807 réponses à ce sujet

[cstewert]

If the Retake movement is anything its a favor to EA/Bioware, thier customers dont want to abandon the company because they have produced inferior product. If this were a simple issue of art as commissioned work the artist who produced unsatisfactory work would have to do something to get another commission. In this case sight on seen we customers commissioned EA/Bioware to provide us with something that might be called art. Some customers are disappointed with the finished product but rather then relegating the "art" they paid for to the trash they are giving the "artist" the opportunity to "improve" it.

[naes1984]

What does the phrase "conventional storytelling" mean? It's not a novel or movie. Videogames are interactive by their very nature.

Modifié par naes1984, 22 mars 2012 - 07:30 .

[Vromrig]

edit: the last 5min of the game do not make this game "something completely different." Your choices did impact the races and universe in meaningful ways in relation to mordin, the krogan, etc.

Flawed analysis. Ending removes impact. Makes everything up to this point futile.

Victory for Reapers while simultaneously defeat of Reapers.

Worst of both worlds, best of none.

[Silveralen]

GammaRayJim wrote...

Silveralen wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

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.

I think I'll just quote this from now on. 

You gonna talk about the part where they promised us one poster, gave us another (and we had no way of knowing ahead of time the poster wouldn't be what they promised) and then told us the new poster was their artistic vision, if we didn't like it to bad.

Did you guys really forget about the rampant blatant lies?

I think they delivered on an epic game...mostly everyone agrees that 90-95% of this game was outstanding. Did the ending leave something to be desired it can be argued yes...just look at the page after page on this topic. So I am not going to agrue its merits as this was not the gist of this thread. Did they lie, I don't know, does a movie promoter lie when the put together a trailer for a movie showing how epic it is and then it bombs. Food for thought not any movie that I know of has been recalled after release and reshot because it failed to deliver. And lets remember most if not all movies are preshown to test audiences and crap still makes it to the big screen. 

http://social.biowar...ndex/10056886/1

I especially like the A, B, C quote from Casey. They lied, by any and every definition of the word lie.

Movies have been reshot during and altered due to focus grops, novels, including Tolkeins orginal follow up to the Hobbit, have been altered during editing etc.

If the best argument you have is "but none of those change after release!" then you are wrong. Redited versions of movies come out on DVD, and novels can and have been changed in later printing, Steven King notably altered the first book in his gunslinger series in a later printing to make it more consistent with the following novels. We do not see more of this, because it is often impractical. With games, that isn't an obstacle anymore, you can change them easily after they are released.

Oh and DLC is an inherent violation of artistic integrity. It is like going back and adding more chapters in the middle off a book.

[Thalorin1919]

Turtlicious wrote...

If I hire you to paint the los angeles skyline, and you paint me a picture of your ballsack. am I supposed to not ask you to change it?

You hired Bioware to make ME3?

[michael99887766]

GammaRayJim wrote...

michael99887766 wrote...

BIO18 wrote...

michael99887766 wrote...

BIO18 wrote...
So you eat in a restaurent, you don't like a meal. Just out of personal taste, you are intitled to ask them to give you a free dessert ? And change some of the meal?
I still think it lacks respect.

If they specifically asked for your input in making the meal, yes.

If they said when you arrived, "we will make this meal with the utmost respect for what you want. Would you like your steak rare or well done?", and you said "well done" and it came out bleeding, yes.

If they said "we will serve you steak and chips" and they actually served you a sandwich, yes.

If they promised "we won't give you any ketchup" and then festooned your chips with it, yes.

If it was rubbish in some other way, yes.

Ugh what ever, did you enjoy mass effect 3?
Yes you did.
Did you see your choices in mass effect 3?
Yes you did.
Did mass effect 3 deliver the intence and epicness they promiss?
Yes they did.
Did you end the reaper invasion like stated 5 years ago?
Yes you did.

I still think that just because we all did not like the 5 last min, we should not forget the great job they did for the game in general.
Did I like the ending?
No I did not.
Do I want them to change?
Yes I do.
Do I still respect their vision and their view of THEIR game even if they don't change the ending?
Yes I will.

We should all at least admit that its really selfish what we are doing. Wether you like it or not.

