[ecarden]

MintyCool wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

I'm sorry that you wasted your time in typing out a lengthy post, only for it to be skimmed and undoubtedly buried beneath other topics. ;_;

The Misconception: When your beliefs are challenged with facts, you alter your opinions and incorporate the new information into your thinking.

The Truth: When your deepest convictions are challenged by contradictory evidence, your beliefs get stronger.

- David McRaney

---

Winning.

Yeah. 

You and Charlie Sheen.

[DarkBladeX98]

Ridiculous claims, you say?
Forbes supports us.
Gamefront supports us.
90% of the Mass Effect fanbase support us.
Mr 2%, I don't believe you realize what's happening.

And we do have legitimate reason to do this. Im not going to list all the problems with the ending because if you aren't convinced already you're obviously either A. indoctrinated or B. a member of the Council. Bioware doesn't fix, large chunk of dedicated consumers gone. End of Story.
So much for your checkmate.

[Dean_the_Young]

Marta Rio II wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Successful artists don't go to the crowd: successfull artists create products that bring the crowd to them.

Pretty sure that the only crowd that ME3's ending is currently drawing in is people who like to gawk at train wrecks.

Or people who don't base their evaluations on metagaming alternatives (which was a lot of people back in ME2).

Of course, there's also the other couple hundred of things to do in ME3 that could also draw people to the product.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

Dean, you're confusing me. What are you even try to argue? You seem to be saying that marketing research and trying to please an audience are not very important and that having a vision is what matters. 

Maybe I'm not understanding you?

[dkear1]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

dkear1 wrote...

Um.....all companies pander to fan whims or they go bankrupt.

Untrue. Or rather, an exageration that is equivalently untrue.

Companies that only pander to fans will go bankrupt simply because fan whims are often not only impossible or unreasonable, but also contradictory. Even among the 'the endings suck' camp, there are notable differences between what people think the endings should have been: those who just want Disney endings, those who wanted attention to Love Interests, those who wanted epilogue slides, those who wanted the Relays to not be destroyed in any ending, etc.

Companies that don't consider fan sentiment can lose their base, but companies that don't make positions despite fan sentiment produce nothing at all.

Again we are both arguing semantics.  Companies do have to listen to customers or they go under.  The degree  that they react on that is a fine line that is difficult to walk.  This is why 3/4 of businesses fail.  It is hard.

Artists do have produce art that someone will buy.  Sure there are lots of directions one can go but at the end of the day it all comes back to getting a sale.  I don't view games as art because the are a mass produced product.  To me that seperates things.  Of course it is only my opinion and others are free to disagree.

Modifié par dkear1, 15 mars 2012 - 02:02 .

[joshko]

You do make some compelling arguments. Especially about the knowledge digging types.
They do tend to take the story on themselves so to speak and forget that they are not the ones telling the tale.

But, I disagree with you on the point of the ending.

The ending was too big, too philosophical if you will. The whole series is simple, the Reapers are coming, get your act together or die. That's it, and all other other choices, romances, and stuff are just fluff. Not one in the series is Shepard conflicted as to his ultimate goal. Not once do his companions question the urgency of the mission over all.
Simple, plane with pretty trappings.
And then your throw in a bunch of metaphysical nonsense that goes against the whole theme of the game? No thank you.

[dkear1]

joshko wrote...

You do make some compelling arguments. Especially about the knowledge digging types.
They do tend to take the story on themselves so to speak and forget that they are not the ones telling the tale.

But, I disagree with you on the point of the ending.

The ending was too big, too philosophical if you will. The whole series is simple, the Reapers are coming, get your act together or die. That's it, and all other other choices, romances, and stuff are just fluff. Not one in the series is Shepard conflicted as to his ultimate goal. Not once do his companions question the urgency of the mission over all.
Simple, plane with pretty trappings.
And then your throw in a bunch of metaphysical nonsense that goes against the whole theme of the game? No thank you.

Quite simply it really all does just boil down to this.  They changed stories at the 11hour.

[KimGulch]

On the topic of whether a company should or shouldn't pander to fans, it's irrelevant whether "a company" should or shouldn't pander. This is Bioware, a company that for at least the last 4-6 years has very frequently said when asked about their development process that they take fan feedback very seriously, that they read and listen to all the feedback they can and that their fans are incredibly important to them.

[piemanz]

dkear1 wrote...

joshko wrote...

You do make some compelling arguments. Especially about the knowledge digging types.
They do tend to take the story on themselves so to speak and forget that they are not the ones telling the tale.

But, I disagree with you on the point of the ending.

The ending was too big, too philosophical if you will. The whole series is simple, the Reapers are coming, get your act together or die. That's it, and all other other choices, romances, and stuff are just fluff. Not one in the series is Shepard conflicted as to his ultimate goal. Not once do his companions question the urgency of the mission over all.
Simple, plane with pretty trappings.
And then your throw in a bunch of metaphysical nonsense that goes against the whole theme of the game? No thank you.

Quite simply it really all does just boil down to this.  They changed stories at the 11hour.

What's even more hilarious is the fact that they probably changed the ending due to fan reaction over it. And now, probably the same fans that were crying about the old ending, now want it back.

Modifié par piemanz, 15 mars 2012 - 02:06 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Madecologist wrote...

