807 réponses à ce sujet

[Vilegrim]

where the novels of Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle invalidated when he listened to his fans and ret conned Sherlock Holmes death? Was FO3 invalidated by Broken Steel?

[GammaRayJim]

Wow it really boggles my mind that people can honestly compare themselves to the Catholic Church who commissioned/hired Micheangelo to paint/sculpt ect... to themselves as having hired BioWare to write/produce ME3. The Church as said patron had every right to determine what the artwork would represent because they approved preliminary sketches. Please don't think that he just painted whatever he felt like.

Quit deluding yourselves you didn't hire them you purchased their mass produced artwork. Much like buying a poster of said famous work of art you bought a copy of someones artistic vision and because you don't like the ending you feel ripped off. But no one forced you to buy it and you in no way hired them to make it for you, you chose to go along for the ride.

[Murkman4683]

GammaRayJim wrote...

Wow it really boggles my mind that people can honestly compare themselves to the Catholic Church who commissioned/hired Micheangelo to paint/sculpt ect... to themselves as having hired BioWare to write/produce ME3. The Church as said patron had every right to determine what the artwork would represent because they approved preliminary sketches. Please don't think that he just painted whatever he felt like.

Quit deluding yourselves you didn't hire them you purchased their mass produced artwork. Much like buying a poster of said famous work of art you bought a copy of someones artistic vision and because you don't like the ending you feel ripped off. But no one forced you to buy it and you in no way hired them to make it for you, you chose to go along for the ride.

Thank You! We are just cosumers, users of the product, we commisioned nothing, if I am not mistaken EA probably funded the project.  Considering the sales of ME3, they are probably pretty happy with the game. 

[Enraged Sympathizer]

I respect your views and points, but as an aspiring artist myself, you have to consider that art itself is a product, especially if it's being made for someone (Aka:fans in this case) with the exchange of funds. People pay for what is promised, ME3's case, an actual conclusion. Now I'm not saying Biowares done yet, personally I think they're too good for what they gave us, but it just seems "fishy" or odd for the current situation to think they're finished so by that I feel the fans should calm down, give feed back and see what's to happen. Time will tell. But back to my original point, first you must define art. Now I'm not saying its bound by one explanation but I just feel its anything with passion and expression yet at the sametime under whatever circumstances it happens to be in. Hobby AND business included. Business meaning there be paying customers who can and will be upset and be entitled to being upset. Demanding is one thing but if there is a demand then people will buy with supply. God forbid I-or anyone say video games aren't art because everything and anything has the right to be art with enough passion and expression. The art of war, proper sword work or even the slight changes and aiming of a gun. Working and forging something to your will with expertise implying a certain passion and care to do so for, in this case, the custumers satisfaction. DOES NOT MEAN ITS NOT ART. It has the effects of art and more! Attachment, meaning, makes you think and give a damn. Personally, I feel, if someone leads a completely one sided argument contradicting art (expression, etc) then no one is really in the right OR wrong here.

In short, I suppose, it is as much their art as ours. Make of that what you will. I apologize for the wall of text. 

Modifié par Enraged Sympathizer, 22 mars 2012 - 04:03 .

[Murkman4683]

Vilegrim wrote...

where the novels of Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle invalidated when he listened to his fans and ret conned Sherlock Holmes death? Was FO3 invalidated by Broken Steel?

I am sorry this comparison is a joke.  A literary master and a video game company are two different things.  Broken Steel will not be remembered, Sherlock Holmes will. 

[BDelacroix]

Again, the "art" they chose was that the product is shaped by your decisions. This end is not shaped by anythign but picking from three colors. Therefore the "artistic integrity" is broken.

On top of that, we have quotes of promises of not being an A,B or C choice. Varied endings etc. etc.

This did not happen.

Modifié par BDelacroix, 22 mars 2012 - 03:53 .

[Mhgasa]

This whole debate reminds me why I hate politics. If you try and take a somewhat neutral stand, both sides are gonna hate you.

