292 réponses à ce sujet

[H. Birdman]

Whether it's "art" or not is such a 20th century question. The relevant question today is how the concept of "authorship" changes when you actively invite patrons to co-author the story with you. It seems disingenuous to say, on the one hand, "we'd like your money in exchange for this interactive experience in which your choices matter," and on the other hand, "just accept our choices because this is our art."

[tekkaman fear]

I was wondering when other companies were gonna start chiming in, publicly and otherwise.

[Mev186]

Ken Levine has always been a control freak. The very idea of him having to give up one inch of control is unthinkable. This doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

[Lianaar]

Actinguy1 wrote...
I think video games CAN be art. But imagine that you are a talented artist who develops a significant following. People just LOVE your paintings of landscapes. They love them so much, they start buying your paintings sight unseen. So then you announce your newest painting, and all of the wonderful hills and trees and everything, and people line up to buy it.

And then, after they've paid you their money, you reveal that you haven't painted another landscape at all. You've painted an ostrich raping a baby.

That's exactly what happened with Picasso in my view  I thought he is a talentless painter who was bored out of his mined. And then I accidentally bumped into some of his early works, and I was amazed to see how talented an artist he was. In my view he tossed it all away to do something .... that is considered art by many people to which those people are entitled to. So I guess people who didn't like his change of style should have "given him the opportunity to comply with the tastes of those who trusted he would continue on that path". (actually this sarcasm wasn't fully called for)

I don't claim that the end is good or bad. At this point it is fully irrelevant for me.
I can accept arguments as you expected something else based on the marketing and you feel the marketing should have done differently as valid. I am however engaged to seeing how far gaming companies let this affect them. And yes, I do believe that precedents, once set are hard to alter. Since everyone is pointing at earlier precedents and using them as examples why BW 'is not forced but given the.. you know"
And later on they might have just one more precedent to pull forward for other things. Once the lines are blurred everything is imaginable. This is certainly a point where a line is drawn. And the question is wether that line will be stepped over or fortified. It will have a lasting effect. No, this is definately not limited to BW and ME only.

[MordicaiBlack]

another example of developers saying how dare we question their vision

[Lianaar]

H. Birdman wrote...
you actively invite patrons to co-author the story with you

Co author? I don't consider myself to be author or co author of ME3. I am a user of it. It is like going into a restaurant and ordering food from the menu. It doesn't make me a cook. I'll make decisions  that define the outcome of my evening. I can be displeased and think I am lied to. But I won't be a co-cook just because I picked 1-4-8-12 instead of 2-19-3-6

[JasonC Shepard]

anexanhume wrote...

http://www.theverge....-ken-levine-sad

Game makers, not game players, should retain control over the games
they make and how they end, a panel of developers said during a weekend
talk at the Smithsonian to celebrate the new exhibit, "The Art of Video
Games."
"If computer games are art than I fully endorse the author of the
artwork to have a statement about what they believe should happen," said
Paul Barnett, senior creative director at BioWare-Mythic. "Just as J.K.
Rowling can end her books and say that is the end of Harry Potter. I
don't think she should be forced to make another one.
The comment came at the end of a nearly hour-long discussion about the future of video games which took place in front of a live audience at the Smithsonian American Art Museum last week.
Following the discussion, audience members were given the opportunity to ask questions. A man named Sam asked:
"What do you think of the whole idea where community has influence on
making game story like for Paul with BioWare ...," he asked, referring
to the "current fiasco going on right now with the Mass Effect ending."
Some gamers are upset over what they believe was an unsatisfying
ending to the Mass Effect trilogy, a series that promised gamers an
ending that was in part shaped by the choices they made over the course
of playing the three titles.
Barnett's response was met with loud applause that overwhelmed Sam's response.
When the applause died down Ken Levine, founder of Irrational Games,
added that he wanted to address the question as well because, Levine
said, "I think this is an important moment."
"I think if those people got what they wanted and (BioWare) wrote
their ending they would be very disappointed in the emotional feeling
they got because ... they didn't really create it," he said. "I think
this whole thing is making me a little bit sad because I don't think
anyone would get what they wanted if that happened."

