807 réponses à ce sujet

[dragg44]

Sigh . . . why is it that people assume video games are exempt from adapting to the consumer's wants and needs? Slapping an "artistic" label on a product does not exempt video games from this process. In the end, a video game is a product made by employees for a company in the business to make a profit for their shareholders.

Can it be considered a type of art? Certainly. To say it's only art and not subjected to, shaped or dictated by the demands of consumer is being disingenuous.

Frankly, I find this argument to be no less of an "entitlement" behavior than what the unhappy consumers have been labeled and chastised for in the forums and websites.

It's a rather tiresome argument of "that's just how it is so just accept it and move along."  I would dare say that we would be stuck with a lot of horrible, unimaginative and faulty products if consumers simply shut up and bowed their heads.

[Foxhound2121]

Phategod1 wrote...

Yeah But niether me or the person I was quoting mentioned anything about sequels We were discussing -DIRECTORS CUTS_ and there correlation to this particular situation. But to your second point if the content that is coming Is simply and explanation of what happend I'm fine with this as long its done with actually added gameplay, My concern is what some have called the "slippery slope" where  Bioware would do nothing more then create some type of happy ending and completely discard the original ending that set a terrible precedent. for the "Slippery Slope".

Precisely, as your trying to alter the entire context of the situation to fit the logic that is untrue and a decoy fallacy, so I gave you a more fitting analogy. If anyone bothers to read Bioware's response, absolutely nothing you have said is true. Matter of fact, changing an art already consumed or received is physically impossible in almost all cases including Bioware's case. Giving us more closure is just another art piece that anyone would have done in any other industry. Just as a movie might come out with more content, comic books, or back story to tell you what happens after a rather vague ending.

Modifié par Foxhound2121, 22 mars 2012 - 11:09 .

[Dezerte]

Karrie788 wrote...

You're using an old argument, so I'll use old counter arguments. You know who had to change a particular event of his novels? To unkill his main character? Arthur Conan Doyle. And said character was Sherlock Holmes. Would you say that was a bad decision?

I myself truly believe games are art. They have a wonderful capacity for storytelling, being interactive. But that's just the thing : they're interactive. In that way, the story also belongs to us. Besides, Bioware has stated numerous times they were creating the story with the fans. That's how, for example, we got the romances with team dextro.

If an ending is bad, I have the right to dislike it. If it's full of plotholes, lack of closure, and goes against everything the developers have promised, I sure have the right to ask for a better ending. They may not listen. But I have the right to voice my opinion.

This is not unprecedented. Bethesda was humble enough to recognize the ending to Fallout 3 was rubbish and changed it. Bioware can do the same if they judge that the fans may have a point. The ball is in their camp.

Summed up my feelings well.

We have the right to critizise their work, but it is also their right to not listen to it.

[FadingPhil]

Meanwhile in the real world.

[LegendaryBlade]

Sir Conan Doyle, what a tool he was. He ruined the artistic integrity of books forever.

[emperoralku]

 I genuinely loathe this artistic integrity argument. People treat "art" as if it's something holy, that it is the word of god that cannot be changed under penalty of death. 

Hogwash.

People make bad calls, they make mistakes and we have every right to call them out on it. 

In the end it doesn't matter what the source of an idea is or if it was the "artist's original vision". What matters is that the quality of the end product, a product which they want to sell to us.

If the product is improved through dialogue with fans then that doesn't compromise some kind of sacrsanct rule, it simply makes good business sense.

[emperoralku]

Dezman8 wrote...
We have the right to critizise their work, but it is also their right to not listen to it.

Their shareholders will disagree.

[Skyhawk02]

Just wanted to mention that I really enjoyed Mass Effect 3's ending, but I think its great that Bioware is trying to give other people more of the ending that they wanted too.

[DuncanId]

Karrie788 wrote...

You're using an old argument, so I'll use old counter arguments. You know who had to change a particular event of his novels? To unkill his main character? Arthur Conan Doyle. And said character was Sherlock Holmes. Would you say that was a bad decision?

I myself truly believe games are art. They have a wonderful capacity for storytelling, being interactive. But that's just the thing : they're interactive. In that way, the story also belongs to us. Besides, Bioware has stated numerous times they were creating the story with the fans. That's how, for example, we got the romances with team dextro.