Im all for artistic integrety and it can be argued in some cases, but i really think that mass effect is a really bad example. I consider myself a consumer and bioware a product manufacturer, from whom i purchase a game based on their own ideas and fan input(which they even said so themselves). This has absolutely nothing to do with art, again in my opinion. its about creating a product that the customer wants to purchase, basic capitalism (supply/demand).

If they stick to their guns, it should be a question of them having a different view of the ending and not about art, which i would respect. But as it goes in politics we always have to degenerate everything into the slippery slope argument, which pretty much consumes most threads atm.

[bti79]

"you may singlehandedly destroyed modern story telling in games. "

Absolutely not. All we ask for is that the multithreaded story telling which is the very core and trademark of a game like ME is continued until the end.

[txmn1016]

All I have to say is, ME was never conventional story telling. It was interactive story telling from the beginning. Interactive obviously being the key word. So to say that the fans have "ruined" conventional story telling doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

[Jackal7713]

TheMakoMaster wrote...

You do know that patrons commissioned many of the world's artistic masterpieces and that these patrons directly or indirectly influenced the direction of the end product.

If Michelangelo and company decided to make Muhammad the focal point of the fresco in Sistine Chapel, I bet the Catholic Church would have made him to change it

Bioware's patrons are its fans. Clearly many of them are not happy with the work their $60 commissioned.

Pope Julius II had Michelangelo make several changes to Sistine Chapel. Lets not forget that the Sistine Chapel took 4 years to make.

So I agree TheMakoMaster. As Bioware's patrons we should get a fix to the endings.

[txmn1016]

Mhgasa wrote...

This whole debate reminds me why I hate politics. If you try and take a somewhat neutral stand, both sides are gonna hate you.

Im all for artistic integrety and it can be argued in some cases, but i really think that mass effect is a really bad example. I consider myself a consumer and bioware a product manufacturer, from whom i purchase a game based on their own ideas and fan input(which they even said so themselves). This has absolutely nothing to do with art, again in my opinion. its about creating a product that the customer wants to purchase, basic capitalism (supply/demand).

If they stick to their guns, it should be a question of them having a different view of the ending and not about art, which i would respect. But as it goes in politics we always have to degenerate everything into the slippery slope argument, which pretty much consumes most threads atm.

This.  It's impossible to win by trying to be level headed.  It's a very sad thing, but when you're in the  middle and try to see all sides of the question, people will hate you for it. 

[pfellahX]

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.

For me, this isn't about art, it's about holding a game company accountable for the marketing bull**** for once. When you say things like "it won't be an A/B/C ending" and then you deliver an A/B/C ending... that's not a difference of artistic opinion, that's a game-company specifically misrepresenting the product to their (most loyal) customers. They specifically "promised" ( I recognize that's a bit of a naive verb choice, but whatever) one style of ending, and then released EXACTLY what they disparaged and claimed it wouldn't be. And then doubled down on it by claiming that was their "artistic statement" all along.

I'm for games as art. I'm for game designers being allowed to tell the story they think is right. But when the company behind them flat-out lies about what they're going to deliver, we should absolutely be allowed to call shenanigans. As well as vote with our wallets next time they put a game out.

[Mister Mida]

Murkman4683 wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

where the novels of Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle invalidated when he listened to his fans and ret conned Sherlock Holmes death? Was FO3 invalidated by Broken Steel?

I am sorry this comparison is a joke.  A literary master and a video game company are two different things.  Broken Steel will not be remembered, Sherlock Holmes will. 

So Conan-Doyle gets away with retconning yet Bethesda doesn't?

[Beta-Breech]

GammaRayJim wrote...

Wow it really boggles my mind that people can honestly c:devil:ompare themselves to the Catholic Church who commissioned/hired Micheangelo to paint/sculpt ect... to themselves as having hired BioWare to write/produce ME3. The Church as said patron had every right to determine what the artwork would represent because they approved preliminary sketches. Please don't think that he just painted whatever he felt like.

