807 réponses à ce sujet

[lokiarchetype]

Money has always exerted influence over the creative direction of games. Do you think Publishers and Investors have no input?

Nothing has changed, stop being melodramatic.

[Yttrian]

Phategod1 wrote...

This person get what I'm saying in a nutshell and said it in a more concise manner thank you. 

Your initial post contains over half a dozen fallacies, ignores several logical arguments that invalidate your own, as well as being built on confirmation bias.

[Zokopops]

Lately I have been reading people like Colin Moriarity and several others on here that defends Biowares artistic ending. I can agree that it is a dangerous path to let consumers dictate art.

BUT the bad reception among ME3-fans is not about that. It is about what we have been promised since 2007. "Our decisions matter. It WILL not be an ending with A,B or C, you WILL have conclusion, our questions WILL be answered."

What you defenders of Bioware do not understand is that this product is sold as an END to a trilogy. It even says so on the cover "Take Earth Back!". We have had dozens of trailers telling me Im about to kick reaper ass, liberate humanity and save the galaxy. Which of course we didn't.....
IF Bioware had played their cards right from the beginning, we wouldnt be in this mess. They should have said: "This is a work of art and some may find the ending a controversy". But they didnt.

So people got upset. For good reason. People have invested alot of time and money on this and what they were promised.....And THATS why the rage and not because we cant appreciate an artistic ending.

Hope this made things clearer.

[SaladinDheonqar]

No. Hopefully we're ruining non-sensical and faux 'artistic & intelligent' endings that has no place in franchises like ME. And hopefully this will teach Bioware and other developers to not make misleading, and sometimes outright deceiving statements about a game, when you know them to be false.

[Bfler]

Look at Dragon Age 2 and then think about the games are art statement.

[wright1978]

Sorry but I have every right to give them feedback as to how to improve the game. That's how consumer products work. They can of course refuse to accept that feedback as long as they are happy to run the risk of losing customers. The shoddy ending is something that masses of people have severe problems with so it is absolutely no surprise that a company that boasts about how seriously they take fan feedback are coming out with noises that they will try to address the issue in some fashion.

[Phategod1]

stuka1000 wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

 1st let me say that this following statement is for older individuals with common sense and the ability to form coherent sentences. Your the ones I am disappointed in, not the 16 year old children who should not even be playing the M rated ME1 from several years ago. What you dont understand is, if Bioware and Casey Hudson have agreed to actually change the ending based on the arguaments, then what has been achieved is the fans have comepletely invalidated Casey Hudson's artistic vision, and video games artistic value as a whole. 

What this means is video games are not art, have no artistic value and are just a product. Movies, books, and other form set to entertain can be claimed as art as such we all can base an opinion on it, but when you demand the artist change it, most times they'll laugh in your face and tell you to sod off because its there art they made it and its your choice to enjoy it or not or buy it or not. When the finished product is comprimised for the sake of the vocal majority of the customers then the product is not an artistic vision but just a product. 

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes. Sure, you made decisions that affected your Shepard but those are decions that were given to you by Casey and the writers, every single piece of fiction has plotholes thats a fact of life. For those who don't like the ending, you have a right to your opinion but when you demand a change, you have over stepped your bounds as a fan and a consumer, and you may singlehandedly destroyed modern story telling in games. 

Thanks for any one who took the time to read all this and Apoligize for length and any spelling or grammatical errors I missed.

Wether or not video games are art or not is irrelevant; the fact is that we as consumers were openly lied to.  We were promised many things in various marketing statements by various people within EA / BW and these promises were not fulfilled, far from it in fact.  A car can be considered art, the designers certainly look at them that way but if you were promised a vehicle that was capable of 150 mph and instead got something that struggled to top 30 mph you would be rightfully enraged.

If you wish to talk about precedents then start with stopping in it's tracks the precedent were a company can openly lie to it's customers in order to make a sale; then we can talk about artistic integrity.