I am talking about the ending. To go over these points one by one:

1) Not really, because of the end. In a three-part RPG where story is given great importance, the conclusion is kinda important. Bioware promised that this would deliver for fans, and that it would be impacted by game choices, and it wasn't.

2) Not in the ending I didn't see my choices.

3) No it didn't deliver the epicness because of the ending.

4) Kinda irrelevant. Another way Bioware could have ended the Reapers could be by having a big red button saying "destroy Reapers" randomly pop out of the Normandy halfway through ME3. But that would be awful. I'm not saying that they broke every promise or something, just that they broke several rather substantial ones, rather directly.

I agree with you that we should not forget the great job they did with the rest of ME3 - and I think most people (including me) have been keen to point that out in all our feedback. However, understandably in such an involving, lengthy and story-driven game, the ending was rather important. I'm sure some of the review bombing is excessive, but I think a lot of people quite legitimately feel the game deserves a 30% rating because the ending was such an ill-conceived damp squib which ruined the whole experience. Bioware could not have picked a worse place to drop the ball.

I don't think this is a case of dreaming, arty Bioware storywriters fulfilling their artistic vision, I really don't. I think it was a case of time pressure and poor judgement of what constituted a good conclusion. Can art be in any sense "objectively bad"? It's hard to say. Can 80% of people think that a piece of art is bad, and if they do does this say more about the art than the viewers? Yes, I think it does. And as I and others have said before, art can certainly fail to deliver on what was promised/commissioned: if Bioware couldn't deliver on its promises (i.e. have a fulfilling and diverse set of endings driven by players' choices throughout the story arc) it shouldn't have promised in the first place.

I don't think what Retake is doing is selfish at all. It's just consumers exercising their right to be dissatisfied: Bioware will also do what it wants, and live with the consequences.

Can someone please tell me what choices are not appearing at the end of the game?

I cured the genophage Taurians and Krogan were there, the Salarians were not because of this. I saved the kids, scientist and the list goes on from Cerebus and they were all there. I am somewhat confused as to what choices we make during the game are not appearing in the ending. I didn't get the Shepard on the planet taking a breathe ending because appearently I didn't do something right in the previous games and I wasn't able to secure enough resources. Oh yeah it was a Tali situation and I could not get the Quarians to back down from the war with the Geth so they were destroyed but the Geth joined me, and they were there at the end.

It seemed every decision I made in game played itself out to where it was supposed to....the first 95% of this game was just about getting everyone to Earth that you could and I believe we all did that. Are you all believing that your choices don't matter because all of the color choices make gathering the army irrelevant? Well we all should have known that the success of this was always going to fall on Shepard, the Reapers were always a superior force. 

We got a few cameos in the closing scenes, but nothing meaningful. Bioware could have made the final scenes and battles around earth twenty times better if they'd done up another couple of minutes of cutscenes properly showing the assets you've recruited taking part in the battles, and if they'd involved these assets more in the final battles (a Geth/Krogan squad helps you out; Asari commandos help you battle to the beam; better war assets ease the path to your destination and cause more of Hammer Team to be saved). This would all have been relatively easy to implement, and it feels like a bit of a cop-out that the only evidence we see of war assets is one or two tiny scenes like that where Wrex is rallying his troops.

However, I think I and most people could live without the above. It would make the game a lot better, but it's not a deal-breaker.

The actual conclusion is the main problem for most. The ending is divorced from the rest of the game in so many ways. I could list all the reasons here but it has been done much better by plenty of other posters and magazine articles - you don't have to look very far. As an example, it really sucks that after you unite the Geth and the Quarians, hook up Joker and EDI, etc., you get told by some AI god that synthetics will always kill organics. Way to tell players that their actions don't matter. Another commonly brought-up point is the relays. "Well done, you beat the Reapers by uniting the galaxy. But hey, don't celebrate too soon, because most space travel is now out and all your buddies will starve to death whilst orbiting earth". I suppose if you try you might be able to think up convoluted reasons why this might not happen, but I don't find any posited so far very convincing. When at the end of a story the world of that story is effectively destroyed, it makes prior choices seem kinda pointless.

