292 réponses à ce sujet

[Tyrzun]

If you are paying for commissioned art of a dog, then the artist must provide you with a dog. Not a car. Bioware said we were buying a dog before it was released, AKA buying the pre-order, and then they delivered a car. That is NOT right, nor is it protected under artistic freedom. In fact is a breach of contract, but I'd never go legal with this stuff. It's not that big of a deal.

[recentio]

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 think he's assuming (and normally he'd be right) that the work maintains a consistent theme and quality. ME3 does not. It should be revised, IMO. It's awfully slapdash in its final moments.

The ending isn't 'true' for a lot of people now. It would be hard to be worse. I mean, how do you undershoot random prejudiced godboy, rollover Shepard, technicolor final non-option, and random Normandy crash?

Asking for a revision that makes sense isn't the same thing as dictating it's every detail. They'll engineer it. I'm just asking for them to engineer it in a way that actually works. (Admitedly, a few players like it as is.)

Modifié par recentio, 20 mars 2012 - 12:23 .

[hismastersvoice]

Slidell505 wrote...

Ken Levine being a pompous ****? Sir, I am shocked. I mean honestly, how narcissistic do you have to be to make a public announcement about something that has nothing to do with your company? He's just swinging his dick around to get attention.

Give him a break. He was answering a question, not making a statement.

[Lethys1]

To pretend a new ending at fan request wouldn't lose some value is nutty. He's right but the fans are too because the endings are all awful and we do have an investment.

[daigakuinsei]

Lianaar wrote...

daigakuinsei wrote...
Just because it's art doesn't mean you can't criticize it. That's why we have art critics.

That is beyond the point. We don't debate wether people can express opinions. We debate wether people criticised must comply with the content of criticism.

No one's forcing Bioware to comply.  If they do, it's out of concern for their future sales.  Welcome to capitalism, buddy.

[parrmi22]

I loved BioShock and BioShock Infinite looks truly epic, but Mass Effect is an RPG, not a shooter. This is a series that stressed choice above everything else; combat, visuals, music. To have that choice taken from players at the very end of the series is like a punch to the gut.

I agree with Levine on one point, however. If the retake movement succeeds, then it will really open the floodgates for consumer entitlement. Pretty soon people all over would point to Mass Effect and say, "If the misfits over at BSN can change an ending, then so can we!"

'Tis fitting, I suppose. Like their games stress, BioWare must make a choice: side with the industry or with the fans? Both have positives and negatives.

I'm cynical, so I have feeling I know who they're going to choose.

[Greed1914]

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.

[Aramiss Ducati]

If Me3 was truly art then only one playable copy should have ever been produced, and our experience with it should have only been published lets play segments done by Casey Hudson and Mac Walters.

[Lianaar]

Hussain747715 wrote...
This we aren't trying to create a new ending we're allowing them the oppurinity to correct their mistakes as they see fit. All I ask is diversity between endings and meanful way in which our choices manifest.

BW, I am not forcing you to create a new ending, I give you the opportunity to change the ending into something I want you to change it into. This really is just a play with words. It is an euphemism to say you don't want to force BW. The whole point of the movement is to make BW do something BW doesn't want to do. You can put any ideology behind it, but it still will be force.

Wheter the force use is valid, necessary and should be applied for this one time or in gaming industry generally... now that is the interesting part where I would wonder what people think.

[III Mav III]

I've never been a huge fan of the games are art label...i see it as entertainment and there's always a risk of pretentiousness...and this doesn't endear me to the term...if having an ending changed is ruining artistic vision then i don't want my games to be art...i want them to make me feel good...ME3 did the complete opposite...

[katanakage]

Lianaar wrote...


Leonardo was commisioned to make that painting, but was doing it for over 4 years and guess what, the person comissioning it never laid hand on it. So I guess his opinion didn't matter to Da Vinci.