So what does everyone think? Will the ending not be 'true' if it is engineered by the fans? If so, how is that different than the feedback loop Bioware used to write subsequent games, such as including Tali and Garrus as romance options?

I don't think anyone is telling them to write an ending that isn't THEIRS.  As fans though, we have every right to be disappointed in a product we bought.  I just want an ending that will remove the gaping plot holes.  And I think even Bioware can agree they are there.  So if they do that, then there should be no more problems.

[Lankist]

Lianaar wrote...

H. Birdman wrote...
you actively invite patrons to co-author the story with you

Co author? I don't consider myself to be author or co author of ME3. I am a user of it. It is like going into a restaurant and ordering food from the menu. It doesn't make me a cook. I'll make decisions  that define the outcome of my evening. I can be displeased and think I am lied to. But I won't be a co-cook just because I picked 1-4-8-12 instead of 2-19-3-6

Casey Hudson referred to the fans as co-authors on several occasions in interviews, if I recall. It's more than the decisions made in the game; a LOT of things were added to ME2 and ME3 due entirely to fan request. Tali and Garrus romances, for instance.


And seriously, this whole argument is garbage. Just because you have an artistic vision does not mean it's a GOOD vision.

Modifié par Lankist, 20 mars 2012 - 12:46 .

[TolaSrrup]

Okay, admittedly I have only skimmed through most of these threads complaining about the ending(s).  I have also observed people slamming the game for NOT being art.

Art is subjective.  It can take the form of any medium and can be represented by conscious effort to create it or simply observed around you by noticing that all life is a form of expression and it is that expression that is art.  But I would rather not argue this point.

My main concern is that there seems to be a lot of people who hate the ending and are spewing venom about the writer's choices and direction that he and his team chose to follow.  In my opinion, I think part 3 is Shakespearean in its quality, emotional angst, and tragic overtones.  It makes me think of Henry V or MacBeth, just without the Shakespearean language.  I mean - at the very least - those of us who were in theatre or from a literary background (of which I am both) - one thing we used to tease about Shakespeare is that "everybody dies."  I think in that broadest comparison alone, one can see the initial comparison.

Emotionally, I was moved to near tears when Mordin and Legion died.  So much sacrifice for the cause to save the galaxy, but boiled down to Legion being a near-Christ like figure, sacrificing himself to save the Geth from evil and to resurrect their "souls."  Mordin on the other hand sacrifices himself to undo the wrong he had done in creating the genophage, releasing himself from guild so that he too could assend from guilt that was slowly destroying himself.  Saren and the Illusive Man (TIM) both committing suicide upon the realization that they had become what they had been fighting against.  So much angst and anxiety, regret and guild, fear and ultimately bravery all expressed through the dialogue of this game -  like any quality play or film.  This is where I can see the comparison to art - it's in the writing.  To see Shepard doing that one last thing, sacrificing himself to save all of known creation did not come as a shock to me.  This man had survived events above and beyond the capabilities of any other mortal being, it was about time that he "paid the piper" and realized there was no miracle save at the last moment.

And this aspect had been forshadowed throughout the entirity of the third game.  I don't know how many times within his exchanges with folks that he talked about dying or made some referene to the "other side."  Look back or replay the scene with Thane as he's dying.  Listen (or turn on the subtitles and read) the dialogue as Shepard talks to his team just before the last run to the beam.  It all points to him dying, from the first scene to the last.  I was in no way shocked that Shepard dies.  It almost gives his life - that we directed - more substance by him dying than if he lived "happily ever after."

However, if most people are annoyed that we were not given the choice between the sadder ending and the more "Hollywood" ending then I can see the justification to that arguement.  The entire point of the game (according the arguements presented) was our choice.  If we want to see him be a womanizing ****** that shoots first and gets answers later or the "boyscout" that just wants to make the galaxy a better place while finding friendship, love and understanding along the way, or some place in the middle - then we can make those things happen.  And regardless of what path we have chosen over the last five years and through multiple replays, we find sacrificial death behind each door...Yes, I can understand the frustration - even rage - at this, especially if the masses (no pun intended) are as emotionally connected to their Shepard and the other characters in the story as I am.