The ending - most of all from the start of the God-child scene - is the antithesis to so much of what Mass Effect stood for: making choices; bucking the trend and telling arrogant enemies where to stick it; seeing the impact of what you've done so far. To sum up in the same way most people have, it sucks to go through three great games where your choices have an impact and for the end to be:

"Yo, I'm the AI who created the Reapers for a totally illogical reason, but don't let that tempt you to counteract me. I know you think your choices matter, but they don't: pick option A, B or C to see the same cutscene but with different colours. Do bear in mind that all three choices are diametrically opposed to what you've stood for throughout the trilogy. And remember that whichever you pick, much of the galaxy (and especially all your buddies whom you united to bring to earth) is doomed. Also, turns out your crew doesn't like you and they ran away."

Modifié par michael99887766, 22 mars 2012 - 07:44 .

[DadeLeviathan]

Videogames are an interactive experience. The Story is part of that experience. Are you saying that gamers wanting the look of Geralt changed for The Witcher 2 was fine, but gamers wanting the ending changed for ME2 is not? You can't just point to one part of the experience, defend it with "artistic integrity" and then allow changes to others. Either players can demand changes to the entire experience, or none of it.

[Dhraconus]

GammaRayJim wrote...

Fair enough but you go to movies and buy books with out knowing the ending.....

Movies and books are also shown to outsiders in their entirety prior to release and edited/changed based on feedback.  Especially the endings of movies.  Hollywood has too big of an obsession with "happy endings" but that's another matter entirely.

Bioware should have asked multiple people from the outside who don't have a personal investment in the game to look at it and give feedback/criticism prior to release.  They didn't and they got this.

Without asking for external feedback on your art you are basically a 5 year old believing you're a wonderful artist because mommy and daddy said so.  You need to get real honest feedback to improve.  You need to compare yourself to your peers, or those you aspire to have as peers.  Comparing the ending of ME3 to the endings of movies and books (at least the really good ones) it just doesn't measure up.  Everything before the space brat measures up but then the ball is dropped.

I will go see movies or buy books without knowing the ending because for the most part I know if it made it to publication/production there is a certain amount of external quality control that was in place.  There were certain standards that were adhered to.  There are critics who will give fair and balanced opinions of the product I can turn to before putting out money.  There aren't going to be blatant lies in the advertising (yes there are subjective statements like "best thing ever" but not blantant lies about facts, go find the list that's around for examples).

[milkymcmilkerson]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

The first two are examples of art that is consumed by someone else. Visual and audio arts sold to masses fall under this. They are a product, but it doesn't render them less of an art. Video games also fall under this.

Some artists will continue to refine the product: the performing arts are examples of this. The performing arts aren't a situation where it's a "this is the way I'm doing it take it or leave it." The performer, if they have any artistic integrity continues to strive for improvement. They also know that the better their product the more likely it is for them to make a living doing what they love to do.

But once an artform becomes a publicly held corporation it ceases to be art. The art becomes the bottom line focusing on short term profits of the next quarter. It becomes a consumable product, sorry. You may have paid artists working for the corporation, but they are subject to their corporate masters.

You don't consider idependent cinema, literary novels, or  recorded music art? All of those are distributed en masse if a producer or publisher decides to take a chance on them, yet I would most certainly call all of those things art? All of those things have some sort of investor hoping to gain a return, yet the creator's intent was to get the funding to make whatever it is they wanted to make. It gets muddled in these situations, especially since the end result does become a product or service that is consumed, however that doesn't diminish what it is, good art or bad art.

EDIT: I might have misread your post. Were you saying that once the product--i.e. movie, music, book, game--is owned by a corporate entity that it's no longer considered art? If so, I understand your reasoning, yet I still ahve to disagree. In music and movies especially, it's not uncommon for the publisher to retain rights to the created work (or at least in that form, such as a Warner Bros owning the movie rights to the Watchmen, while DC owns the comic book).

Modifié par milkymcmilkerson, 22 mars 2012 - 08:11 .

[milkymcmilkerson]

Dhraconus wrote...

GammaRayJim wrote...

Fair enough but you go to movies and buy books with out knowing the ending.....

Movies and books are also shown to outsiders in their entirety prior to release and edited/changed based on feedback. 