Marketers especially artist promise things all the time, at the end of a day you were promised 1 thing.....A Game, the quality of that game or any aspect of that game are simply your opinion, Does your game work does it crash or have you reached a point where is it unplayable? If the answer is no, then there is nothing bioware needs to do. 

[Myskal1981]

Phategod1 wrote...

Sparse wrote...

Even if you accept the argument that art can be a commercial product - which is highly questionable - it is complete nonsense to suggest that an artist will - or should - act with a total disregard for their audience. No artist does that, particularly not when they are utilising a highly interactive medium.

Do you honestly believe that Christopher Nolan, Maichael Bay, or James Cameron hold in high regard what the audience believes about there "artistic vision" (NOTE: I hate one of the Three directors I just mentioned with the passion of one million suns). The goal for any artist whether it be a painter a director, or a singer ect. is to have ther product consumed at a market level but when it comes changing that already developed, finish product due to the outcry of a minority or hell even the majority thats when the product ceases to be art and simple JUST a game. and I've said it a million times you did not pay for the ending you thought you deseerved or even a good ending you for A GAME nothing more, nothing less you paid $60+ for A GAME and you received a damn fine game at that. everyone is entitled to there opinion on the game or the ending, but to demand a change in my opnion is rediculous and counter productive in modern story telling. 

You are stating an important aspect. After development, after releasing. A book or a movie after being released is very difficult to change and release again. There is a finality to the product that makes it very difficult.

But...

You have pre-screenings and pre-readings that help you gather feedback. Don't think that movies or books are not changed before release and don't think that the artist does not change his artistic vision to guarantee more success.
Also, there is a subtle difference to create art so it pleases the masses and you can earn money or art for the sake of art.
The advantage of video games is the interactive nature, you do not just consume. And additionally you have the chance to change the product even after release.

And now I have a question: What do you think about reboots? Did you like the new Star Trek movie? Did it not butcher the artistic vision of Gene Roddenberry? If the media industry on the one hand changes their art all the time so they can make money but cry when fans are requesting changes, they are hypocrites in my opinion.

[ryuasiu]

Phategod1 wrote...

 1st let me say that this following statement is for older individuals with common sense and the ability to form coherent sentences. Your the ones I am disappointed in, not the 16 year old children who should not even be playing the M rated ME1 from several years ago. What you dont understand is, if Bioware and Casey Hudson have agreed to actually change the ending based on the arguaments, then what has been achieved is the fans have comepletely invalidated Casey Hudson's artistic vision, and video games artistic value as a whole. 

What this means is video games are not art, have no artistic value and are just a product. Movies, books, and other form set to entertain can be claimed as art as such we all can base an opinion on it, but when you demand the artist change it, most times they'll laugh in your face and tell you to sod off because its there art they made it and its your choice to enjoy it or not or buy it or not. When the finished product is comprimised for the sake of the vocal majority of the customers then the product is not an artistic vision but just a product. 

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes. Sure, you made decisions that affected your Shepard but those are decions that were given to you by Casey and the writers, every single piece of fiction has plotholes thats a fact of life. For those who don't like the ending, you have a right to your opinion but when you demand a change, you have over stepped your bounds as a fan and a consumer, and you may singlehandedly destroyed modern story telling in games. 

Thanks for any one who took the time to read all this and Apoligize for length and any spelling or grammatical errors I missed.

  Hate to break it to you but most of us are pretty sure they were planing on releasing content later anyway. They have droped some very good hints on this through the teams twitter account way before Dr. Rays response. 

Also the ending was not artistic, it was a cliffhanger. We were promised that this was going to be the end of shepards story, and it was not. Its not entitlement to ask for the ending to an $80 game, much less a series you payed $200 too, to not end on a cliffhanger

[DESTRAUDO]

Not because i say so, because the game and the ones before it very intentionally forced those situations with non optimal outcomes and no one has complained about any of the others. The entire concept of the ME3 is sacrifice. The game is loaded with sacrifice, and has multiple choke points where sacrifice is all but guaranteed, in some places guaranteed.  If you added in options throughout the game for happy happy the entire theme of the game goes zoom out the window. The dream sequences where you are haunted by comments from those that sacrificed themselves. Zoom gone. The emotional impact of defeating kai lang, zoom gone. Absolute freedom for optimal choices will never be given because it would crush the narrative on which the game is hung. 