If an ending is bad, I have the right to dislike it. If it's full of plotholes, lack of closure, and goes against everything the developers have promised, I sure have the right to ask for a better ending. They may not listen. But I have the right to voice my opinion.

This is not unprecedented. Bethesda was humble enough to recognize the ending to Fallout 3 was rubbish and changed it. Bioware can do the same if they judge that the fans may have a point. The ball is in their camp.

Let's not forget all the movies with different alternate endings, or with different versions like blade runner (4 different versions of the same movie) or highlander 2.

Also, all the games with different endings, it's not like all games have always had only one ending.

[Wattoes]

Authors have never had to do rewrites or adjust things?
Movies have never had to do reshoots after filming closed, or multiple endings?

Plenty of other art forms get changes based on how the fans would perceive it. Whats so bad about getting feedback that your product sucks and fixing it? Hell its not even the first time its happened in videogaming.

Modifié par Wattoes, 22 mars 2012 - 11:24 .

[WeAreLegionWTF]

"...now you can continue to build that legend through further gameplay and downloadable content." now that's very artistic.

[darkshadow136]

Skyhawk02 wrote...

Just wanted to mention that I really enjoyed Mass Effect 3's ending, but I think its great that Bioware is trying to give other people more of the ending that they wanted too.

Thank you for your post. I also respect that you enjoyed the endings. Your post +1

[Mandemon]

WeAreLegionWTF wrote...

"...now you can continue to build that legend through further gameplay and downloadable content." now that's very artistic.

And here is why I believe "Art" argument doesn't fly.

[SeanThen1]

This just in: Skyrim no longer considered "art" due to ignorant PS3 fans demanding so-called "Patches".

YOU'RE RUINING THE ART, PEOPLE!

[MrFob]

[quote]Phategod1 wrote...
*snipping for space*
[/quote]

Yeah But niether me or the person I was quoting mentioned anything about sequels We were discussing -DIRECTORS CUTS_ and there correlation to this particular situation. But to your second point if the content that is coming Is simply and explanation of what happend I'm fine with this as long its done with actually added gameplay, My concern is what some have called the "slippery slope" where  Bioware would do nothing more then create some type of happy ending and completely discard the original ending that set a terrible precedent. for the "Slippery Slope".

[/quote]

Ok, I will acknowledge that my analogies were not always the best (I actually wrote so in my post). However, The directors cut was but one example of art that is changed and I DID give another one with involving a sequel (good job btw on taking out two minor points of my post, answer to that and discard the rest of it ). That however is not even the point.
The point is, we are asking and if BW wants to listen to us, they can do whatever they want with their IP. That's it. End of story.

Of course there are better ways and worse way to handle it but just like the original, they are subjective. I also would much more enjoy it if they resolved the situation without throwing away what they have done so far but explain it. That however, is a matter of opinion. To categorically define something as THE finished art product that cannot be changed (behest of fans or no) without even being the artist in question, THAT is entitlement.

That btw is especially true for a product that ends with a message that can be paraphrased as "Wait for DLC."

Out of curiosity, (and this is genuine interest, no sarcasm, bait or hostility) how do you stand on the indoctrination theory? You said you'd be fine with additional content that leaves the ending intact. How about one that leaves it but dramatically changes its context? I am really interested to hear your thoughts on this.

Modifié par MrFob, 22 mars 2012 - 11:56 .

[Kilshrek]

I honestly recommend you spend the eight and a half minutes listening to this guy.

He gives it from the consumers point of view. Mind you, we are all consumers.

Keep that in mind.

[Mnementh2230]

Dreogan wrote...

Nonsense. They abdicated their artistic vision when they slapped together the tripe they threw together at the last minute, shoved it into a box, and shipped it unfinished.

If artistic vision were their concern, we would've had consistency throughout the narratives of ME1, 2, and the ending of 3. This is not what we got.

QFT (Quoted For Truth)

If this so-called "artistic vision" of the author is so important, why have the powers that be decided to re-write the last Mass Effect novel?  BECAUSE IT WAS WRONG.  The endings we got?  Also wrong - not in keeping with the themes of the series.  We went from sci-fi to supernatural with that star-child *thing*, and Shepard just trusts what he already knows is a Reaper entity?  Bullsh*t.

Never mind that we were directly lied to by Hudson about the type of endings we would get.

If that's the only way he can get his "artistic vision" out, maybe that says something about the quality of it.