I think our problem stems from the Video Game as genre being rather new and having little tradition (compared to novels, theatre and paintings). We do not know exactly how to realte to it and what expectations are acceptable or not. Different people place video games in different sectors and thus validate claims in regards of altering the games differently. What we can securely claim is that presently video games is shaping its own position on cultural/entertaiment palette of our life.

Also note, that some novels will be just that, novels, written words. And some novels will be art. I guess the same is to be said about the games.

I was merely stating a painting viewed as art now... It could be a Rembrandt, Monet, etc.... the point was would you still call it art seeing it that way just because he was an artist... I'd call it trash

[EllOneillE]

agathokakological wrote...

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

So you think the renaissance was an artistically bankrupt era? But I digress...

I did not pay for static art. I paid for a good interactive storyline that they told me would have multiple endings influenced by my actions. Had I known that the story was going to have a non-interactive ending that couldn't be influenced in any significant way I would not have purchased the game. I would have used YouTube to watch the ending.

They promised a conclusion to an interactive storyline and then they go out of their way to create a generic ending with an evil deus ex machina I am forced to comply with. The destruction of the relays alone invalidates or plainly ****s up many of my efforts to help the galaxy. Wrex can't lead Tuchanka with Eve into a renaissance era for the Krogan. The Quarians and Geth won't share their homeplanet. The Rachnii will continue to be known across the galaxy as an ancient pest.

So yeah, I think the ending should be changed. Because if you want to take the We-are-unquestionable-artists stance and lie to me about what you are selling I am not going to open my wallet for you anymore. And even polls in the most biased of places show that I am probably not one of an insignificant number of players that feel that way. But that's not an argument against the horrible plot holes in the ending or the way it ruins a lot of what the player has done. That's me using the opportunity to reiterate why they should change it as a business.

[chkchkchk]

Sepharih wrote...

Art isn't created in a vacuum, and, perhaps more importanntly, art like this is a collaboration.  It may seem high and noble to demand that your art remain pure and keep your original intent...but my experience is that you grow as an artist by accepting, responding, and yes, often times INCORPORATING criticism into your work.  Sometimes, the screaming fanboi's are right.  Sometimes, you need to let go of your original intent to allow a better story.

I totally agree with you.  I went to art school and nothing we ever did was "in a vacuum".  Things were constantly being reworked, even after the official "display" period.  I also never bought into "authorial intent".  There is no one true meaning or interpretation, regardless of what the artist says.  Everything is constantly in motion.  The "final product" is whatever's left when you're dead, and even then it isn't sacred.  People can take it and work with it.  So many of Shakespeare's plays were reworked versions of old stories.

If there's a new or expanded ending, well... it just means more Mass Effect.  This isn't a sin against the art gods.  The art gods don't care.

[Renew81]

Art ?

Call me crazy but in my eyes its a product a product that was sold under false promises and advertisement , so in my opinion its more then reasonable to ask for a fix for the product
you purchased,

[Midarenkov]

He had a fun time beating down a strawman. Move along.

[CrazyBirdman]

Zulmoka531 wrote...



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

That was literally the only thing that killed the ending for me. Remove this screen and I am happy.
Levine brings up a point I have been thinking about too. With this hole fiasco goind on right now everyone loses: the develeopers who feel misunderstood, the fans that did not get the ending their wished for and even people like me who enjoyed the ending because it just hurts to see so many people sad and disappointed.
The whole situation while eventually settle down if BioWare explains itself  a bit better but the hole thing regarding ending DLC would only make things worse. The writer would lose their independence, people like me would get disappointed and people who are angry right now would probably still be angry because their wishes would again be not fulfilled. The entire situation is just depressing because there is no way out of it that would please everyone. Hopefully time will close the wound and we all will remember Mass Effect as what it is: an amazing journey

[LucidStrike]

It's called CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM AND FEEDBACK, and, with INTERACTIVE media, it's a very important. Artists can be so frickin' pretentious. =_=

Modifié par LucidStrike, 20 mars 2012 - 12:33 .

