807 réponses à ce sujet

[NekOoNinja]

So, if someone buys the mona lisa, shoots a paintball at it and calls it modern art you cannot argue about the results? Because it's art?

[wright1978]

aliengmr1 wrote...

Vromrig wrote...

Disingenuous and overly dramatic. No basis for accusation. Art, also, not in vaccuum, not immune from criticism. Never been case. Never will be case.

Movies, considered modern form of art. Necessitates pre-screenings. Test audiences. Endings often changed.

Ultimately, demanding people be grateful Bioware makes money off them. Illogical conclusion. Bioware cannot request feedback, then attempt to deflect, defend with emotions, "artistic integrity".

Made mistake. If wishing to retain customers, must amend mistake.

Thank you Mordin:D

Very well put.

[jkflipflopDAO]

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 then you're saying books aren't art either, as many, many, many of them have been changed after the first edition went out. Also, movies are clearly NOT art, because I do not remember those two crazy CGI aliens singing in Jabba's palace.

[Samtheman63]

Well said op

[jkflipflopDAO]

Neanderthal.

[Chris-1983]

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.

Totally agree. Further you have to see, that Bioware promised us the total opposite of what we got in the end (see here their broken promises http://social.biowar...ndex/10056886/1). How can you defend their artistic freedom when they told us before, that our decisions matter and we don`t get the general A,B,C ending? As a company you have to stay to your promises and don`t deceive your customers.

[RLesueur]

When was Mass Effect about conventional story telling?

[lm_Commander_Shepard]

OP is a definition of ACTUAL whining. THE GAME WAS UNFINISHED. It had no ending. It was not an 'artistic' end, it was a lazy conclusion that contradicted the narrative. Consumers paid for a product that was falsely advertised. They rightfully petitioned. Now it's being rectified. Get over it.

[Puzzlewell]

Slidell505 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

Phategod1 wrote...Your the ones I am disappointed in

Phategod1 wrote...Your

Oh irony, you strike again.

Beat me to it as this is the first thing that popped into my head on starting the OP.  

As for my opinion on the matter, others have said basically exactly how I feel. So many different kinds of media have been altered through-out the years because of public demand, this isn't new. Another case that may not have been noted before: The story of Berenice from Edgar Allan Poe was forever altered since it was first published because readers felt one particular passage was too gruesome. This passage has never been reprinted since then.

[Rascouri]

Shakespear rewrote his plays after they where recieved badly. I do not think that this detracts anything from them. The same can be said for the film industry. This is not an unusual occurance, if anything it should be expected in an industry that moves as quickly as the games industry.

[Vromrig]

Rascouri wrote...

Shakespear rewrote his plays after they where recieved badly. I do not think that this detracts anything from them. The same can be said for the film industry. This is not an unusual occurance, if anything it should be expected in an industry that moves as quickly as the games industry.

Obscure reference, but meritous.

Original D2: Mighty Ducks, in theaters, features Gordan Bombey in AHL.  Gets slashed in ankle with hockey stick.  Damage crippling.  Ruins career.

Producers realize too violent.  On VHS release, changed to simple check, causes pain in knee.

[Skyblade012]

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.

Bullfeathers.

This is not unprecedented.  Look at Fallout 3, and its ending redux DLC.  And Bethesda then went on to make Skyrim, which people have made them change left and right...  Oh, wait, no.

And for that matter, it happens outside of gaming.

Look at Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and his resurrection of Sherlock Holmes, a character he hated, despite his "artistic vision" clearly wanting the character to die in a fire.

Hell, two of my favorite book series had major retcons introduced in them: Lord of the Rings and the Chronicles of the Lensmen.

[robarcool]

If that half baked ending is artistic, art is ruined in this world.

[Hussain747715]

Well, if someone promised you a film about kitties and you got one about dogs does artistic integrity still holds?

We've been promised a diverse ending that take into consideration our choices throughout the three games which isn't what we got.

[robarcool]

Hussain747715 wrote...

Well, if someone promised you a film about kitties and you got one about dogs does artistic integrity still holds?