99% of the game is fantastic.  We're not asking for that to be changed - we just want and ending that makes sense.  I'm going to repeat that, because it bears repeating.

WE.  WANT.  AN.  ENDING.  THAT.  MAKES.  SENSE.

Not an art-piece that can't follow simple dramatic structure - ie. you DON'T introduce a new, incredibly important character (this star-child-reaper-thing) at the very end.

[die-yng]

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.

Go and do a Tali bad ending, for all I care about your inane ramblings.
Endings of books, games, comics and tv series have been changed, added upon or been discarded completely.
Whole seasons have been retconned into dreams, because fans didn't like the way they developed, going back as far as "Dallas."

A game is something in which you immerse yourself way more than in any other media and as BW itself is fond of saying, games are best when you take the fans opinions and wishes and include them into the game.

Last but not least this ending is not such a great idea, it's not unique (has even been done in video games before, not even talking of the many, many books wiht similar endings), it is flawed both in logic and execution and full of plot holes/ inconsistencies and stuff that is outright unexplainable.
Look around a bit here on the boards and you will find enough entries or links to reviews, that show the flaws very well.

With video games we have the rare occassion to get both, we can let the ending as it is stay, for those who want that and give all us others (80-90% in every survey taken) an ending that is more to our liking.

Come off your high horse and stop acting like this is the end of all creativity, when the ending stems from nothing but EA forcing a deadline on BW which didn't leave them the time to work properly on the ending and led to that great first day DLC.

Seriously!!!!!!!!!!!!

[DarthSyphilis59]

Video games are a product. I don't care that you want to use the "art" cop out, but consumers have a right to demand better quality when expectations, and promises made by the manufacturer (I might add) are not met. Enough said, stop being a fanboy and use your brain.

[Baronesa]

Maybe the OP is right... we should not ask for BioWare to change the ending... and obviously people should have never protested or pointed out the problems of the last Mass Effect book...

After all, it is not like changing endings has happened before in art, right? Obviously Dickens or Conan Doyle would never sink to that level!




For those with broken detectors... that was a joke -.-

[nevar00]

Phategod1 wrote...

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.

What the **** is this?  I damn well do; I PAID for the game, I'm the consumer.  We can make complaints ESPECIALLY when we were flat out lied to like with ME 3.  That's false advertising.  

And on top of that, the entire ending is a mess of plot holes and decisions that in the end mean nothing, which is the exact opposite of what we were told.  Yes people are pissed, and rightfully so.

Games, books, and other media when made for a profit, are products first and "art" second.  This art argument is, quite frankly, horrendous.  

[Merwanor]

Like movies are not edited to be shorter for the cinema and later released as a directors cut or extended editions. Altering art is not a new thing, neither is it with games. I did not see anyone complain when they altered the ending for Fallout 3 with the Broken Steel dlc.

And in the case of ME3, we where lied to. They said there would be no A, B, C ending, but that is exactly what we got.

Edit:

Lewis Black on how the Old testament was changed to the new one.


Most of what Lewis Black says here is ment to be comedy, but also it is very logical.
Christians thought that the Old testament of the bible was way to dark and god was to much of an ass. So they changed it to something more convenient and more positive.

seems to me that "art" has been altered throughout history for a long time.

Modifié par Merwanor, 22 mars 2012 - 11:45 .

[luferndes]

Games are geared to customers, not the publisher or developer. I think if developers want to create games so that WE can enjoy them, they should act accordingly, and if we aren't happy with the product they made something is obviously wrong and it needs to be addressed. Whether it's art or not, video games are still a sold product, and a relatively expensive one at that, so as far as that goes I think our satisfaction is just as important as artistic integrity.

[Lugaidster]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

Sir Conan Doyle, what a tool he was. He ruined the artistic integrity of books forever.

Now we have to spend the rest of our lives computin Pi... Oh wait!

Modifié par Lugaidster, 22 mars 2012 - 11:41 .

[Dezerte]

emperoralku wrote...

Dezman8 wrote...
We have the right to critizise their work, but it is also their right to not listen to it.

Their shareholders will disagree.

Yes, not listening to your fans might result in a loss of fanbase and reduce future earnings from DLC or other games.

I'm still on the fence myself, I don't think I can write BioWare off until I see DA3. Still, my faith in BioWare is crumbling a bit at the moment.