Ultimately, I can see both sides of the issue.  I, being part of the minority, have no problem with the endings as they are, even if I am emotionally destroyed by the choice that he must die.  I do see it as art, as I do with any emotionally moving literature, film, or production - I do not make comparisions to Shakespeare lightly.  I also recognize this as art by the amount people are moved to speak about this work, whether for it or againist it.  I have even seen literary deconstruction done on the work already through various links from the forum and on youtube postings (most interesting was the ones postulating that Shepard was indoctrinated).

I can also see and also agree that if we as players wanted to create the Hollywood ending, where Shepard saves the day, returns battered but alive into the arms of Liara (or whatever other chosen love interest) and he manages to defeat the Reapers, save the Mass relays, bring Anderson back just in time to save him and brings forth a new golden age of cooperation and peace for the galaxy, then we should have had that option as well. 

The game was hyped by choice.  I even have one of the original print ads for the first game alluding to a completely opened end game where we shape the outcome.  And if we (as I did) try to play it as the warrior-saint, the ultimate boyscout, then we should have had the option of "rainbows, ponies and granola" for one of the ultimate endings.

Is there anything I would personally change?  Yes probably, but it would totally detract from this epic creation.

Do I think the ending was "slapped on" as so many other accuse?  No, not remotely, there is far too much forshadoing thoughout the rest of the dialogue to believe that.

Do I wish there as a "happily ever after" ending?  Yes, but I can be a sap and want the cliched ending that every other game, most movies and most books bring you - I am but a product of American pop culture and society.  But I respect them more for not giving us a pat, overdone ending for once.

Do I want more from this title, whether it be DLC, another sequel or an MMO?  Yes!  I am not done with this story or the universe in which it exists.  I know Liara is pregnant with Shepard's child(ren), I know that Tali and Garrus "hook up,"  I want to see (depending on ending) if EDI and Joker create some kind of offspring.  There are stories yet to tell.

"...okay, just one more story."

[goose2989]

agathokakological wrote...

The moment that art becomes commissioned art is when the artists lose supreme artistic license over the product.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Hejdun wrote...

This whole "you can't change art!" argument is rather specious. I think the real source of the problem behind the ending is obviously that the writers ran out of time and were so intimidated by the promises they had made about the ending, that they choked. They dropped the ball. Even as late as November Bioware still hadn't decided on the endings. I don't think that the writers, in their hearts, believe that this was the best possible ending to Mass Effect 3 that they could've written. The number of plot holes and rejection of major ME themes is proof that this wasn't a lovingly crafted artistic expression so much as an explanation thrown together at the last minute.

Personally, I it's similar to writing a story for a creative writing class. If your professor asks you for a rough draft so he can provide constructive criticism, there's likely going to be things he expects you to change, based on his comments. What you wrote was your artistic vision, but ultimately there will always be things to fix. If your professors hands you back corrections, you can always tell him no, that "it's art" and purely the expressionof the creator. That is your right. But ultimately, you'll live with the consequences. Your professor likely isn't going to ignore your decision to maintain artistic integrity, which will affect your grade.

We have a similar situation with Bioware and the fan base. We have 50k+ fans telling Bioware "we don't think the ending makes sense". Ultimately, it's their creative vision, to alter as they see fit. But there will likely be consequences should they choose to ignore any feedback, given the current scale of this dispute.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 20 mars 2012 - 12:49 .

[Lianaar]

Lankist wrote...

Casey Hudson referred to the fans as co-authors on several occasions in interviews, if I recall. It's more than the decisions made in the game; a LOT of things were added to ME2 and ME3 due entirely to fan request. Tali and Garrus romances, for instance.


And seriously, this whole argument is garbage. Just because you have an artistic vision does not mean it's a GOOD vision.

So if Casey Hudson says it then it is something I must accept? No. I don't think we are co-authors. For reasons stated above.
Having an artistic vision doesn't make it good. But it makes it the AUTHOR'S vision, not yours. You, as consumer of that vision can decide wether you like it or not. And you can voice that displeasure or approval. But it won't make the original vision any more yours.

