281 réponses à ce sujet

[NPH11]

az350z wrote...

 Lumping the entire game of 20-30 hours (plus multiplayer)into a 5-10 segment is - yes, back to that great word - childish..

When that 5-10 segment is so damn atrociously done that it reflects poorly on the previous time spent on the game, it isn't childish at all.

And again, you're assuming that everybody had the same experience as you, because you believe the final 5-10 minutes weren't that bad.

az350z wrote...

You didn't pay for an just an ending, most importantly, the massive product is not just a quick cinematic ending.

 

Yes I most certainly ****ing did! I didn't go out and buy ME3 for the second act. I bought it to see the series conclude, everything beyond that was an afterthought. After 150-200 hours and hundreds of dollars spent on this series, I wanted to see what would happen to my Shepard and his team. While you may feel that the ending wasn't important, to many people, it was the focal point of the entire game.

Modifié par NPH11, 20 mars 2012 - 09:52 .

[musicaleCA]

tenojitsu wrote...

And to that effect, we'll assume video games are in fact art, but they are VASTLY different from any other art form. You can simply download a change in video games, something impossible in movies, music, literature, painting, etc. I wonder if other other art forms wouldnt take advantage of this if they had the opportunity.

Actually, we photographers and digital artists do all the time. Client doesn't like proof. Fix proof. Send to client. Client likes changes, asks for other improvements or changes. Make changes, send to client. Client approves, pays rest of money.

Plenty of photographers are still required to accept some collaboration in their work. Often it's up to an art director what you're doing, so you provide the end product, and if they tell you to fix something, you do it. The internet has made such revisions much easier, just as it has with video games.

[Detha]

http://en.wikipedia....ki/What_Is_Art?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art
http://www.arthistor...artartists.html

It is believed that many paintings, much music, and many movies are art, but there are also paints, musical pieces and movies that are not.

Modifié par Detha, 20 mars 2012 - 09:51 .

[NPH11]

Detha wrote...

http://en.wikipedia....ki/What_Is_Art?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art
http://www.arthistor...artartists.html

It is believed that many paintings, much music, and many movies are art, but there are also paints, musical pieces and movies that are not.

I wouldn't say that this is art:

jk

Don't get me started on this. I'm getting memories of my Film Studies class.

What is sport?
What is art?
What is film?

[tenojitsu]

musicaleCA wrote...

tenojitsu wrote...

And to that effect, we'll assume video games are in fact art, but they are VASTLY different from any other art form. You can simply download a change in video games, something impossible in movies, music, literature, painting, etc. I wonder if other other art forms wouldnt take advantage of this if they had the opportunity.

Actually, we photographers and digital artists do all the time. Client doesn't like proof. Fix proof. Send to client. Client likes changes, asks for other improvements or changes. Make changes, send to client. Client approves, pays rest of money.

Plenty of photographers are still required to accept some collaboration in their work. Often it's up to an art director what you're doing, so you provide the end product, and if they tell you to fix something, you do it. The internet has made such revisions much easier, just as it has with video games.

Very good point! I didnt really think of the whole photography thing and how digital cameras and image software has changed that field.

[Nu-Nu]

tenojitsu wrote...

Art can't be mass produced

Also, Charles Rennie Mackintosh will disagree with you on that. He was the first artist who wanted to give art to the masses. He is the reason why we have lovely looking things at home, before he came along, everything was created just to be practical with no creative thought going into it.

[Inprst]

I spend a great deal of time around fiction writers and the like...I don't know many that wouldn't consider literature to be a written art form.

There is the mechanical aspect of writing: grammar, syntax, punctuation, etc. This is akin to a painter learning the broad brush strokes vs the fine points. The musician leaning where the keys are on his keyboard.

The art aspect of literature...well...that's something you can't exactly teach. You can't teach someone how to express themselves through written words. You can't teach someone how to have "voice", how to express an ideal they've got in their head. That is the art aspect.

As to whether or not games are or aren't an art form...I think games are a definite unique art form, but this doesn't at all mean they're immune to criticism. If others want games to be seen a valid art form, to be taken seriously, then criticism must come with the territory. If ME3 is a work of art, then we, the viewers, have the right to accept or reject it as is.

[tenojitsu]

Nu-Nu wrote...

tenojitsu wrote...

Art can't be mass produced

Also, Charles Rennie Mackintosh will disagree with you on that. He was the first artist who wanted to give art to the masses. He is the reason why we have lovely looking things at home, before he came along, everything was created just to be practical with no creative thought going into it.

No idea who you are talking about. You arent going to go all "Good Will Hunting" on me are you?

[Nu-Nu]

tenojitsu wrote...

Nu-Nu wrote...

tenojitsu wrote...

Art can't be mass produced

Also, Charles Rennie Mackintosh will disagree with you on that. He was the first artist who wanted to give art to the masses. He is the reason why we have lovely looking things at home, before he came along, everything was created just to be practical with no creative thought going into it.

No idea who you are talking about. You arent going to go all "Good Will Hunting" on me are you?