Aweus wrote...

DESTRAUDO wrote...

Because as i said, it would create a jarring change of tone at the end of the game.  You seem to think you should have the happy happy choice. 

Tell me.

Where was the happy happy choice in ME1 when you had to choose between kaiden and ashley? 

Where was the happy happy choice in Arrival DLC where you got to warn the batarian colony and allow them to escape?
Where was the happy happy choice in ME3 where you got to cure the genophage and keep mordin alive?
Where was the happy happy choice in ME3 where you got to resolve the geth war without losing legion or tali?

What you see in ME3 rather beginning in arrival dlc in earnest but grounded in the foundation of the choice in ME1 is that there is not always an optimal scenario. If anything players were spoiled with the ability to resolve disputes perfectly between squadmates in me2. You should have had to pick your sides in those fights and had to deal with it. 

So yeah, in a game full of situations where you are not given an optimal choice, you want an ending that gives a happy happy optimal choice. Why stop at the ending. They should rewrite ALL the priority missions to give you a rediculous happy scenario if you keep blindly hammering the paragon button.  And why stop there, they should also rewrite ME1 to remove the need to choose between kaiden or ashley.  Everyone is happy! 

Simply put. No. 
 

No why? Becouse you say so. You have same right to have an opinion as I do. Why your is better?
None of your choices you presented as examples are concerning endings of the game. Mordin death was great, I loved Mordin and I loved this scene. Same with Thane. I was fine with them dieing although in no way I would protest if Bioware added OPTIONS to keep them alive. I would probably still sacrifice Mordin becouse I found this scene to be very touching but that would be my CHOICE. Using your naming convention, both ME1 and ME2 had happy happy ending options despite many losses suffered on the way. I dont feel that ME3 gives me any sort of ending even remotely happy. Not only happy. Even worth the effort. For me those endings had almost same outcome as would had an ending where we just allow Reapers to harvest everything. I am not even asking for HAPPY HAPPY ending (although again, I am not against such option, why are you against OPTIONS for the love of God?) but at least for something that would make me feel like it was all worth it and make me want to replay ME3 or maybe even ME1,2,3. After completing ME3 I dont have any motivation whatsoever to touch any of ME games. And all I ask for is an OPTION for some ending that you will never even witness since you would probably find it horrible. For me current ending is horrible. Keep it for yourself and be happy with it, I dont mind. Why do you mind that I also get another option is beyond me.

[Ariaya]

Most people asking for additional ending content want the endings to have more context and/ or they want more ending choices. People who like their current ending can leave their game where it is. Nothing in their game has to change. No artistic vision compromised.

I just don't see the problem here.

This is not going to jeopardize the future of game storytelling for the eons to come.

[Phategod1]

VAIOMANIAC wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

 1st let me say that this following statement is for older individuals with common sense and the ability to form coherent sentences. Your the ones I am disappointed in, not the 16 year old children who should not even be playing the M rated ME1 from several years ago. What you dont understand is, if Bioware and Casey Hudson have agreed to actually change the ending based on the arguaments, then what has been achieved is the fans have comepletely invalidated Casey Hudson's artistic vision, and video games artistic value as a whole. 

What this means is video games are not art, have no artistic value and are just a product. Movies, books, and other form set to entertain can be claimed as art as such we all can base an opinion on it, but when you demand the artist change it, most times they'll laugh in your face and tell you to sod off because its there art they made it and its your choice to enjoy it or not or buy it or not. When the finished product is comprimised for the sake of the vocal majority of the customers then the product is not an artistic vision but just a product. 

