1311 réponses à ce sujet

[xxskyshadowxx]

Heck Dungeons and Dragons is doing it...sorta. 4th edition bombed inways they never imagined (I hated it and haven't bought anything from them for years and years)...so the next edition will have -heavy- fan input. They've already started asking creative questions and will have players (not developers) adding a ton of creative input to hopefully create something absolutely amazing for people to play.

Why are folks so terrified of this concept? If something like this could be implemented more often and in a cost-effective and practical way, the results could be amazing. And whoever figures out how to pull it off first will be laughing all the way to the bank.

Bioware has the opportunity to be one of the first.

[Unit-Alpha]

Luc0s wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I find it interesting that the pack of hyenas in the group turn and cannibalize and ferociously attack their own ex-member the moment they no longer agree with them. Seems to appear now and again their true colours shine through.

YOU'RE BACK! YAY!

He wasn't one of us. That's pretty obvious.

No true scotsman fallacy.

I truly was "one of you", but not anymore. Just look at my sig to see the proof that I indeed was part of the Retake movement. I even donated $10 to Child's Play to support the Retake movement (and to support Child's Play ofcourse).

You switched teams and are now outright attacking Retake people? Over one article? Yeah, you weren't fully on our side to begin with.

God, you would do so well in communist China or the Soviet Union.

[deathscythe517]

Nice to see more of the fickle Retakers jumping ship, you're happier, and we're better off without you.

[Dejan Kober]

To OP:
1. if we don't "complain" abut ending, who will Bioware realize that ending was bad, and needs to be changed? If they didn't realize in beta testing phase, then they surly won't realize it when game is out, if we who play it, don't complain.

2. First, they used argument that entire game is work of art, and that we don't have a right to demand any change to it... Now, out of blue, there are different parts of game that are considered "art" and can't be changed, and other parts that are not??? By that definition, cut scenes have to remain same, but we can demand that husks are replaced by pink bunnies, because they are part of interactive gameplay???

3. Harry Potter, LOTR and other comparisons:
Harry Potter is a nice thing to compare with ME; why? Because it was as ME, first just one book (in ME case game), and entire story was growing as fans ware reading books... Ending was unknown when first book was out...
But imagine what will happened in fan base of Harry Potter, if last book ended up as ME ended?? With tones of plot holes that in many cases contradict rest of books. And do you think fans of Harry Potter will like if Harry died? I personally think that cities will burn if HP fans start to riot

4. Lets say that some designers design car that has square wheels... And they call it their peace of art... And, then they produce that car with square wheels, but in same time then promise best ride ever and actually never show you how complete car will look like, until you buy it. So you don't know that it has square wheels till you buy it and try to drive...
And then you realize that those square wheels suck, and are nowhere close to "best ride" ever like they promised.
So, what will you do?? Complain and demand regular, round wheels? Or will you listens some so called journalists who run car review site, and say that "It's artistic freedom to put square wheels on car, so you can't demand regular ones".
Game, same as car, is product! Yes, there are parts of car and parts of game that are made by artist.. But those artists SELL THEY artistic "freedom" to company they are working for! And company is producing products, made of art, not art it self (and art by definition is not mass produced; that's why original Mona Lisa cost tens of millions, but you can get print out for dollar)

[ZodiEmish]

Luc0s wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Luc0s wrote...
Huge difference.

No, it isn't.

Yes it it. The fact that you do not understand the difference only shows your ignorance.

Or the fact that you do not understand the difference yourself only shows your ignorance...

See. See what I did there. It is a two way street when you push your opinion around like it is a fact.

Modifié par ZodiEmish, 24 mars 2012 - 01:07 .

[yoshibb]

ket_shee wrote...

I think we should all just calm down...and take a look at this.

No, that simply reminds me that Garrus is starving on some planet for the sake of "artistic integrity" and I want to fight harder D:<

[Zix13]

Luc0s wrote...