He's a famous artist, one of the artist that started the art nouveu movement. Oh well, just letting you know a well reknowned and accepted artist by the establishment and arty intellectuals, would agree on mass market art.

Modifié par Nu-Nu, 20 mars 2012 - 09:59 .

[tenojitsu]

Nu-Nu wrote...

tenojitsu wrote...

Nu-Nu wrote...

tenojitsu wrote...

Art can't be mass produced

Also, Charles Rennie Mackintosh will disagree with you on that. He was the first artist who wanted to give art to the masses. He is the reason why we have lovely looking things at home, before he came along, everything was created just to be practical with no creative thought going into it.

No idea who you are talking about. You arent going to go all "Good Will Hunting" on me are you?

He's a famous artist, one of the artist that started the art nouveu movement. Oh well, just letting you know a well reknowned and accepted artist by the establishment and arty intellectuals, would agree on mass market art.

Thanks for the info! I just happen to disagree, but hey, to each his own

[NPH11]

 To say art cannot be mass produced is just wrong in this day and age. Something can be made for the purpose of art and can be produced and sold to the masses for that purpose.

The difference being is that most of that art isn't being produced by a subsidiary developer of a major publisher to be sold with the profits going to the shareholders of that major publisher.

I'm sure there are people in Bioware who truly produce games as art for the love of it, but that art doesn't get off the ground without financial support from EA and they aren't going to support it unless they believe it can turn a profit. Inevitably, EA is involved in the creative process at some step, they'd be foolish to risk releasing something that might not be profitable. Bioware also certainly wouldn't risk selling anything that doesn't fly with EA, as they'd be the ones facing the backlash (Budget cuts to compensate, possibly layoffs, potentially the whole subsidiary being closed or merged)

So the question is ultimately what the purpose of the product is. Art of profit? Can it be both? We can apparently only complain if it's the latter.

Modifié par NPH11, 20 mars 2012 - 10:02 .

[Xandurpein]

Art is always subjective. To me a game is art, and should be judged by it's quality as art, when the creator claims it's art. Otherwise it's a commercial product. Had Bioware met the critique from the fans by letting the developers explain their artistic vision and defend why they think their art shouldn't be changed to fit our perception, then I would buy the argument that their art shouldn't be changed. I'd still not like it and probably take my money to other artists, but I wouldn't demand a change. Instead we have only met PR spokesmen from a business, trying to minimize the damage to sales of their product.

[tenojitsu]

Xandurpein wrote...

Art is always subjective. To me a game is art, and should be judged by it's quality as art, when the creator claims it's art. Otherwise it's a commercial product. Had Bioware met the critique from the fans by letting the developers explain their artistic vision and defend why they think their art shouldn't be changed to fit our perception, then I would buy the argument that their art shouldn't be changed. I'd still not like it and probably take my money to other artists, but I wouldn't demand a change. Instead we have only met PR spokesmen from a business, trying to minimize the damage to sales of their product.

I feel the same way about all the PR we've heard and no real answers. The purpose of this topic was to invoke thought regarding the issues of game developers using the "art defense" when they make a sub-par product. Oh, I have my own conspiracy theories about why all the PR talk we've heard, but I'll save it for another thread. All I'll say now is I dont think Bioware wanted this ending more than we did.

Modifié par tenojitsu, 20 mars 2012 - 10:09 .

[Klijpope]

LadyLinnie wrote...

There's different kinds of art, and games, books, paintings, music can all BE art, but just because you did a painting doesn't qualify it as art. There are developers out there who aim to merge games and art, sure, but for most developers, for obvious reasons, entertainment value is far more important. Some relevant comparisons: popular fiction (entertainment) vs literary fiction (art); pop music (entertainment) vs opera (art); action movies (entertainment) vs serious drama films (art).
The obvious problem with the art defense is that most people wanted entertainment, then at the end (after some pretty good entertainment for 20 hours, I might add), the game suddenly went: ART! And then ended.

Sorry, that is bol**x, all of that is 'art'. Whether it is 'high' art or 'low' art just depends on how pretentious you are. If something is entertaining does not disqualify it as art. Lady Ga Ga is as much 'art' as 'Tosca', and Tosca is entertaining to an opera afficionado.

If you did a painting, you created some art. May not be good art, but it is still art. Any other definition is elitist and so subjective as to be useless.

[Yttrian]

Art is not beyond criticism.

Oh look; the entire argument nullifed in 5 words.
Doesn't matter if it is or isn't...

Can we stop now?

Modifié par Yttrian, 20 mars 2012 - 10:10 .

[tenojitsu]

Klijpope wrote...

LadyLinnie wrote...

There's different kinds of art, and games, books, paintings, music can all BE art, but just because you did a painting doesn't qualify it as art. There are developers out there who aim to merge games and art, sure, but for most developers, for obvious reasons, entertainment value is far more important. Some relevant comparisons: popular fiction (entertainment) vs literary fiction (art); pop music (entertainment) vs opera (art); action movies (entertainment) vs serious drama films (art).
The obvious problem with the art defense is that most people wanted entertainment, then at the end (after some pretty good entertainment for 20 hours, I might add), the game suddenly went: ART! And then ended.

