618 réponses à ce sujet

[DarkSpider88]

I really hope Collin read that one.

[WilliamDracul88]

What Bioware is losing, Forbes is gaining. And it's fine for me, seeing all this.

Modifié par eghbdgdsgh, 22 mars 2012 - 04:43 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

Rockpopple wrote...

SandSkorpion wrote...

Kain states "Here’s Colin Moriarty two years ago, discussing changes made by studio Sucker Punch to their game Infamous 2, after the release was met with fan backlash:"

That is 100% false. The fans spoke out when details of the character change (look/voice) were revealed during devleopment. Suckerpunch weighed their options and made adjustments prior to the game's release. What is happening here is completely different.

Keep drinking the Kool-Aid.

Absolutely no difference. At all. If fans hadn't have spoken up, Sucker Punch would've gone with their original "artistic choice" of a different Cole. They essentially lost their "artistic integrity" by "caving" to the fans' demands. 

Time was the only difference here. The premise is EXACTLY, i repeat, EXACTLY the same.

[Kosiji]

[quote]RedNanaki wrote...

[quote]Rockpopple wrote...

[quote]The Angry One wrote...

[quote]Rockpopple wrote...

Dude, the irony is that the situation WASN'T the same and therefore the principle IS different. 

But don't expect logic to slow down a rage-filled and vengeful audience like you, and the others on this forums. He has other like-minded forum-members, as well as an ego the size of NY, to please after all.

[/quote]

The principle is exactly the same, fans wanting developers to change something they don't like. The end.
You refuse to see this, and resort to insults and raging to hide the fact that you have no point.

You are a disgrace to the Sisko.

[/quote]

You're wrong. Already explained. Not going to go into it again.

You're a disgrace to Commander Shepard. In fact, it's hard to find something you're NOT a disgrace to. 

[/quote]

Let's all lay off the personal attacks before somebody gets banned. Please.
[/quot
I was just about to say this! Almost every page is full of back & forth's between members.

[Nephilym83]

Rockpopple wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

marshkoala wrote...


@Rockpopple 
I don't know I a thing about Infamous 2 and so I can't comment.


What I can say is that I watched the IGN video and it was a raving rant against fans requesting change. It was really offensive to me, being 51 and playing the game, if you're going to disagree you can do so in a civil manner.


That said the Forbes article points out the inconsistencies with Colin's past comments.

Forbes' article doesn't go deep enough. All it does is show a surface so-called contradiction in Colin's past statement without going into how the two circumstances are COMPLETELY different.


But I bolded the real reason behind the love for Forbes and the hate for Moriarty. This is undeniable. It's not about trying to point out "inconsistencies" and "hypocrisy". It's about revenge. Pure and simple.

You have yet to establish that they are completely different.  The distinction you are making is irellevant because we are not arguing from a financial or economical standpoint about their ability to produce more content, nor was IGN.  It's moot.
We are arguing from a moral and philosophical standpoint about "artistic integrity" and "creators rights" and what say if any the fans have in the artist's creation.  You can't say its a dangerous precenent for fans to get a creator to change his work when you were championing another developer for listening to what their fans wanted and letting go of their own vision just a few months back.  You can change your mind but you can't have it both ways.

If I really have to explain to you how changing something during the development something and going back to change something after the development process is over and done with are two different things, then that's really the least of what I'd have to explain to you, isn't it?

If Colin Moriarty didn't make that clear in his little rant, that's fine, maybe he should have, but the difference is still there. The change in circumstance does colour people's perceptions, because that's what people do.

I wonder: to Kain and you and everyone else that wants BioWare to change the ending... what would you be thinking if a lot of people wanted a change an ending YOU actually LIKED?

Would you STILL be claiming that artistic integrity DOESN'T matter, and that fans should have a say in what the ending of a narrative is AFTER the narrative is completed? Or would you change your stance, and suddenly DEFEND artistic integrity, saying that the narrative should remain as shipped?