[durasteel]

So, these "art" guys who like to pretend that artists don't make art at the specific request of patrons and customers or change it to please patron or customers... It seems to me--correct me if I'm wrong--that the only ones who have no legitimate participation are, well... us. Everyone else, from the publisher's executives, directors, and shareholders to the people paid to review and advertise the "art" is entitled to an opinion and should have their input considered, while I should keep my mouth shut and keep buying their games.

Did I miss anything?

I mean, if we're talking about how it's crap to interfere with an artist or a work of art, where is the outcry against forcing BioWare to release this game so early? The Last Hours app makes it clear that the original "artistic vision" was for Javik and his mission to be part of the main game, but EA's release schedule forced that content to be cut and shifted to (paid) DLC. That's perfectly legitimate, but my request that a fix for all the plot holed and incongruities be released as DLC, well... that's some entitlement bull crap.

So, yeah... screw you, Ken. I respect your work and your games, but on this issue your full of yourself, and full of crap.

[Dockerr]

If bioware came out, and stood by their convictions and said "no, we are artists, we made this like we wanted it and its not being changed" then I would respect that.

The reason people are up in arms is because we KNOW bioware can do better. it's like da vinci smudging the smile on the mona lisa and someone offering to pay him to redo it.

If Da Vinci said he intended the smile that way, thats another story.

[Kelwing]

As an action/RPG the player should be allowed to chose how their character finishes. If you wish to have Shep give his life to destroy, so be it, You want Shep to give all to control, so be it. If you want Shep to give all to change life and stop the Reapers with Synthesis, so be it. If I want my Shep to beat the Reapers and walk away from it all, we should have that damn option. We didn't have that option. No NG+ doesn't cut it with enough EMS and the destroy option.

Not looking for the everyone lives happy happy joy joy endings, I have no problem with the massive loss of life throughout the galaxy. Friends of Shepard dying. I just want to choice to have Shepard walk away what was left of his humanity and friends that survive it all. How much trouble can it really be to even add a 4th option. My Shep would do exactly what he tells Garrus. Walk away from it all if they win. Maybe become a leader which he is, maybe help rebuild , who knows but have that choice to, was not there.

Modifié par Kelwing, 20 mars 2012 - 12:53 .

[Lankist]

Lianaar wrote...

So if Casey Hudson says it then it is something I must accept? No. I don't think we are co-authors. For reasons stated above.
Having an artistic vision doesn't make it good. But it makes it the AUTHOR'S vision, not yours. You, as consumer of that vision can decide wether you like it or not. And you can voice that displeasure or approval. But it won't make the original vision any more yours.

Then why, precisely, has everything Bioware has ever said about their relationship with their audience been entirely contrary to what you're saying? The "art" argument is NOT Bioware's position, they have not confirmed it. It is the position of third-party commentators. Bioware's own words are completely contradictory to the argument.

Either you're wrong or you're saying Bioware is outright lying about how important they consider their fans to be.

I lean toward the more optimistic choice.

Modifié par Lankist, 20 mars 2012 - 12:52 .

[Lianaar]

TolaSrrup wrote...
Ultimately, I can see both sides of the issue.  I, being part of the minority, have no problem with the endings as they are, even if I am emotionally destroyed by the choice that he must die.  I do see it as art, as I do with any emotionally moving literature, film, or production - I do not make comparisions to Shakespeare lightly.  I also recognize this as art by the amount people are moved to speak about this work, whether for it or againist it.  I have even seen literary deconstruction done on the work already through various links from the forum and on youtube postings (most interesting was the ones postulating that Shepard was indoctrinated).
(...)
Is there anything I would personally change?  Yes probably, but it would totally detract from this epic creation.

Do I think the ending was "slapped on" as so many other accuse?  No, not remotely, there is far too much forshadoing thoughout the rest of the dialogue to believe that.

Do I wish there as a "happily ever after" ending?  Yes, but I can be a sap and want the cliched ending that every other game, most movies and most books bring you - I am but a product of American pop culture and society.  But I respect them more for not giving us a pat, overdone ending for once.