We've been promised a diverse ending that take into consideration our choices throughout the three games which isn't what we got.

Don't bother. People will believe what they want to. We believe the ending was crappy and should be made at least clear if not changed, but others believe that it would affect 'artistic integrity'. I have tried to argue, but it is something that can't end.

[Strange Aeons]

“They’ve thought about [the ending] for years and years. It’s not something they’ve had to solve in a week or a month even, but over the course of five or ten years.” –Ray Muzyka, Bioware co-founder

“It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C.” –Casey Hudson, Director

“And, to be honest, you [the fans] are crafting your Mass Effect story as much as we are anyway.” — Mike Gamble, Associate Producer

So when did “artistic integrity” become the go-to excuse to cover for flat-out shoddy workmanship?

You want to talk about “art?” It’s no secret that the original concept for the ending, which incorporated an extensive amount of foreshadowing that is visible in the first two games, was scrapped during production and hastily replaced at the eleventh hour with the current version. Neither was their “artistic” vision of the game so pure as to preclude excising a large swath of important content to sell it separately as Day-1 DLC. The last vista we gaze upon in the ME universe is a datapad begging us to BUY MOAR DLC PLX. Or, you can go to Youtube and enjoy the video of EA’s CEO John Riccitiello musing wistfully over his schemes to monetize every square inch of their products, which seems to be where most of the creative energies of big game corporations are focused these days.

Are people seriously suggesting that all that’s going on here is some ivory-tower fantasyland of art for art’s sake? ME3 is a product produced by a large, publicly-held corporation to make a profit. It is not Blue Dog, as a recent article hilariously tried to suggest.

Ironically, game corporations have no hesitation about stoking the flames of community involvement when it works to their advantage, whipping up fans to generate word-of-mouth and increase pre-release sales. Now they’re finding out that when they spectacularly fail to deliver on their promises the passion they inflamed is a sword that cuts both ways. You live and die by the expectations you create.

So, please spare us the histrionics about “spoiled” gamers trying to “dictate” to developers what they can create. You’d think this is the Church threatening to burn Galileo at the stake, when it’s nothing more than a case of concerned customers trying to make a company who clearly lost its way understand what is broken about its product. In an age of DLC and routine content patches, why is it so crazy to think that if Bioware agrees and owns up to the game’s flaws, they could act to expand the ending to provide more options that improve player interactivity and are more in tune with the tone and spirit of the series? Why would anyone who cares about the quality of games object to having more choices and a deeper, richer experience?

Then again, when so many people are lining up to write Bioware’s PR talking points for them, it’s no wonder they figured they could get away with this.

[RedShft]

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.

Sorry bud. Bioware is not a non-profit company. They are a for-profit company motivated by money. Many of their decisions relating to their product are made to maximize profit not artistic value. They maximize profit by listening to customers WHO BUY THEIR PRODUCTS. 

If a gameplay mechanic is poor, customers provide feedback. If a character is flat and not interesting, customers provide feedback. If the game is broken and doesn't run on their console/pc customers provide feedback. If the story in the game is poor, and is nonsensical, customers will provide feedback.

It's Bioware's responsibility to respond and act accordingly to this feedback by tweaking the offending part of the game.

Bioware is in a relationship with their customers, that you seem to ignore. Unfortunately for them, the customer is always right.

Modifié par RedShft, 22 mars 2012 - 05:58 .

[NReed106]

hahahahahahahah
2 words: Commissioned Art
You can buy a painting or tell the artist you won't because it is bad. The artist can redo it or not but a new painting is still art.

Your argument is "video games are no longer art" fine believe that. Indeed they aren't, otherwise CoD is an artform and judging by its popularity it is a perfected artform due to its massive sales

Modifié par NReed106, 22 mars 2012 - 06:00 .

[BIO18]

I wanted a other ending, but not like other people, I have the balls to admit that its selfish and a complete lack of any respect.
But hey, selfish is normal ya ?

[Vromrig]

BIO18 wrote...