Yes it it. The fact that you do not understand the difference only shows your ignorance.

Luc0s wrote...

Gosh, I didn't know BSN was so dumb and illiterate. 

Luc0s wrote...

GUYS PLEASE STOP FIGHTING!

My thread will get locked because you guys cannot behave like mature adults. Take your petty insults and childish behavior somewhere else please! THANK YOU!

Lol... too funny

[withneelandi]

ashdrake1 wrote...

withneelandi wrote...

I don't necessesarily think they should change the ending to mass effect 3. I don't think it was a good ending, but I am uncomfortable with the idea of a writer being presured by the fanbase to change something they have written after the fact.

There are a few reasons I don't think this argument holds up with mass effect 3...

The idea of "authorship" is far more complicated in a game like mass effect than in novel or film in the sense that it asks the player to take part and make choices on how the narrative will progress, the problem with mass effect 3's ending is not that it is bleak, or even that it is open ended, but that it seems to render all the choices the game asked the player to make meaningless. For me looking at the game as a narrative, it sets up a sort of 2 way narative with the player then chooses to ignore that convention at the narratives conclusion.

The idea of amending a text after the fact is not a new one, the idea of the directors cut is long established in "proper" art like movies. Especially where technology or time constraints have curtailed what the director could do. I strongly suspect the ending we got in mass effect 3 was less the creative teams vision and more a compromise of time or tecnology. It would be very hard for the team to state that in public but I that is the impression I get from playing the game. The last section felt rushed and disjointed from the rest of the story.

Finally, I think video games can be "art". I'm not sure mass effect 3 is. One of the things that makes art, art is that the primary motivation is "art for arts sake", i.e not to make profit. I find it hard to let a writer fall back on "artistic integrity" when a game ends with a prompt to buy future DLC.

All that said I am still torn on the idea of an amended ending. I think the end was terrible, but I think it would set a horrible example and would frankly lead to a campaign like this any time a game ends in a well thought out, but perhaps leftfield or unexpected way.

Basically, the end is terrible and I don't think we should defend it on the basis of artistic integrity but while chaning this ending seems reasonable it would set a terrible precident and lead to an internet campain to change the end of EVERY major video game franchise that dared take an unexpected approach. It would have a chilling effect on creativity in viedo game in the long term.

A developer will be wary of sparking such a campaign, and getting bad publicity or paying out the costs of developing new content and so won't take any risks when making games. That is far worse for gamers than this ending being rubbish.

So by that logic you are saying many great film makers do not want to make a profit on their films.  That is ludicrous.  Artist want to keep being able to make art.  They very much would like to turn a profit to enable this. 

Also harry potter is dumb.  Could have used the time spinner to save just about everyone.  I don't demand that be changed.  I hate all of the star wars prequels.  I hate the additions to star wars (btw is exactly what people are asking for.)  I was originally sold a product where Han shot first.  I was lied to by the original film.  I have yet to hear of one FTC complaint for Lucas to fix his endings.  I don't want to shoot the elusive man and hear him scream Nooooo!

I didn't say something that looks to turn a profit isn't art, I was talking about the primary motivation. The point I'm making is that I find it difficult to buy the wounded artist argument from a game with such a strong commercial element. By that I mean the existence of enhanced collectors editions, day one DLC, dlc prompts at the end of a game.

Put simply when the narrative ends with a message about future DLC it becomes hard to argue that this is art for arts sake and defend the artistic integrity of the work.

I honestly think Me3 was concieved as product first art second, not the other way round.

[ashdrake1]

Alexraptor1 wrote...

The bigger picture has to be viewed here.
This is about so much more than artistic integrity or the vision of the artist.
This is about the entire franchise that is Mass Effect, the games, all the comics and novels of the canon continuity, things which in turn have been created by other artists and has enabled them to express themselves.

That said, is it really right for one writers vision or artistic integrity to throw all that away?
Writers now who had absolutely NOTHING to do with the creation of the universe of Mass Effect?