Do I want more from this title, whether it be DLC, another sequel or an MMO?  Yes!  I am not done with this story or the universe in which it exists.  I know Liara is pregnant with Shepard's child(ren), I know that Tali and Garrus "hook up,"  I want to see (depending on ending) if EDI and Joker create some kind of offspring.  There are stories yet to tell.

"...okay, just one more story."

That sums up my views pretty much.

[kyrieee]

You people are being silly.
Ken has as much a right to his opinion as you do, and this "I'm not buying his games" crap just makes you and everyone else in this movement look silly.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

kyrieee wrote...

You people are being silly.
Ken has as much a right to his opinion as you do, and this "I'm not buying his games" crap just makes you and everyone else in this movement look silly.

The way I see it? As long as he keeps producing games of Bioshock's quality, he can say whatever the hell he wants.

[CDHarrisUSF]

People who arrogantly use the "it's art" excuse as bulletproof armor against constructive criticism risk having the career arc of an M Night Shyamalan (see: complaints leading up to The Last Airbender) rather than a Ridley Scott (see: Blade Runner & Kingdom of Heaven director's cuts). The ending of Mass Effect 3, as art, failed to elicit the desired response. That part is clear, based on the stated goals from internal documents we've seen and the promises made leading up to the release. Are they going to go back and try to improve on it like Ridley Scott... or are they going to double down on their creative genius and treat everyone else as if they just don't get it like Shyamalan?

[Lianaar]

Lankist wrote...

Then why, precisely, has everything Bioware has ever said about their relationship with their audience been entirely contrary to what you're saying? The "art" argument is NOT Bioware's position, they have not confirmed it. It is the position of third-party commentators. Bioware's own words are completely contradictory to the argument.

Either you're wrong or you're saying Bioware is outright lying about how important they consider their fans to be.

I lean toward the more optimistic choice.

Please read, what I wrote. I am NOT BioWare. I express my views on what I hope they'll do and what I fear they'll do. I express my worry and excitement that this will influence the gameing industry as a whole. I repeatedly said, that I find it valid that marketing and outcome of the game might not match each other. I understand you want to call me wrong or liar, but please refrain from getting personal.

I hope BW will not change the ending, I even more hope they'll come up with a 3rd solution to change - not change. A solution that has not yet listed in the part of the forums I have read. But still, we are not authors of Mass Effect. We are players. We do not have the copy rights. We can not use it as we see fit. We can not lay emotional and legal claim to it. It was BioWare's work. We can be invested, but it was not our work, our intellectual decision, our money, our risk. Thus we are gamers, not game makers. I stick to this.

[alx119]

Total Biscuit wrote...

Nu-Nu wrote...

JK Rowling wanted to kill off Harry Potter but she didn't because people begged her not to. That reference fail. Fans can influence an author's decision.

She was also going to kill Ron off too, but realised that it would be pointlessly miserable, everyone would hate it, and that she was just doing it to shock, and pretend to be clever, rather than because it was actually a good idea, so chucked the idea out entirely. 

Haha I was wondering if someone would bring that up too! 
She was also going to kill off Harry along with Voldemort. Again, killing your protagonist is generally a very bad idea. 

[Zine2]

Creators also have a responsibility not to spread offensive messages nor an ideology of hatred. You cannot claim it is "art" and then shy away from the fact that you produced crap.

[Wildhide]

Greed1914 wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Zulmoka531 wrote...



This kinda hurt the artistic integrity defense for me. But that's just my perspective on it.

That, I think, is the best argument in our favor.

Good point.  People speak of the artistic integrity being attacked, but I don't see much integrity when the very last message we get from the game tells us to be ready to pay for DLC.  We already knew more would be coming, it was a given, but now the game will forever remind us to buy DLC.  Sorry, but when a game acts as it's own advertisement, it really crosses the line into product.

Agreed, Bioware has never had to encourage me to buy DLC.  If it was good I got it, it says something about what they really thought of the quality of the end if they have to try and ask you to buy DLC after the credits.  Makes me think they thought the ending was bad enough before they released the game that they'd need to ask you nicely to still buy more of the game.