I wanted a other ending, but not like other people, I have the balls to admit that its selfish and a complete lack of any respect.
But hey, selfish is normal ya ?

Small case of martyr syndrome.  Not actually indicative of argument.  Hopes to gain attention, while simultaneously demeaning opposition.

Unsuccessful in advancing argument in any case.

[pjotroos]

Phategod, there are so many examples to the contrary in the history that it's pointless to even try and list them all, but let me just say one thing: Mass Effect was never conventional storytelling. It was always a game of what-ifs, constantly changing based on player choices.

[BIO18]

Vromrig wrote...

BIO18 wrote...

I wanted a other ending, but not like other people, I have the balls to admit that its selfish and a complete lack of any respect.
But hey, selfish is normal ya ?

Small case of martyr syndrome.  Not actually indicative of argument.  Hopes to gain attention, while simultaneously demeaning opposition.

Unsuccessful in advancing argument in any case.

Trying to be funny? wow I guess people are children on this forum, but what I mean is:
Even if I DO want an other ending, I DO realise its selfish.
Why should we force Bioware to change anything?
You must realise we are taking a huge dump on their vision and their work.

[michael99887766]

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.

Hasn't this already been addressed a thousand times?

This is art like no other type: it's interactive. My favourite anaolgy is the one kicking around the forums which likens this to an artist who invites people to join him in making a huge, collaborative work of art, made up of many different colours and materials in beautiful patterns, and then at the end says "now, what colour shall I paint it?" The concept of artistic integrity is very different in a highly interactive roleplaying game to what it is in a book or film.

Besides, we were repeatedly promised a good ending with plenty of choice, affected significantly by previous actions, and we didn't get one. Casey specifically said "it won't be an a/b/c ending" and it was. I don't get why people think Bioware had this great artistic vision for the end of the trilogy: clearly they didn't and this was a rush job (all the cutscenes are the same).

No-one here is overstepping their bounds. As a video game producer, Bioware is fully entitled to do whatever it likes, and so are we - including protest or take our business elsewhere.

[Klijpope]

Rascouri wrote...

Shakespear rewrote his plays after they where recieved badly. I do not think that this detracts anything from them. The same can be said for the film industry. This is not an unusual occurance, if anything it should be expected in an industry that moves as quickly as the games industry.

This is a good point.

Art is not immutable; art can be critiqued. Both of those are true statements.

Who owns the artwork? First answer: them who pay for it, in this case, EA. Second answer: the artist owns the idea behind the art (ie: copyright). The consumers of the artwork have no ownership of it - they can like or dislike it as they will. However, a wise artist will take account of the feelings of their audience.

This is becoming a very interesting, and important debate (not this thread, the whole controversy, across the interwebs). This will redefine the 'compact' between artist and audience, and not only within the context of videogames. And it is not that clear cut - there are excellent points on all 'sides' (there are more than 2...)

For one thing it shows how much a very, very many people actually deeply care about Commander Shepard and her/his story. That in itself is an impressive achievement. Bravo BioWare, credit where it is due.

I think the arguments about Dickens and Shakespeare are a stronger example than Broken Steel, however. I cannot remember that much of a fuss about the way the story ended, as a narrative; it was more about the fact that it meant you could not continue to play, and that is what Broke Steel really fixes. For myself, I did not care about the ending or the retcon, because there was no character to get invested in. Bethesda make living, breathing (or choking) worlds; BioWare make living, breathing characters. So Broken Steel was about continuing to appreciate the artwork that Bethesda had made, which was the Capital Wasteland.

But maybe I'm more phelgmatic than others, as I was always likely to get my preferred outcome (if/when ending DLC is made), as it sits slap bang in the middle of the compromise position (retain artistic choice, expand on outcomes and differentiate them more).

Modifié par Klijpope, 22 mars 2012 - 06:10 .

[Lankist]

Good riddance to that, then.

I did not pay $60 just for the pleasure of watching someone else do whatever the hell they want. If you want to take the "you don't have a say" route, perhaps you should tell me before you take my money.

Modifié par Lankist, 22 mars 2012 - 06:10 .