Quit deluding yourselves you didn't hire them you purchased their mass produced artwork. Much like buying a poster of said famous work of art you bought a copy of someones artistic vision and because you don't like the ending you feel ripped off. But no one forced you to buy it and you in no way hired them to make it for you, you chose to go along for the ride.

While we the fans didn't commision this work, we funded it by buying the previous games and keeping the company alive.  If we stopped buying their games, DLC and products they would not of been able to make this game.   It's a buyers market and shock horror the buyers aren't happy with a product because it's not as advertised.   

When it comes down to games and the story they tell a cruicial part of it, is the way it ends.  It has to be consistent to be considered good, it has to have some level of rationallity to match the world it's been set in.  The ending doesn't have either of these things.   It wouldn't matter if everyone died, or if the galaxy was destroyed, just as long as it was damn consistent.  

If I didn't enjoy the Gears of war style multiplayer (which is neither artistic or that interesting in the way it was developed)  I would of returned the game and got my money back.    Don't delude yourself that the buyers don't control the market.  It happens when fans of a series make requests or are unhappy with a product.  What this is, is a product that contains some artistic merit, but it's a product none the less.  

What you're forgetting is with music, and books we can sample them without having to put money on the table first.   We can decided wether or not we want to contribute to the artists developement and help fund their next endevor.  With games we can't do that, so they're more of a product than anything else.  

[SLonergan]

Murkman4683 wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

where the novels of Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle invalidated when he listened to his fans and ret conned Sherlock Holmes death? Was FO3 invalidated by Broken Steel?

I am sorry this comparison is a joke.  A literary master and a video game company are two different things.  Broken Steel will not be remembered, Sherlock Holmes will. 

This comment is ignorant, and it's the problem with the game industry today. People invalidate video games as an art form.

Video Games are just as legitimate as Books, Movies, Music, and Fine Art, whether you like it or not.

That being said, it's fine for Bioware to change the ending. 

THAT being said, Bioware never said that they're changing the ending! They said that they're going to add content to help answer questions. This isn't a rewrite, it's a retcon.

Bioware's artistic vision isn't being violated because they're accommodating their fans. In fact, their artistic vision was to make a game that pleased their fans. 

[Geneaux486]

Turning over creative control to the angry internet mob is pretty much never a good idea. Like the Salarians should have done with the Krogan, wait a while, let agression work itself out. Wait until more and more people have finished the game and see if the ending is still so poorly recieved. They made their decision too early based on knee-jerk reactions.

[Alamar2078]

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. 

@OP:  I believe a company, person, etc. has a right to their artistic vision.  I also believe that games can certainly qualify as art.

I believe there is at least one critical piece of information you are overlooking.  That piece of information is that Bioware made specific statements concerning ME3 and its ending(s)  As soon as Bioware started making statements about ME3 they began limiting their own artistic vision.  Honestly Bioware only have themselves to blame for not living up to their word and limiting their own options.

All that I originally wanted was for Bioware to live up to their word.  After initial mistreatment by EA/BW [see some of the intial "retweets"] I changed my mind and I want, in addition to what was promised, choice to be critically important during every second of the ending ; I want a kick-butt epilogue ; I also want endings to make sense and be consistent with the "rules" of the Mass Effect Universe prior to being nearly hit by harbinger's beam weapon.

Modifié par Alamar2078, 22 mars 2012 - 04:11 .

[billyzero]

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.

So movies are not art, literature is not art, paintings are not art, music is not art, plays are not art.  They all change based on public perceptions and that's just naming the first six things off the top of my head. 

[Klijpope]

Vilegrim wrote...

where the novels of Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle invalidated when he listened to his fans and ret conned Sherlock Holmes death? Was FO3 invalidated by Broken Steel?