I don't know about films, but books aren't, unless you're referring to an editor, which is just part of the writing and publication process. However, the reviewer copies of books are final, and the author doesn't see the reviews until they're published and the book is already out.

[GammaRayJim]

Silveralen wrote...

GammaRayJim wrote...

Silveralen wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

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.

I think I'll just quote this from now on. 

You gonna talk about the part where they promised us one poster, gave us another (and we had no way of knowing ahead of time the poster wouldn't be what they promised) and then told us the new poster was their artistic vision, if we didn't like it to bad.

Did you guys really forget about the rampant blatant lies?

I think they delivered on an epic game...mostly everyone agrees that 90-95% of this game was outstanding. Did the ending leave something to be desired it can be argued yes...just look at the page after page on this topic. So I am not going to agrue its merits as this was not the gist of this thread. Did they lie, I don't know, does a movie promoter lie when the put together a trailer for a movie showing how epic it is and then it bombs. Food for thought not any movie that I know of has been recalled after release and reshot because it failed to deliver. And lets remember most if not all movies are preshown to test audiences and crap still makes it to the big screen. 

http://social.biowar...ndex/10056886/1

I especially like the A, B, C quote from Casey. They lied, by any and every definition of the word lie.

Movies have been reshot during and altered due to focus grops, novels, including Tolkeins orginal follow up to the Hobbit, have been altered during editing etc.

If the best argument you have is "but none of those change after release!" then you are wrong. Redited versions of movies come out on DVD, and novels can and have been changed in later printing, Steven King notably altered the first book in his gunslinger series in a later printing to make it more consistent with the following novels. We do not see more of this, because it is often impractical. With games, that isn't an obstacle anymore, you can change them easily after they are released.

Oh and DLC is an inherent violation of artistic integrity. It is like going back and adding more chapters in the middle off a book.

You should read all my post because never in here do I state that BioWare should not change or alter the ending. All I ever stated is that if this is their vision which I bought into then so be it. I did not commission them to make this and neither did any of you. Again did they lie not any more or less then anyone else selling something. Unfortunately because of the colored ending choices it looks like they delivered A, B, C endings and I am sure he will be regretting that quote for quite some time.

As far as movies and books being altered after release sure they do but most of it is done to get you to buy the DVD. From what you say on King and his gunslinger series it sounds as if he was not planning on it continuing as it did and need to fix the continuity but whatever the reason it was his book and his decision. I never said it was never done hell even Lucas did it with Star Wars because at the time the technology was not there to do what he wanted, but it was his decision not the publics.

And finally DLC only exists because we buy it. Publishers looked for a way to get games out quicker so they decided to go with DLC and extension packs to flesh out the story or give it new life while working on new games. If we didn't buy it though they would be forced to put all planned content in the game or not make any. Does it change the artistic integrity of the story not really, so many things could happen in between missions that it is feasible to believe and accept that we did not see all of Shepards adventures. 

[iExothermic]

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. 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. 

Im sorry but we DO have a right to MANY changes in ALL game as we paid for the game without all the buyers paying money and supporting the game the bloody thing wouldn't exsist in the first place, they dont want to listen to us then we will just not buy future products simple as that.<_<

[sonicphoto]

Umm this is actually a lie. Books go through a process of revision and are constantly changed, same way happens with movie scripts. Star Wars very first script changed a lot, heck even Luke wasn't going to be the hero, it was going to be starkiller. We have free speech, they are the ones that decide if they want to listen or not. Mass Effect is still a work of art, art isn't just a script of an ending. The visuals, the character ideas,concepts, the music everything in it is art. But here is a mayor thing, Mass Effect is a game of choice, where you choose what happens in the game, if the game wasn't a choice game then sure they don't have to change it but a game that has constantly promised that it would make all those choices count, it fails to actually show it. I am very sure if you tell them to explain the ending, they have no idea how to explain it because they have no idea what the heck did they just wrote in there. We can comment all we want, and they have all their right to ignore us or listen to us. So don't accuse people just for simply stating their opinion, we don't have to agree with everyone, we don't have to agree with the press, we are free to enjoy whatever we want to enjoy, same way you are.

[milkymcmilkerson]

sonicphoto wrote...

