618 réponses à ce sujet

[SandSkorpion]

It is readily apparent that Kain's article was meant to point out the hypocrisy of Moriarty's view on changing the endings/content by citing Infamous 2 and relating it to ME3. The circumstances surrounding Infamous 2 are completely different and it is apparent that Kain did not research the event since he claims the changes were made AFTER the game's release. The two instances cannot be equally compared.

I am not arguing whether claims of artistic integrity is valid or not. I personally feel that a developer with an established fan base *should* appease their fans to a point. But that is not what this thread is about.

I am arguing that the mob mentality latching on to any article that appears to be in their favor even though the facts are misrepresented, is quite ridiculous.

[The Angry One]

Ecto-Plasmic Effect wrote...

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

Don't start this. It's not pandering when you're using logic to determine what is right.

[din626]

TjM78 wrote...

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

I think this proves IGN's Moriarty is... not as intelligent as the one we know and love... Played recently by the amazing Jared Harris of Fringe Fame.

[Vhalkyrie]

IGN cannot credibly dismiss their conflict of interest given Jessica Chobot was given a role in this game.

[The Angry One]

SandSkorpion wrote...

It is readily apparent that Kain's article was meant to point out the hypocrisy of Moriarty's view on changing the endings/content by citing Infamous 2 and relating it to ME3. The circumstances surrounding Infamous 2 are completely different and it is apparent that Kain did not research the event since he claims the changes were made AFTER the game's release. The two instances cannot be equally compared.

I am not arguing whether claims of artistic integrity is valid or not. I personally feel that a developer with an established fan base *should* appease their fans to a point. But that is not what this thread is about.

I am arguing that the mob mentality latching on to any article that appears to be in their favor even though the facts are misrepresented, is quite ridiculous.

Sigh. Once again. The circumstances DO NOT CHANGE THE PRINCIPLE, and the principle is Moriarty believes fan input should not change a developer's "vision". Except when it's convenient for him.

[Rockpopple]

Leem_0001 wrote...

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?

lol. Now I'm a "son" am I? Well that's not passive-aggressive at all, no sir. Pfft.


I hit the issue straight on, but you were either dissatisfied with what I had to say, or it upset you. Either way, I'm not gonna bother going into it again. I've repeated myself about a dozen different times in this thread already. There comes a point when one reaches diminishing returns. I've long since passed that point, but what can I say? I'm a bit of a masochist. 

[Dragoonlordz]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I said it elsewhere on same subject so will repeat here.

Holding the line is redundant because as mentioned elsewhere they have won nothing that they would not of got anyways. They would of got this additional content regardless just from constructive feedback which Bioware always asks for. The boycotts, the threats, the review bombing, the filing complaints with the FTC, emotional and financial blackmail, the aggression and arrogance of many (not all) was pointless. All feedback is asked for and upon which they would of created DLC to address such things as they always do even when remove all the nonsense people did in this case.

It is essentially a gimmick to make them feel better not affect change, change they would of got from feedback alone in first place like all titles Bioware makes do the same. Wait for feedback and apply it to DLC. Also Forbes are jumping on the popular opinion bandwagon to gain popularity. Forbes has gone down the crapper as far as respectable content goes. It means what happened was not needed, especially if it's only purpose or action was make it slightly faster. The content takes the same amount of time to make regardless so the only thing might have achieved is quicker reply/statement.

With regard to Forbes... You only praise it because it agrees with you. It has bias to one side or another which invalidates it as respectable as far as I am concerned. A respectable publication does not take sides. It states facts and not assumptions especially not what they "think" something means when the only person who knows what they mean is the person saying it. Then again it is a blog article which means the writer has no more valid an opinion than you do or me so maybe I should not be so harsh.

ME3 was number 2 in the UK and number 1 in the USA charts for sales last week.

To add to this since thread is moving so fast.

@Jackel and others calling people hypocrites look in a mirror.

There is a hypocritical element to many of your stances in that many of those same people who pushed for changes in this case have severe and I do mean severe issues with meta-gaming and there has been truly large disdain when such topics as adding multiplayer to single player RPG's, anime series and influenced figurines or allowing the fans to choose the appearance of FemShep they hissed and they moaned how just because it's popular to other potential customers en masse (more so than current fanbase in number) like such features or did not match their own preferences... The moment it is something they want they praise and use the same thing they hated in order to get what they want. In fact many of them kept saying how during the FemShep aspect that it should be left to Bioware and not the fans and now they changed their tune because their feelings were hurt. 