But Doyle did not change the ending of the Reichenbach Falls. That ended with his protagonist presumed dead. He just wrote new stories where he had not in fact died.

And yes, Dickens did change his ending. He chose to. The fans might have complained and appealed for him to, but he was under no obligation to.

A large segment of the ME fans (not all, or most, or whathaveyou, there's too many opinions and tones represented here to make sweeping statements about everyone) do seem to feel that they have the right to demand that BW change their ending - and are trying to force them to (with threats, and FTC complaints, and using the bogus consumer protection argument), rather than persuade them to.

A lot of Renegade going on when Paragon would be more appropriate.

[iamthedave3]

Murkman4683 wrote...

Bethsada fixed the game so you could continue to play in the open world, not because the ending was bad, get your facts straight. 

Try it yourself first. They fixed the game because the fans complained and hated the forced choice of an ending which did not in any way fit the Fallout universe, and Bethesda simply agreed with them and changed it.

If all they wanted to do was fix it so you could continue to play in the open world, all was needed was a patch that would wind you back to before you began the final mission.

The scenario was identical, with the exception that the Bethesda writers agreed and have since on camera admitted they screwed up the ending and were happy to have the chance to go back and correct their mistake.

[Statulos]

If people compare artistic vision to books, films, videogames and so on I will use this line of thought next time my editor asks me to change a paper because I included perspectives from Theodore Adorno.

Modifié par Statulos, 22 mars 2012 - 04:15 .

[UnbornLeviathan]

 People did it for Fallout, people did it for Infamous 2, people have been doing it for years. You're just involved in this one now so you notice.

And if you really think that doing this for Bioware is somehow ruining it for the rest of the world for all time, you're really out of touch.

Freedom of speech survived The Crusades, Hitler, Stalin and more, I think it will survive this.

[kramerfan86]

If video games being "art" means in the future I am going to continue to recieve unstatisfying conclusions that have a quality level that suggests they were written by an arrogant teenager in a creative writing class who has a misperception that they are incredibly deep, so be it that we "ruined" that

Modifié par kramerfan86, 22 mars 2012 - 04:17 .

[Alisira]

SamFlagg wrote...

Alisira wrote...

Most of the art we hold dear today, has been commissioned. Please don't think that Leonardo da Vinci just showed up in the Sixtine Chapel with a pot of paint one day and began painting. Furthermore, if da Vinci would have decided that rainbows and ponies fit his artistic vision better, I am sure the Vatican would have not been pleased. To say the least.
The only difference is, we are not one commisioner, we are many. But since so many of us are disappointed I think we have a point.

More than anything else it would've pissed off Michalangelo.

bangs head on her keyboard. I knew it felt wrong....

[iamthedave3]

Klijpope wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

where the novels of Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle invalidated when he listened to his fans and ret conned Sherlock Holmes death? Was FO3 invalidated by Broken Steel?

But Doyle did not change the ending of the Reichenbach Falls. That ended with his protagonist presumed dead. He just wrote new stories where he had not in fact died.

And yes, Dickens did change his ending. He chose to. The fans might have complained and appealed for him to, but he was under no obligation to.

A large segment of the ME fans (not all, or most, or whathaveyou, there's too many opinions and tones represented here to make sweeping statements about everyone) do seem to feel that they have the right to demand that BW change their ending - and are trying to force them to (with threats, and FTC complaints, and using the bogus consumer protection argument), rather than persuade them to.

A lot of Renegade going on when Paragon would be more appropriate.

With the difference that Conan Doyle never lied about the ending.

Don't kid yourself, a LOT of the rage stems from Bioware promising they would not give us exactly what they went ahead and gave us and then acting as if the fans are in the wrong for being upset that Bioware lied about it. It's even more galling that many posters seem content to brush the lies under the carpet.

Casey said explictly this would not be a 'choose A, B, or C style of ending'. In black and white. That's what he went on and produced.

And people are in the wrong for being angry about being lied to?