Umm this is actually a lie. Books go through a process of revision and are constantly changed, same way happens with movie scripts. Star Wars very first script changed a lot, heck even Luke wasn't going to be the hero, it was going to be starkiller. We have free speech, they are the ones that decide if they want to listen or not. Mass Effect is still a work of art, art isn't just a script of an ending. The visuals, the character ideas,concepts, the music everything in it is art. But here is a mayor thing, Mass Effect is a game of choice, where you choose what happens in the game, if the game wasn't a choice game then sure they don't have to change it but a game that has constantly promised that it would make all those choices count, it fails to actually show it. I am very sure if you tell them to explain the ending, they have no idea how to explain it because they have no idea what the heck did they just wrote in there. We can comment all we want, and they have all their right to ignore us or listen to us. So don't accuse people just for simply stating their opinion, we don't have to agree with everyone, we don't have to agree with the press, we are free to enjoy whatever we want to enjoy, same way you are.

Revision is part of the process, but in none of those examples is the work given to the consumer first for critique, but rather to professional peers, editors, publishers and agents.

While I agree that the ending should change in this game, it's not a common occurrence for something like this to change after its been released and due to fan feedback if the creators thought that what they made was fine. 

[joshiasi]

Does this mean that DLCs ruined conventional storytelling / artistic integrity since DLCs do impact the story telling and changes the game?

Modifié par joshiasi, 22 mars 2012 - 08:20 .

[Myrmedus]

An integral part of creating art is taking on board constructive criticism and improving your works by implimenting changes described in said criticism. Any artist would know this.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 22 mars 2012 - 08:22 .

[wook77]

Then Michaelangelo - not an artist according to you? He didn't complete his artistic vision so they had to bring in outside artists to complete the artwork that the audience (members of the clergy) wanted to see with the Sistine Chapel.

The second any video game company plans on DLC, the story changes with additions. These add to that artistic vision.

And, finally, a hint to you for future debate styles. It's probably best that you don't insult your audience's intelligence and maturity with your first sentence and then post a diatribe on their supposed idiocy that is chock-full of errors, mistakes, lack of clarity and a rambling logic circle. It's really hard to get taken seriously that way.

[wook77]

milkymcmilkerson wrote...

sonicphoto wrote...

Umm this is actually a lie. Books go through a process of revision and are constantly changed, same way happens with movie scripts. Star Wars very first script changed a lot, heck even Luke wasn't going to be the hero, it was going to be starkiller. We have free speech, they are the ones that decide if they want to listen or not. Mass Effect is still a work of art, art isn't just a script of an ending. The visuals, the character ideas,concepts, the music everything in it is art. But here is a mayor thing, Mass Effect is a game of choice, where you choose what happens in the game, if the game wasn't a choice game then sure they don't have to change it but a game that has constantly promised that it would make all those choices count, it fails to actually show it. I am very sure if you tell them to explain the ending, they have no idea how to explain it because they have no idea what the heck did they just wrote in there. We can comment all we want, and they have all their right to ignore us or listen to us. So don't accuse people just for simply stating their opinion, we don't have to agree with everyone, we don't have to agree with the press, we are free to enjoy whatever we want to enjoy, same way you are.

Revision is part of the process, but in none of those examples is the work given to the consumer first for critique, but rather to professional peers, editors, publishers and agents.

While I agree that the ending should change in this game, it's not a common occurrence for something like this to change after its been released and due to fan feedback if the creators thought that what they made was fine. 

There's always Mass Effect: Deception that got changed due to fan feedback even though the creators thought that what they made was fine.

[milkymcmilkerson]

Myrmedus wrote...

An integral part of creating art is taking on board constructive criticism and improving your works by implimenting changes described in said criticism. Any artist would know this.

It's also the artist's job to sort through said criticism and determine what's valid, what's subjective, and to make the changes that they think are necessary after objectively looking at their work, because by the time it's released they should have the confidence that they were able to make the story/painting/movie that they wanted to make.