I'd really, really like to know that. Honestly, I probably only have to wait a few more months to get my answer.

Personally, I'd never hide behind anything so weak as artistic integrity.  Bioware lost theirs when they changed their narrative style in the last few minutes of the game, left the series full of plot holes, and broke a long list of promises.  Integrity is sticking to what you stand for and what is expected of you.  Bioware obviously didn't do that.  And if Beethoven can alter his operas and symphonies at the behest of fans and peers and still be the greatest musical artist to ever walk the planet, I don't see why the hell Bioware can't do the same.

[MPSai]

Well someone has egg on his face now.

[Chuloos]

All I can say is.. Chick-a-boom, chick-a-boom.. don't you just love it..

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

God, I can't believe how amazing Forbes is.

[thesnake777]

I'm subscribing to Forbes over this fiasco.

[The Angry One]

Rockpopple wrote...

You're wrong. Already explained. Not going to go into it again.

You didn't explain, you claimed it wasn't then threw out insults.
Do you think anyone's taking you seriously at this point?

You're a disgrace to Commander Shepard. In fact, it's hard to find something you're NOT a disgrace to. 

Troll meltdown detected.

[FlyingCow371]

Rockpopple wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

marshkoala wrote...


@Rockpopple 
I don't know I a thing about Infamous 2 and so I can't comment.


What I can say is that I watched the IGN video and it was a raving rant against fans requesting change. It was really offensive to me, being 51 and playing the game, if you're going to disagree you can do so in a civil manner.


That said the Forbes article points out the inconsistencies with Colin's past comments.

Forbes' article doesn't go deep enough. All it does is show a surface so-called contradiction in Colin's past statement without going into how the two circumstances are COMPLETELY different.


But I bolded the real reason behind the love for Forbes and the hate for Moriarty. This is undeniable. It's not about trying to point out "inconsistencies" and "hypocrisy". It's about revenge. Pure and simple.

You have yet to establish that they are completely different.  The distinction you are making is irellevant because we are not arguing from a financial or economical standpoint about their ability to produce more content, nor was IGN.  It's moot.
We are arguing from a moral and philosophical standpoint about "artistic integrity" and "creators rights" and what say if any the fans have in the artist's creation.  You can't say its a dangerous precenent for fans to get a creator to change his work when you were championing another developer for listening to what their fans wanted and letting go of their own vision just a few months back.  You can change your mind but you can't have it both ways.

If I really have to explain to you how changing something during the development something and going back to change something after the development process is over and done with are two different things, then that's really the least of what I'd have to explain to you, isn't it?

If Colin Moriarty didn't make that clear in his little rant, that's fine, maybe he should have, but the difference is still there. The change in circumstance does colour people's perceptions, because that's what people do.

I wonder: to Kain and you and everyone else that wants BioWare to change the ending... what would you be thinking if a lot of people wanted a change an ending YOU actually LIKED?

Would you STILL be claiming that artistic integrity DOESN'T matter, and that fans should have a say in what the ending of a narrative is AFTER the narrative is completed? Or would you change your stance, and suddenly DEFEND artistic integrity, saying that the narrative should remain as shipped?

I'd really, really like to know that. Honestly, I probably only have to wait a few more months to get my answer.

The thing is, your point was true once upon a time. But now, with the prevalance of DLC, just because a game has shipped doesn't mean development is complete. 
Many games now come out with a game of the year, or "complete", or "extended" edition after release which includes all DLC. Especially in the case of mass effect, where they were planning from the beginning to offer post-release DLC for probably a year or so. So, clearly the narrative is not complete. And if the only issue you (and others here) have is that something shouldn't be changed once it's complete...that's okay. Mass Effect 3 is not complete yet. They are still in development, which by your points suggests we are allowed to make requests and give input to the developers so they can make the best, most successful game they can make for their fans.

[KingNothing125]

Oh hypocrisy, thy foul stench is unmistakable.

[Leem_0001]

Rockpopple wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

marshkoala wrote...