For all those entitled individuals you paid $60-$190 for A game or games. If you do not work for Bioware or the dev team for Mass Effect then you do not have the right to demand story changes. Sure, you made decisions that affected your Shepard but those are decions that were given to you by Casey and the writers, every single piece of fiction has plotholes thats a fact of life. For those who don't like the ending, you have a right to your opinion but when you demand a change, you have over stepped your bounds as a fan and a consumer, and you may singlehandedly destroyed modern story telling in games. 

Thanks for any one who took the time to read all this and Apoligize for length and any spelling or grammatical errors I missed.

 

This is not some rare event neither is it the first time it has happened in games Fallout 3 changed ending because of fan feedback and Bethesda has been doing alot better in the story department than Bioware lately.

Bethesda Changed the Ending to FO3 to make DLC playable after you beat the intial game That is all. 

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Okay imagine this: you're watching a heroic story in a movie where your hero has gathered the forces of seven nations to fight a massive invading nation. Then just as the battle is peaking, your hero gets hit on the head, and goes into a weird dream sequence and picks either blue, green, or red, and your hero dies and the movie ends and you have no idea what happened.

So what are you going to tell your friends about the movie?
1) gee that was a great movie -- well you might if you want to be pseudointellectual
2) it was a great movie up until the ending. The ending made no sense at all.
3) or I wouldn't waste my money seeing it.

So the movie goes on DVD and into the bargain bin.... OR... is re-released later as the "Directors Cut" with the "deleted scenes" which means a new ending which makes the whole movie make sense. It isn't like this has never happened before.

[Foxhound2121]

Well you know what, the dlc that will give us more closure is also art. You don't have to buy it if you don't want to. Complaining about it neglects artistic vision and rights of the writer.

Secondly, how in the world does profit set a bad precedent for any industry?
If another developer besides Bioware felt impelled to give additional content for an ending through a paid dlc since Bioware did it, that would be nothing but good for the company. Nobody cares about the artistic rights of the writer of a video game.. The stockholders don't care, the customers don't care, and none of the stakeholders care. Why in the world would profit be secondary if the artistic prestige of the writer is in jeopardy?

Why would the artistic vision any one person be more important than a company as a whole. We all know what happens when companies follow that route. Take one look at how successful the Pontiac Aztek was when everyone greenlighted one person's artistic vision because he was an important figure in the company.

I just woke up in the twilight zone where someones ego is more important than profit for a company.

Modifié par Foxhound2121, 22 mars 2012 - 10:15 .

[Flash Aron]

IT IS A RPG GAME, where I and many other expect to alter the story with the role WE PLAY !

and ME even gave us the ability to decide to play "good" or "evil" to let "people" die or survive ...

and with that type of game, I and many others don't want Fatalistic endings.
In real live we don't know if all is fatalistic, but if we would ... I am sure "horror" would break upon us.

So please go and play Adventure games ...

but I loved ME because I thought it is different and this I want back, that it MATTERS what I have done in all three games and that I will receive a proper result for that.

DON'T TEACH ALL PEOPLE who play that game, FATALISM is the TRUTH

and BIOWARE told us in all their advertisments they hate that, and we believed them !
So I am sure we got that ending because of "TIME" shortage and not because the DEVELOPMENT TEAM wanted it, there has been too much love in the small details to accept THAT ENDING !

I think we will get now what the DEV TEAM really would have liked to deliver us.

So I am waiting ...

Modifié par Flash Aron, 22 mars 2012 - 10:16 .

[sargon1986]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Okay imagine this: you're watching a heroic story in a movie where your hero has gathered the forces of seven nations to fight a massive invading nation. Then just as the battle is peaking, your hero gets hit on the head, and goes into a weird dream sequence and picks either blue, green, or red, and your hero dies and the movie ends and you have no idea what happened.

So what are you going to tell your friends about the movie?
1) gee that was a great movie -- well you might if you want to be pseudointellectual
2) it was a great movie up until the ending. The ending made no sense at all.
3) or I wouldn't waste my money seeing it.