Sorry, that is bol**x, all of that is 'art'. Whether it is 'high' art or 'low' art just depends on how pretentious you are. If something is entertaining does not disqualify it as art. Lady Ga Ga is as much 'art' as 'Tosca', and Tosca is entertaining to an opera afficionado.

If you did a painting, you created some art. May not be good art, but it is still art. Any other definition is elitist and so subjective as to be useless.

Yeah, my paintings definetely arent art, lol.

Modifié par tenojitsu, 20 mars 2012 - 10:10 .

[tenojitsu]

Yttrian wrote...

Art is not beyond criticism.

Oh look; the entire argument nullifed in 5 words.
Doesn't matter if it is or isn't...

Can we stop now?

that my friend, is the point.

[tjmax]

Milish wrote...

The role playing game by definition can not be art. Thats like saying playing AD&D is art.

  It is many pieces of art put together to form interactive entertainment. A product to be sold. The fact that it is interactive means the players have a role in how the story is played out and no two stories are exactly alike. This was the premise of the game on its creation and the expectations of its fans and stood true for the first 2 games.

Its also not a movie.

In movies Actors are the role players. They star in movies and contribute by playing the parts of said movie. They sometimes have direct influence to change the direction of the final story from their own visions. In fact there are many movies that have alternate endings and of course directors cuts.

If you consider it art or not, a game is still a consumer product and those consumers have expectations based on past products, advertisement, interviews and reviews. 

If those expectations are not met there is a feeling of being ripped off. People generally do not like being ripped off. 

Yes a game is a consumer product. It is also art. The point I made earlier was, that you cannot consider art something that you do not have say in, especially if you pay for it.

Just because something is art, doesn't mean it is only artists who have a say as to how it looks. 
Art is a product. As much as some people do not like it, art is nothing else but a product. 
Game is a form of art commission to people and people have full right to demand changes if something was badly resolved.

If you ask me 'paint me a portrait, ill pay' I will. then you say 'sorry I hate the way you painted the nose' and I will be obliged to change it. This doesn't change the fact that the painting is art. But also doesn't change the fact it's a product I made for you and it should comply with your expectations.

Games art much more elaborate than paintings of course, but it still doesn't make them any less of art. In the end of the day BW had a vision for the game and hired people to materialize that vision. That's how art and artists rolled always.

Yes, I agree.

 I do custom 3d skin textures, clothing textures, mesh and sculpie textures and flat digital portrait art for people in a game as a hobbie all the time and agree 100%. People have a vision of what they want and if you do not meet those expectations they will insist you change it to meet those expectations.  If you do not. you simply do not get paid or they never use you again for their work.  

[Detha]

NPH11 wrote...

Detha wrote...

http://en.wikipedia....ki/What_Is_Art?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art
http://www.arthistor...artartists.html

It is believed that many paintings, much music, and many movies are art, but there are also paints, musical pieces and movies that are not.

I wouldn't say that this is art:

jk

Don't get me started on this. I'm getting memories of my Film Studies class.

What is sport?
What is art?
What is film?

Film is pretty clearly defined.  Sports are less open-ended than art when it comes to qualification.  Maybe you just had an overly artsy film study class.

[elarem]

Art is craft with delusions of grandeur. Give me a Master Craftsman before a wannabe artsy-fartsy designer.

The end of the trilogy is the crowning moment - does it leave you with a bad taste in the mouth or a feeling of achievement against all odds? Is it well crafted right to the end or artsy-fartsy and a disappointment?

[Inxentas]

Who even cares if you can label this as art? It doesn't work as advertised, that's the problem. Not that it's wrongly being accused of being art.

[tenojitsu]

Inxentas wrote...

Who even cares if you can label this as art? It doesn't work as advertised, that's the problem. Not that it's wrongly being accused of being art.

^This

I've said this to someone else numerous time in this thread.

Modifié par tenojitsu, 20 mars 2012 - 10:17 .

[NPH11]

Detha wrote...

Film is pretty clearly defined.  Sports are less open-ended than art when it comes to qualification.  Maybe you just had an overly artsy film study class.

I did. Very much so.

[tjmax]

Detha wrote...

Film is pretty clearly defined.  Sports are less open-ended than art when it comes to qualification.  Maybe you just had an overly artsy film study class.

You do know harry potter was suposed to die, but people got so upset about it she changed it right?

[SaturnH]

As a freelance storyboard illustrator, I think the "art defense" is absolute bull. If I draw a frame a certain way that I think is cool, but the director doesn't like, it changes immediately with no questions asked. I would be absolutely insane to refuse making changes due to "artist integrity". If a client with certain expectations is paying me for my time, I need to think about things with the client's opinions in mind- not my own. Even if I personally love a drawing, it is a failure if it doesn't meet the expectations of the client. I don't see the situation at Bioware as any different, only much larger. Instead of one client, they have millions, but all those people are in fact clients with expectations who are paying for Bioware's time.