@Rockpopple 
I don't know I a thing about Infamous 2 and so I can't comment.


What I can say is that I watched the IGN video and it was a raving rant against fans requesting change. It was really offensive to me, being 51 and playing the game, if you're going to disagree you can do so in a civil manner.


That said the Forbes article points out the inconsistencies with Colin's past comments.

Forbes' article doesn't go deep enough. All it does is show a surface so-called contradiction in Colin's past statement without going into how the two circumstances are COMPLETELY different.


But I bolded the real reason behind the love for Forbes and the hate for Moriarty. This is undeniable. It's not about trying to point out "inconsistencies" and "hypocrisy". It's about revenge. Pure and simple.

You have yet to establish that they are completely different.  The distinction you are making is irellevant because we are not arguing from a financial or economical standpoint about their ability to produce more content, nor was IGN.  It's moot.
We are arguing from a moral and philosophical standpoint about "artistic integrity" and "creators rights" and what say if any the fans have in the artist's creation.  You can't say its a dangerous precenent for fans to get a creator to change his work when you were championing another developer for listening to what their fans wanted and letting go of their own vision just a few months back.  You can change your mind but you can't have it both ways.

If I really have to explain to you how changing something during the development something and going back to change something after the development process is over and done with are two different things, then that's really the least of what I'd have to explain to you, isn't it?

If Colin Moriarty didn't make that clear in his little rant, that's fine, maybe he should have, but the difference is still there. The change in circumstance does colour people's perceptions, because that's what people do.

I wonder: to Kain and you and everyone else that wants BioWare to change the ending... what would you be thinking if a lot of people wanted a change an ending YOU actually LIKED?

Would you STILL be claiming that artistic integrity DOESN'T matter, and that fans should have a say in what the ending of a narrative is AFTER the narrative is completed? Or would you change your stance, and suddenly DEFEND artistic integrity, saying that the narrative should remain as shipped?

I'd really, really like to know that. Honestly, I probably only have to wait a few more months to get my answer.

Sorry, but you continually avoid the issue. When it comes to artistic integrity, it makes no difference when a change is made due to fan input. It happens at a different time, and the technicalities are different, but the whole 'artistic integrity' thing is still the same. And you have not (or can't) give any reasonable explination to the contrary. Instead you seem content to hurl abuse and stamp your feet insisting you are right.

Unfortunately son, you are not.

And you menioned in an earlier thread if I would be happy if people wanted to change an ending I liked. If it was done via DLC that I could choose to ignore, I would be perfectly happy with it being released. More people happy, better company image for Bioware - what is there to complain about?

[TjM78]

I came in here expecting something to do with everyones favorite vampire leader and Sherlock Holmes mortal enemy

[Baronesa]

To those claiming that Forbes jumped into this without knowing a thing...

You are absolutely correct... they jumped into this situation claiming that the whole controversy was because ME3 offered homosexual relationships... The difference is, people pointed out to the real reasons and AFTER they investigated they took a position that somewhat aligns to that of those protesting.

Should I really link to the first article by Forbes claiming this was all due to homosexuality? Want to see how the tone change as they get to know more and more of the situation?

[braisbr1]

hahaha, there goes the credibility of moriarty down the hill... if he ever had any!

[The Angry One]

Kosiji wrote...

RedNanaki wrote...

Let's all lay off the personal attacks before somebody gets banned. Please.

I was just about to say this! Almost every page is full of back & forth's between members.

"That was a joke".
He evidentally took it seriously, what can you do..

[Well]

Atraiyu Wrynn wrote...

Easy win for Bioware if new DLC includes fighting a villian based on Moriarty.

lol Yup.That would be cool.

[Cucobr]

IGN takes another punch on the face.

FORBES AWESOME

[Streambeck]

Rockpopple wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

marshkoala wrote...


@Rockpopple 
I don't know I a thing about Infamous 2 and so I can't comment.


What I can say is that I watched the IGN video and it was a raving rant against fans requesting change. It was really offensive to me, being 51 and playing the game, if you're going to disagree you can do so in a civil manner.