So the movie goes on DVD and into the bargain bin.... OR... is re-released later as the "Directors Cut" with the "deleted scenes" which means a new ending which makes the whole movie make sense. It isn't like this has never happened before.

This!

[Sailfindragon]

I am all for "conventional story telling" and "art integrity"
But when units sold, mass produced, profit margins, bottom line, advertising, sponsors and share prices come into the equation, it is no longer art, its a product. As a product, consumers have the right to voice their opinions.

[Aweus]

DESTRAUDO wrote...

Not because i say so, because the game and the ones before it very intentionally forced those situations with non optimal outcomes and no one has complained about any of the others. The entire concept of the ME3 is sacrifice. The game is loaded with sacrifice, and has multiple choke points where sacrifice is all but guaranteed, in some places guaranteed.  If you added in options throughout the game for happy happy the entire theme of the game goes zoom out the window. The dream sequences where you are haunted by comments from those that sacrificed themselves. Zoom gone. The emotional impact of defeating kai lang, zoom gone. Absolute freedom for optimal choices will never be given because it would crush the narrative on which the game is hung. 

Then how would you explain that me and multiple other people (just look around) are CRUSHED with the current narrative? If the narrative is so perfect, why are people angry/sad over it? Is it becouse we are idiots and idiots dont understand true valors? Even more so, idiots do not deserve anything becouse they are not worthy by definition? I am sorry, but the only explanation of your argument is that you are regarding me and my kin as mentally handicapped individuals. Good riddance. And if not, I still dont understand why you are against changes that will CHANGE NOTHING for your Mass Effect experience and make low intelligence life-forms like me happy? What you are basically saying is like: "I like oranges best, apples should never be present in our kitchen becouse then it would be possible to not eat oranges which would crush the wonderful taste of oranges. People who likes apples are irrelevant, make them eat oranges or let them die from starvation."

[Hendrik.III]

Irate reaction from OP. We haven't ruined anything, nor are we setting a trend.

I don't see what the panic is all about, it's all speculation and doomsaying. Should we be content with mediocrity? Should we be lied to and be expected to pay the full price? I don't think so.

Storytelling will continue in whatever way the devs please, and it's up to us to like it or not. We are engrossed by what they did, and we're letting them know. If anything changes, and I hope it does, then it's still BW/EA's decision. When nothing changes, they will lose customers. This is NOT a threat, it's a direct consequence of their "artistic view". 

Modifié par Hendrik.III, 22 mars 2012 - 10:19 .

[Sanrei]

I have a feeling most of the people defending the 'Art' argument to the point the OP is hasn't had to sit through five+ years of various art classes and be consistently critiqued and criticized. And if they have, I can easily see them being the kind who doesn't take criticism very well, and doesn't value opinions that don't match their own.

I believe video games can be art. But art is not all they are. The majority of art is created and there is little way for the person to interact with the art. A video game is also an entertainment product, and if it is poorly executed in either way IT WILL lose the company fans and money and people who pay money for a product have a right to ask that the product be improved or at the least get their money back when that product fails to deliver.

Fans have not ruined conventional storytelling because Mass Effect was never a conventional story. It's a well-written choose-your-own-adventure game. The major mechanic of the whole series was making your own ending.

EDIT: Anyway, I've fed the trolls enough tonight. Goodnight!

Modifié par PedEgg, 22 mars 2012 - 10:19 .

[Phategod1]

MrFob wrote...