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 22 mars 2012 - 04:50 .

[Strike2k2]

The word OWNED comes to mind. This makes me wish Forbes reviewed video games.

[spacefiddle]

Rockpopple wrote...

The Infamous 2 controversy and this controversy are two different things.

Infamous 2 was still in development when fans learned of Cole's new looks and wanted a change.

Comparing that to what happened in ME3 would be as if Infamous 2 shipped with the new-look Cole and then was changed with a patch a month afterwards due to fan outcry. Obviously that wasn't the case.

This should be something "Kain" and this community should realize, but I'm not surprised they don't. Kain is probably lurking around these forums trying to figure out what he can write next to get more hits, and the community that loves Kain for doing it are simply not thinking things through, but are just reacting out of gut instinct.

It's sad and pathetic all around.

Thanks for the insults, but this doesn't hold up under even mild scrutiny.

You're basically saying that our position would be valid if and only if we weren't blindsided by changes we couldn't possibly know about?  Expectations about ME3 were entirely shaped by BW's marketing, their tagline, their statements about the game and series.

To follow your logic, if fans had been told that Cole would NOT be changing, that the look everyone's loved over the previous game was remaining the same because they knew how important it was to fans, and everyone bought the game based on this then discovered they'd completely changed Cole, they would have been... in the wrong to demand an explanation or a fix?

This makes no sense at all.

Modifié par spacefiddle, 22 mars 2012 - 04:51 .

[The Angry One]

Actually come to think of it, Moriarty's name is shared with characters in TWO stories that changed their outcomes due to fans.
Fallout 3 and Sherlock Holmes.

More irony than an iron cupboard full of irons.

[Nephilym83]

Kosiji wrote...

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

Sucks to be the minority, doesn't it?

[Rockpopple]

The Angry One wrote...

SandSkorpion wrote...

It is readily apparent that Kain's article was meant to point out the hypocrisy of Moriarty's view on changing the endings/content by citing Infamous 2 and relating it to ME3. The circumstances surrounding Infamous 2 are completely different and it is apparent that Kain did not research the event since he claims the changes were made AFTER the game's release. The two instances cannot be equally compared.

I am not arguing whether claims of artistic integrity is valid or not. I personally feel that a developer with an established fan base *should* appease their fans to a point. But that is not what this thread is about.

I am arguing that the mob mentality latching on to any article that appears to be in their favor even though the facts are misrepresented, is quite ridiculous.

Sigh. Once again. The circumstances DO NOT CHANGE THE PRINCIPLE, and the principle is Moriarty believes fan input should not change a developer's "vision". Except when it's convenient for him.

How many times, from how many different users, in how many different ways, do you have to figure out you're just plain wrong on this before it finally settles in?

Are we allowed to take bets? Because I'm gonna bet $100 on the short-side of thousand times. But we're probably not gonna reach that point, so you're likely to just remain ignorant on this issue forever.

Which is kind of terrifying, when you really think about it.

[Sharn01]

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.

Yes, he has to make that distinction if he wants credibility, you are defending him because he supports your views on this not because he supports them for the same reasons.  He has never, at any point, at any time, talked about the cost of making the change after the game has been made, he just makes fun of fans and talks about the artistic vision of the creators, its clear this article proves that he has praised developers in the past for giving up their artistic vision in favor of the fans, and now he is saying he is against it.

[The Angry One]

Rockpopple wrote...

How many times, from how many different users, in how many different ways, do you have to figure out you're just plain wrong on this before it finally settles in?

Are we allowed to take bets? Because I'm gonna bet $100 on the short-side of thousand times. But we're probably not gonna reach that point, so you're likely to just remain ignorant on this issue forever.

Which is kind of terrifying, when you really think about it.

All I read was "YOU'RE WRONG!". In fact, that's all you've ever said.
Why are we wrong?

[mghjr6]

Rockpopple wrote...

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.

That depends... does the ending we liked make any sense whatsoever? This ending didn't.

Really, I don't mind reading your arguments and considering everything you say, but the snide attitude in every one of your posts is inflammatory.

[spacefiddle]

Rockpopple wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

SandSkorpion wrote...

It is readily apparent that Kain's article was meant to point out the hypocrisy of Moriarty's view on changing the endings/content by citing Infamous 2 and relating it to ME3. The circumstances surrounding Infamous 2 are completely different and it is apparent that Kain did not research the event since he claims the changes were made AFTER the game's release. The two instances cannot be equally compared.