In no way does it destroy the franchise of mass effect.  The whole thing is make belive.  They can make belive all sorts of things into existence.  They obviously want to start with a clean slate and establish a new time line.  Nothing in make belive land is impossible.

[beccathelion]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

'k, bye!

this.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Myrmedus wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Reptilian Rob wrote...

Well, the problem is that once it leaves the dev's hands and they sell it as a product with ****ING DAY ONE DLC it is no longer art and can thus be changed by consumer demand.

That, and we were blatantly lied to, breaking the reader-writer contract.

WRONG!

The cutscenes, narrative and story within games are very much art and always will be art.

Are movies art? If you answer is "yes" than you should also understand why the non-interactive parts of video-games are art.

An integral part of art is the modification and improvement of it based upon constructive feedback and criticism: it is how art evolves and how an artist improves.

The sheer fact it is art validates the process and role of change.

Exactly. Imagine trying to tell your instructor that excuse in an academic setting. They try to tell you what's wrong with your work and how you can fix it, but no! "It's art!" Art is solely the expression of the artist! That's fine, but don't be surprised when your instructor gives you a failing grade for not taking constructive criticism. Likewise here. Bioware can keep the ending, but they will also reap the consequences which come with it.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 24 mars 2012 - 01:07 .

[Hexley UK]

Opsrbest wrote...

Marque De Leon wrote...

Opsrbest wrote...


-------------------------------------------------------
Actually claiming to do the following:

- Not purchase another Bioware product.
- Cancel a SWTOR subscrip.
- Return your ME3 copy.
- Violate forum TOS and be a prat on the forums by attacking Bioware, Bioware employees, etc.

Those above have all been stated factual evidentary statements made by the people who, if they don't get what they want, will respond in that manner. That is in fact forcing. It is in fact called coercion.

Are you insane? Aside from the last one all of the things you listed are RIGHTS THAT CONSUMERS HAVE! That's not forcing! That's not coercion! That's exercising your rights as a consumer!

Learn your legal implication.

In the laws governing wills, coercion is present when a testator is
forced by another to make provisions in his or her will that he or she
otherwise would not make if permitted to act according to free choice.
It is an element of both duress and Undue Influence,
two ways in which a testator is deprived of his or her free choice in
making the will. If coercion is established in a proceeding to admit a
will to probate, the document will be denied probate, thereby becoming
void; and the property of the decedent will be distributed pursuant to
the laws of Descent and Distribution.

LOL dude thats a statement about WILLS, nobody died here.....

[xxskyshadowxx]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I find it interesting that the pack of hyenas in the group turn and cannibalize and ferociously attack their own ex-member the moment they no longer agree with them. Seems to appear now and again their true colours shine through.

YOU'RE BACK! YAY!

He wasn't one of us. That's pretty obvious.

No true scotsman fallacy.

I truly was "one of you", but not anymore. Just look at my sig to see the proof that I indeed was part of the Retake movement. I even donated $10 to Child's Play to support the Retake movement (and to support Child's Play ofcourse).

You switched teams and are now outright attacking Retake people? Over one article? Yeah, you weren't fully on our side to begin with.

God, you would do so well in communist China or the Soviet Union.

And he still has a Retake banner....he's like a self-hating...um....something.

[Madecologist]

I'd like to say, I think almost everyone here is at least wrong about one thing or another. But that is my personal opinion so you can disagree with me. I see -both- sides as being wrong on so many issues. BW as being wrong that this is in any way 'good writing' or 'good anything'. I disagree with about anything that remotely involves the word art.

I do believe videogames are a product (regardless of artistic status it may or may not have), that art is not immune to being seen as bad nor is it immune to accountability when it fails. I do believe Bioware will need to face all consequences for their recent actions, despite the severity they may entail.

Modifié par Madecologist, 24 mars 2012 - 01:11 .