I don't think anyone questioned Biowares skill at making a great game. They don't even question them as writers, people acknowledge and praise the story of Mass Effect 3 up to the dreaded point. Overall ME3 is highly praised untill someone reaches... the end. That is where we question. That is where we doubt, but mostly stand dumbfounded that it even happened considering the rest of the product.

Here's the thing though:

The reason people aren't questioning is because a lot of people are already insisting that Bioware sucks EA soccer balls. There really is a large number of people who have let the ending unreasonably consume their rhetoric.

I have yet to hear one good explaination for Normandy Fleeing scene. That scene is not a minor scene, nor a minor technical error. That scene alone is a very bad error in professional writing. It serves only one purpose and it being just used for that purpose makes it worst.

Allegory and metaphor.

The Normandy's destruction but survival onto a new world parallels the post-Relay, post-Reaper galaxy: damaged, disconnected and seeming isolated, but alive and in a position to rebuild. The Normandy's inability to fly is analogous to the galaxy's inability to easily connect to eachother without relays, but the verdant garden world represents the new opportunities that exist even so. The emerging of the crew not only symbolizes survival, both of individuals and the galaxy, but the multiple races hints towards both cooperation and a new style of coexistince that will follow the Reapers. The survival of the group, watching the rising sun, is the obvious sign of the new era past the darkness of the Reapers.

The Boy and the Grandfather bring the focus to how the new galaxy is once again a mysterious place to be explored, both mysterious and enticing. Nothing in the scene says that travel doesn't exist already, but the new frontier brings back endless possibilities. Shepard's sacrifice has given a new, exciting future to those who follow, filled with the possibilities of meeting old friends and new discoveries.

[Drak41n]

Pandering =\\ making good on your promises.

Also, you do know your argument is ridiculously defeatist, right?

[Alamar2078]

Yet another "art trumps promises made" thread?? That's all that we could come up with?? Playing devil's advocate even if I wildly misinterpreted the promises I would still fault any company that seems this out of touch with their core group of fans. Simply if you don't deliver a satisfying product then this sort of reaction is exactly what you should expect.

[piemanz]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

The Normandy's destruction but survival onto a new world parallels the post-Relay, post-Reaper galaxy: damaged, disconnected and seeming isolated, but alive and in a position to rebuild. The Normandy's inability to fly is analogous to the galaxy's inability to easily connect to eachother without relays, but the verdant garden world represents the new opportunities that exist even so. The emerging of the crew not only symbolizes survival, both of individuals and the galaxy, but the multiple races hints towards both cooperation and a new style of coexistince that will follow the Reapers. The survival of the group, watching the rising sun, is the obvious sign of the new era past the darkness of the Reapers.

The Boy and the Grandfather bring the focus to how the new galaxy is once again a mysterious place to be explored, both mysterious and enticing. Nothing in the scene says that travel doesn't exist already, but the new frontier brings back endless possibilities. Shepard's sacrifice has given a new, exciting future to those who follow, filled with the possibilities of meeting old friends and new discoveries.

This, exactly.

Or we could have one where we snuggle with a LI.....

[Dean_the_Young]

dkear1 wrote...

Again we are both arguing semantics.  Companies do have to listen to customers or they go under.  The degree  that they react on that is a fine line that is difficult to walk.  This is why 3/4 of businesses fail.  It is hard.

Sure, but the standard that started this wasn't striking a balance: it was a desire for slavish obedience.

Artists do have produce art that someone will buy.  Sure there are lots of directions one can go but at the end of the day it all comes back to getting a sale.  I don't view games as art because the are a mass produced product.  To me that seperates things.  Of course it is only my opinion and others are free to disagree.

Strongly, given that paintings, literature, cinema, music, and more physical arts are also mass-produced products.

[ChuckNorris18]

Only problem is, we aren't guaranteed assets.
Connect four.

[GreyLord]

I admit, I was a guaranteed asset...at least until now. I disliked what they did with DA2, but I understood ME3 was by a different team and had hope that it would hold true to the OLD bio way of doing things instead of the new.

So...I gave them another chance...

I think many had that opinion...

Right now I'm not certain they are utilizing that chance all that well...in fact I'd say it could be on the knife's edge of whether they've used they're good will or not.

I've been with bioware and a steady fan since BG1...

This is not the worst game they've ever made...not even close...

but it IS the worst ending...

[Dean_the_Young]

Drak41n wrote...

Pandering = making good on your promises.

Fortunately, Bioware made good on their promises.

Maybe not the promises you interpreted them as making, but that's always subject to interpretation.

Also, you do know your argument is ridiculously defeatist, right?

Only if you predefine victory to agreeing with you.  Since I don't, I would obviously disagree.

[Dean_the_Young]

GreyLord wrote...

I admit, I was a guaranteed asset...at least until now. I disliked what they did with DA2, but I understood ME3 was by a different team and had hope that it would hold true to the OLD bio way of doing things instead of the new.

So...I gave them another chance...

I think many had that opinion...

Right now I'm not certain they are utilizing that chance all that well...in fact I'd say it could be on the knife's edge of whether they've used they're good will or not.

I've been with bioware and a steady fan since BG1...

This is not the worst game they've ever made...not even close...

but it IS the worst ending...

Here's a question for you:

Was the flaw of ME3 the same as the flaw of DA2?