That said the Forbes article points out the inconsistencies with Colin's past comments.

Forbes' article doesn't go deep enough. All it does is show a surface so-called contradiction in Colin's past statement without going into how the two circumstances are COMPLETELY different.


But I bolded the real reason behind the love for Forbes and the hate for Moriarty. This is undeniable. It's not about trying to point out "inconsistencies" and "hypocrisy". It's about revenge. Pure and simple.

You have yet to establish that they are completely different.  The distinction you are making is irellevant because we are not arguing from a financial or economical standpoint about their ability to produce more content, nor was IGN.  It's moot.
We are arguing from a moral and philosophical standpoint about "artistic integrity" and "creators rights" and what say if any the fans have in the artist's creation.  You can't say its a dangerous precenent for fans to get a creator to change his work when you were championing another developer for listening to what their fans wanted and letting go of their own vision just a few months back.  You can change your mind but you can't have it both ways.

If I really have to explain to you how changing something during the development something and going back to change something after the development process is over and done with are two different things, then that's really the least of what I'd have to explain to you, isn't it?

If Colin Moriarty didn't make that clear in his little rant, that's fine, maybe he should have, but the difference is still there. The change in circumstance does colour people's perceptions, because that's what people do.

I wonder: to Kain and you and everyone else that wants BioWare to change the ending... what would you be thinking if a lot of people wanted a change an ending YOU actually LIKED?

Would you STILL be claiming that artistic integrity DOESN'T matter, and that fans should have a say in what the ending of a narrative is AFTER the narrative is completed? Or would you change your stance, and suddenly DEFEND artistic integrity, saying that the narrative should remain as shipped?

I'd really, really like to know that. Honestly, I probably only have to wait a few more months to get my answer.

When has a good ending ever come under such scrutiny? When has any video game ending ever come under such scrutiny? Other than, perhaps, Halo 2, which is entirely different based on the circumstance of it clearly existing in service to a successor.

You're trying to point out hypocrisy, on the end of the people that want the ending changed, based on a precedent that has never existed before.

For the record, I would personally openly defend a game's ending that I enjoyed if it received this level of backlash. If Red Dead Redemption had instigated some form of "Retake" movement, I'd be shouting from rooftops, claiming people didn't get it, tonally or thematically.

I also would, in no way, begrudge Rockstar for wanting to cater to their fans. I enjoyed the original ending, I wouldn't have to partake in a theoretical new ending. Particularly if I was in what could only be perceived as a minority with my stance.

And honestly, your argument shifts radically from "artistic integrity" to "development difficulty" purely in service to your argument. Obviously it's easier to change something mid-development, no one would argue that. It's completely irrelevent in the "artistic integrity" debate.

[marshkoala]

@SandSkorpion Sorry it too awhile to catch up this thread is flying.....
So you are saying that the Forbes article is inaccurate because the author stated Colin protested "after release' when he "protested before release". Okay I get that, but where does that disregard the fact that fans can/should affect the game. I am serious not trying to belittle really!

@Rockpopple Revenge? That's a pretty strong accusation. That's accusing me of having listened/read Colin's articles for a long period of time and desiring harm upon him.
I just got a link this week about him, watched it, didn't like it and let it go.
Did I like the Forbes article....Yes.
Why.....because it pointed out a character flaw that I saw in his viewpoints for me.
Do I think it will harm him....No.

[The Angry One]

TjM78 wrote...

I came in here expecting something to do with everyones favorite vampire leader and Sherlock Holmes mortal enemy

I thought he was the guy from Fallout 3.
Ironic he shares a name with a character in a game that changed it's endings due to fan outcry eh?

[Ecto-Plasmic Effect]

You can't scold Moriarty for pandering to one side while Kain is doing the same.

[Brother Kosh]

Just remember, you can’t spell ignorant without IGN

[Kosiji]

This thread has been overrun by the staff at Forbes or by people who are just along for the ride. Either way...... :-/