To the OP:
Ok, first of all, what is artistic integrity? If someone makes a movie and later makes a directors cut, is that compromising the artistic integrity? If writer writes a book and then writes a sequel, that does not adhere what was established in the first one (similar to what the ME3 endings did), that changed things and does that compromise artistic integrity? When Raphael or Michelangelo made alterations to their sculptures and paintings to get the end result we see and admire today because their patrons demanded it, does that corrupt artistic integrity? I find the whole concept very flimsy and an argument on a flimsy basis is never a good idea.
2. How important is artistic integrity and why? Why shouldn't changes be made if they improve the end result? This is a point that IMO is very specific to entertainment art rather then really abstract art. You could argue that the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica series compromised the artistic integrity of the original series but still, millions of people enjoyed it immensly and I ask you, is that such a bad thing?
3. And here comes the crucial point, we (as in the fans) do not change the ending! We are telling the artist (BW) that we are not happy with it and that we'd like to see a change/addition. If the ending were to be changed, it would be solely and only BW's decision to do so and they would be the ones to implement the change. It would still be their artistic vision if they wished to do so. We are asking for that, but we are not proposing to take the prerogative to change it away from BW. On the contrary, we would no one else to do it.
Here is a horrible little story for you: If Leonardo Da Vinci after finishing the Mona Lisa would have taken a huge read brush and painted one big line over the whole painting in the end, I am sure people would be really unhappy and would like for that line to be removed. Now ignore the fact that for a painting this is much harder to do than for a video game. If anyone but Leonardo would remove that line, I'd also cry "foul" but if people urge Leonardo to do it and he takes pitty on them and does it, in my view, that would be perfectly fine. (at this point, I'd like to apologize for the horrible analogy but I am just trying to get my point across here).
Of course, you can disagree on this and say the read line has to stay, that's fine but at that point I'd like to say that this already shows that "artistic integrity"" is not something objective that everyone has to view in the same way.
If BoiWare wants to listen to the upset fans, they are damn well free to do so in my opinion. You call us entitled for asking, I am saying it is entitled to say we should not due to some abstract concept which is absolutely subjective.

1, When  a director releases a Directors Cut its not at the behest of a consumer who wanted something changed in the original movie, this is a terrible analogy because, its usually to add an additional few mintues to a film that other wise would have stayed on the cutting room floor. 

2. Artistic integrity  is everything when it comes story based games like this, and to validate the "games as art" arguament. Imagine a wrold where people would have said *SPOILER* "Oh Wanderer turning into a baby at the end of Shaow of the Colossus is complete BS, change it" then we get a world were every ending has to be a  happy-pink-easily-explained-bunnies ending and games developed by corporate yes men who work for Fox studios. 

[darkshadow136]

Yttrian wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

This person get what I'm saying in a nutshell and said it in a more concise manner thank you. 

Your initial post contains over half a dozen fallacies, ignores several logical arguments that invalidate your own, as well as being built on confirmation bias.

Agreed. I also see the OP avoiding statements from myself and many others that tear apart his argument  with historical facts. I guess he is right on one thing, which battles to pick.

[Mad-Max90]

They don't have a problem changing the story and selling it to us as dlc so why should they have a problem with changing the story to put every thing they promised but didn't deliver. How can you claim we're destroying the developer's artistic integrity when your major selling point from day one was being a highly "interactive" "ROLEPLAYING" game. This studio is filled with liars and swindlers now, just look at what we were promised in both mass effect 3 and dragon age 2 then play them...it's a lot of **** missing from what they said they put in those two games

[ComfortablyNumb]

Phategod1 wrote...

Marketers especially artist promise things all the time, at the end of a day you were promised 1 thing.....A Game, the quality of that game or any aspect of that game are simply your opinion, Does your game work does it crash or have you reached a point where is it unplayable? If the answer is no, then there is nothing bioware needs to do. 

No, they didn't promise us a game. The promises they made and what thye have delivered are two different things. Of course, it's their right to change the concept and the direction but at least they should have the balls to admit it up front. And not feed us with vague and meaningless PR-talk.

Modifié par mrufka_z, 22 mars 2012 - 10:25 .

[Nonoru]

If by "conventional" you mean endings like mass effect 3 then sure i'm genuinely happy to ruin this kind of lazy work.Hopefully we will never see another "artistic" ending in any game.