I am not arguing whether claims of artistic integrity is valid or not. I personally feel that a developer with an established fan base *should* appease their fans to a point. But that is not what this thread is about.

I am arguing that the mob mentality latching on to any article that appears to be in their favor even though the facts are misrepresented, is quite ridiculous.

Sigh. Once again. The circumstances DO NOT CHANGE THE PRINCIPLE, and the principle is Moriarty believes fan input should not change a developer's "vision". Except when it's convenient for him.

How many times, from how many different users, in how many different ways, do you have to figure out you're just plain wrong on this before it finally settles in?

When you prove it with facts and logic, instead of screaming "I'M RIGHT" and hurling insults and vitriol.

[Valk72]

FemmeShep wrote...

Colin's original video rant was silly. He didn't know why fans were upset, and went on a huge soapbox: you guys are just whiners, DEAL WITH IT.

We don't care, DEAL WITH IT.

[Rockpopple]

spacefiddle wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

The Infamous 2 controversy and this controversy are two different things.

Infamous 2 was still in development when fans learned of Cole's new looks and wanted a change.

Comparing that to what happened in ME3 would be as if Infamous 2 shipped with the new-look Cole and then was changed with a patch a month afterwards due to fan outcry. Obviously that wasn't the case.

This should be something "Kain" and this community should realize, but I'm not surprised they don't. Kain is probably lurking around these forums trying to figure out what he can write next to get more hits, and the community that loves Kain for doing it are simply not thinking things through, but are just reacting out of gut instinct.

It's sad and pathetic all around.

Thanks for the insults, but this doesn't hold up under even mild scrutiny.

You're basically saying that our position would be valid if and only if we weren't blindsided by changes we couldn't possibly know about?  Expectations about ME3 were entirely shaped by BW's marketing, their tagline, their statements about the game and series.

To follow your logic, if fans had been told that Cole would NOT be changing, that the look everyone's loved over the previous game was remaining the same because they knew how important it was to fans, and everyone bought the game based on this then discovered they'd completely changed Cole, they would have been... in the wrong to demand an explanation or a fix?

This makes no sense at all.

I'm not saying a goddamned thing about your position. I've never said anything about anyone's position. I've said here and elsewhere that I TOO don't like the endings.

I'm saying anyone saying Colin contradicted himself are mistaken. He didn't. I never said I AGREE with Colin's position, and if you can prove I did I'd love for you to do so. I'm saying, his position hasn't changed. The situation with Infamous 2 and Mass Effect 3 are two different things.

I'm not surprised that this gets by people, with the speed these forums look at, but if people actually read what others wrote, it'd clear up a lot of confusion.

[AwesomeDudex64]

 Awesome!

[Balmung31]

Rockpopple wrote...


How many times, from how many different users, in how many different ways, do you have to figure out you're just plain wrong on this before it finally settles in?

Yes, Rockpopple, how long will it take for you to realize that?  Got any estimates?

Modifié par Balmung31, 22 mars 2012 - 04:54 .

[Jackal7713]

Jenaimarre wrote...

Guys, even if we disagree let's not allow things to get personal. Please.

Agreed. Although, its not a personal attack if you are proven to be a hypocrite. Moriarty has been proven to be one.

Now if he or his supporters thinks its insulting, well maybe they should watch what they say then? Maybe, he shouldn't post editorial videos insulting people, calling them "entitled, childish, whiners, etc."?

[pavi132]

The Angry One wrote...

Sigh. Once again. The circumstances DO NOT CHANGE THE PRINCIPLE, and the principle is Moriarty believes fan input should not change a developer's "vision". Except when it's convenient for him.

Why are people not getting this? Can you explain that to me?

[wasawsolos]

oh cmon! NO ONE liked my Holmes reference?

[ahandsomeshark]

Kosiji wrote...

:-/ Were there this many Forbes fans before this incident?

I was a Forbes fan but not for anything relating to gaming. I read forbes because I study industries specifically and I'm estatic that they're extending their coverage to one of the biggest, and most backward, industries in the country.

[Rockpopple]

The Angry One wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

How many times, from how many different users, in how many different ways, do you have to figure out you're just plain wrong on this before it finally settles in?

Are we allowed to take bets? Because I'm gonna bet $100 on the short-side of thousand times. But we're probably not gonna reach that point, so you're likely to just remain ignorant on this issue forever.

Which is kind of terrifying, when you really think about it.

All I read was "YOU'RE WRONG!". In fact, that's all you've ever said.
Why are we wrong?

If that's all you've read from everything I've written, then - ironically enough - you're doing it wrong.