jb1983 wrote...
Deltaboy37-1 wrote...
You insist on comparing products to art.
naturally doesn't work. Try comparing art to art.
A movie with a bad ending isn't bad, a book with a bad ending isn't bad. A song with a bad ending isn't inherently bad. That is the magic of art, it is a form of expression unlike a product. Products break and can be faulty, art cannot. Art is all about perception and taste. If you like one part, you make not like another, but that doesn't make it a bad product.
...and you claim to know so much about business.
ME3 isn't art. It can be artistic, but it isn't art. At the end of the day, it's a product that a company is trying to sell.
A Monet is art. An independent film can be art. A video game is entertainment, not art.
And even if we buy this stupid argument that it's somehow art, great, that doesn't change a thing I've said. It's art, cool, let's grant that. In that case, the art is still faulty. Why? Because some art, to be taken as successful, must be taken as a whole. Movies and novels work like this. If they lack a conclusion or have a conclusion that doesn't match the rest of the story, then the entire thing is a failure. Even in television we have a thing called "jumping the shark" where the "art" moves beyond its scope, to the point that it fails as being good art.
So with ME3, the entire thing is broken, even as "art" (lulz). Why? Because the ending is incoherrent and leaves plot holes while contradicting other aspects of the story. One of the most past things in telling a story is not to violate any major a priori logical rules. The law of noncontradiction is known a priori to all humans. Thus, when your ending contradicts the story, your art has failed. A story must be taken as a whole and cannot be compartmentalized, that's just how it works. We can appreciate aspects of a story, we can even say that the story is a beautiful thing, but the story as a whole fails if one part doesn't work.
QED.
If there was a stronger word to use other than "NO" I'd use it here.
Please tell me I just misread what you said if you are this business man you claimed to be in the beginning. Okay walk me through the steps of registering a new wrench product versus a game...
...don't worry, I'll wait...
My point exactly. Gaming is an art form, and entertainment. The entertainment label alone is enough, but it is art.
And if an independent film is art as it is entertainment, then gaming is art.
I'll indulge you. The fundamental problem with your argument is that art is based on more than just one thing. So is a product for that matter. As a business man, I think I'll argue you under the table... here goes.
Let me do you a favor and argue on your terms. Let's go with the product angle. If a wrench is released to the public, it will be judged on a few things, not just one. It will be mostly judged on its durability, flexibility, design and so on. If one of these areas lack, it is not a complete failure, it may lose to other competitor products, but somebody is gonna like it as a whole. IT ISN'T A FAILED PRODUCT. If a combination of those factors are totally faulty as in it DOESN'T work as advertised or wasn't properly manufactured, then, houston we have a problem!
Enter ME3, lets look at it as a product and not art for a second. Games are judged on a few things just like the wrench. Graphic quality, music, story, gameplay and longevity. According to our arguments, BioWare nailed almost everything except story in this one as the endings are lacking to most of us. If someone says otherwise, it is a direct result of the nature of art, people will have different opinions, as most people will not want a faulty wrench. Even the most anti-tool person will not want a faulty wrench.
Here is the kicker... Not only is that a fact, but some people like the ending, so your argument that it is a failed problem not only doesn't have legs, it's totally nonexistent.
You'd be hard pressed to find me even a large group of people who hated ME3 as a whole. You would actually have to search for those people.
Retour en haut