Once again, I'm not applying this to the Mass Effect 3 situation since it's so out of whack that it's ridiculous that the ending even made it into the final game, however some of these statement are jsut ridiculous. If movies and publishing worked how you state it here, then there would be thousands of different cuts of films and versions of books. What REALLY happens is when a work--that's already been through the process of revision by the writer, revision by the editor, revision by the publisher--is published and gets awful reviews, the writer (or whatever...I'm using writing for the example)  learns a hard lesson about why everyone thinks their story sucks, hopefully grows as an artist from that, and moves onto the next project, hopefully remembering the hard lessons learned.

[Silveralen]

GammaRayJim wrote...

As far as movies and books being altered after release sure they do but most of it is done to get you to buy the DVD. From what you say on King and his gunslinger series it sounds as if he was not planning on it continuing as it did and need to fix the continuity but whatever the reason it was his book and his decision. I never said it was never done hell even Lucas did it with Star Wars because at the time the technology was not there to do what he wanted, but it was his decision not the publics.

This is Biowares descion as well. They can lose a significant portion of their fanbase, or they can change the game. End of the day, still Bioware's descion.

[milkymcmilkerson]

wook77 wrote...

milkymcmilkerson wrote...

sonicphoto wrote...

Umm this is actually a lie. Books go through a process of revision and are constantly changed, same way happens with movie scripts. Star Wars very first script changed a lot, heck even Luke wasn't going to be the hero, it was going to be starkiller. We have free speech, they are the ones that decide if they want to listen or not. Mass Effect is still a work of art, art isn't just a script of an ending. The visuals, the character ideas,concepts, the music everything in it is art. But here is a mayor thing, Mass Effect is a game of choice, where you choose what happens in the game, if the game wasn't a choice game then sure they don't have to change it but a game that has constantly promised that it would make all those choices count, it fails to actually show it. I am very sure if you tell them to explain the ending, they have no idea how to explain it because they have no idea what the heck did they just wrote in there. We can comment all we want, and they have all their right to ignore us or listen to us. So don't accuse people just for simply stating their opinion, we don't have to agree with everyone, we don't have to agree with the press, we are free to enjoy whatever we want to enjoy, same way you are.

Revision is part of the process, but in none of those examples is the work given to the consumer first for critique, but rather to professional peers, editors, publishers and agents.

While I agree that the ending should change in this game, it's not a common occurrence for something like this to change after its been released and due to fan feedback if the creators thought that what they made was fine. 

There's always Mass Effect: Deception that got changed due to fan feedback even though the creators thought that what they made was fine.

Well, maybe it really is different in gaming, or maybe it's because they can't accept the fact that they made something that sucked, and instead of letting go they keep hacksawing in the hopes that it'll get accepted?

[Adugan]

OP managed to insult EVERYONE who does not agree with him.

+100 achievement points.

[Quietness]

how is this topic even debatable with all the historical fact that was provided last night, thought i would never see this stupid thing again.

[MrNighttime]

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.

Have to respectfully disagree. This is not Art in the traditional
sense we have had something of a say in how the story went (not matter how small).
Maybe that say so was a illusion, but perception is reality.

That said most people have been conditioned not to"
rock the boat", I can't count the number of times I have seen people quietly
slink away or say nothing when they get an incorrect order, or bad service, or
they see a bad movie so as not to "rock the boat".  Are we entitled--hell yes we are entitled to
voice our opinion. If this was a movie or a book I'd agree with you (about
change--but never about the right to voice and opinion that something sucks)  but that illusion that we had a say in the
story I think entitles us to a say.

Also this is no longer about "art" it's about
business, in ages gone there would have been complaining and then we would have
moved on, many never to buy another Bioware product again. In the past a bad movie
or book could have ruined a writer, actor or company. Nowadays these changes
can be done and whether or not the artists want to it's in the hands of the
money men--that may be sad but it's a fact.

And even if you disagree with that, we are entitled to voice
our likes and dislikes and hope for change. With a movie or a book that would be
next to impossible, with a game and DLC---not so much. Lastly, we are entitled
to vote with our feet and our wallets and let EA/Bioware know that while they
don't HAVE to change anything we don't have HAVE to ever give them another dime
of our money. And while , unlike some, I am not there yet that my friend is
something consumers are ALWAYS entitled to.

Modifié par MrNighttime, 22 mars 2012 - 08:40 .