[CronoDragoon]

parrmi22 wrote...

I agree with Levine on one point, however. If the retake movement succeeds, then it will really open the floodgates for consumer entitlement. Pretty soon people all over would point to Mass Effect and say, "If the misfits over at BSN can change an ending, then so can we!"

Eh, I don't think so. I think ME3 is the perfect storm for this to happen based on the level of fan investment, the type of game it is, the promises made before hand, etc. I don't see this happening again, at least not in this fashion. In a week when I beat Tales of Graces and the ending is terrible, I won't be starting a movement.

[Lianaar]

daigakuinsei wrote...
No one's forcing Bioware to comply.  If they do, it's out of concern for their future sales.  Welcome to capitalism, buddy.

Capitalism is just a tad more complicated then that
If there is a secure customer group who will buy a given product, no matter what, and the income will cover cost and give a resonable profit, then a small enough customer base is good enough for the product to be born.
Should there be a way larger customer base, however it is not secure and there is a chance that the returns will not cover costs and a chance the profit will be ultra high, then it might be too risky to try to provide for that customer group.

That too is part of a mechanism. A recent examples is when state and customers wanted to force banks into giving certain loans to customers. It was argued that it is in the interest of the banks to give loans as that is how they make money and it will also benefit the customers. And the banks were cornered to such a level that they chose to actually close down business instead of complying with customers. And that still is capitalism. In the end customers, state and bank all lost. If less force was applied, then maybe a version would have been cooperated where everyone comes out pleased from the situation.

[Actinguy1]

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.

You have the RIGHT to paint an ostrich raping a baby. You are an artist, you can paint whatever you want. But the people who bought that art, trusting that you had painted another landscape as you had promised, have the right to find an ostrich raping a baby to be abhorrent.

[Synonamess]

ValendianKnight wrote...

I don't want the fans to write the ending for ME3. I want Bioware to write an ending worthy of the series. To me, it makes no sense that Bioware managed to get 99% of ME3 so damn well, and just drop the ball on the most crucial %1 of the whole series. They are no crap writters. They proved with ME3 itself, they still have it. It's why we're fans in the first place. But anyone can tell something went wrong with that ending, even people who like it. Even if you do, you have to admit it's not what they promised, and a better ending CAN be written by Bioware. I want it to be theirs. I just want it to be better than it is, an ending deserving of the series that Bioware so carefully created.

agree

[hismastersvoice]

Greed1914 wrote...
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.

Not only that, but it's apparently okay to change the story of the game with more content, as long as that content is produced by the company, ie Javik, Shale, all the extra quest DLC, etc. So either we're sold an incomplete game and what is being peddled to us later on is a part of the original "artistic vision", or companies ****** all over "artistic integrity" by arbitrarily adding to the story in the name of money,

I mean, isn't Witch Hunt pretty much the same thing we're asking for, albeit on a smaller scale? Where was "artistic integrity" then?

[Hejdun]

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.

[Sesshaku]

Oh c'mon, ME3 was not art...Even twilight had a better ending that that....TWILIGHT!!....we are serious here people.

That ending was not what they promised us. Besides, they can't tell us we can't tell them to change the ending, because we don't want AN ENDING, we want, MANY diverse endings based on what we made.
Also they sound like they didn't even played the game, because that ending can't be defended. And also because they talk about our group as if we wanted to change the LOTR ending or the Harry Potter Ending....which it CAN'T BE COMPARED TO MASS EFFECT....because Mass Effect it's not about getting ONE ending, it's about having a different story depending on your choices.

Modifié par Sesshaku, 20 mars 2012 - 12:39 .

[Tyrzun]

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.

Actually the LEAD writer from Mass Effect left Bioware before ME 3.  This is obviously a case of new person, saying I'm going to make this my own and stick it to Drew.  Drew was the orginaly lead writer.