[katamuro]

I think people stopped really reading by now. I mean here we are some of us trying to explain calmly about how its not just art its also a product sold to people for enjoyment. And all the while other people just continue to troll, attack and just generally argue without resorting to logic. If you say "its not about logic" then what is it about? Analyse the problem.

[FemmeShep]

http://geek.pikimal....t-name-release/

Then I read something like this , and think: wait, so it's more than likely that the entire writing team didn't have input on the end?

Modifié par FemmeShep, 24 mars 2012 - 01:10 .

[ZodiEmish]

Luc0s wrote...

ZodiEmish wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Luc0s wrote...
Huge difference.

No, it isn't.

Yes it it. The fact that you do not understand the difference only shows your ignorance.

Or the fact that you do not understand the difference yourself only shows your ignorance...

See. See what I did there. It is a two way street when you push your opinion around like fact.

So you do admit that there is a difference between cutscenes and story in video-games and video-games as whole?


And I'm not pushing my opinions as fact. I'm pushing facts as facts. It's a FACT that cutscenes and story =/= video-games.

No I didn't admit anything. And once again no. your not pushing facts. your pushing your opinion, and the opinion of a article you found on the internet as a fact. It is not a fact.  It is an opinion, and calling people ignorant over your opinion just makes yourself look bad.

It is one thing if someone does use some facts to disprove your opinion, but to use an opinion to disprove an opinion doesn't work.

Modifié par ZodiEmish, 24 mars 2012 - 01:10 .

[Unit-Alpha]

Luc0s wrote...

ZodiEmish wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Luc0s wrote...
Huge difference.

No, it isn't.

Yes it it. The fact that you do not understand the difference only shows your ignorance.

Or the fact that you do not understand the difference yourself only shows your ignorance...

See. See what I did there. It is a two way street when you push your opinion around like fact.

So you do admit that there is a difference between cutscenes and story in video-games and video-games as whole?


And I'm not pushing my opinions as fact. I'm pushing facts as facts. It's a FACT that cutscenes and story =/= video-games.

Please allow me to choke to death laughing. Do you remember the original draw of ME, the one that the marketing campaign was based around?

Our choices made during the *game* had effects during the *game.*

In the game's story.

And cutscenes.

So story isn't part of a movie either? Really?

Modifié par Unit-Alpha, 24 mars 2012 - 01:11 .

[Marque De Leon]

Opsrbest wrote...

Learn your legal implication.

In the laws governing wills, coercion is present when a testator is
forced by another to make provisions in his or her will that he or she
otherwise would not make if permitted to act according to free choice.
It is an element of both duress and Undue Influence,
two ways in which a testator is deprived of his or her free choice in
making the will. If coercion is established in a proceeding to admit a
will to probate, the document will be denied probate, thereby becoming
void; and the property of the decedent will be distributed pursuant to
the laws of Descent and Distribution.

Oh god, you ARE insane. That passage deals with wills and written binding contracts. CONSUMER RIGHTS MF'ER!  DO YOU SPEAK IT?

[evolsokar]

If an artist paints something that doesn't sell, they draw something new that people want to buy... I made a post explaining this earlier, look for it and read it, but basically capitalism dictates they listen to us, because without our money they are not a company.

[Hydralysk]

I'd be fine with this argument if A) they didn't charge me for the game or didn't make all those promises about the ending. When you ask me to pay for something based on the promises you gave that the game would meet certain criteria, you can't just turn around and go back on your word because it's not what you feel like doing.

[Atmospeer]

Luc0s wrote...

ZodiEmish wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Luc0s wrote...
Huge difference.

No, it isn't.

Yes it it. The fact that you do not understand the difference only shows your ignorance.

Or the fact that you do not understand the difference yourself only shows your ignorance...

See. See what I did there. It is a two way street when you push your opinion around like fact.

So you do admit that there is a difference between cutscenes and story in video-games and video-games as whole?


And I'm not pushing my opinions as fact. I'm pushing facts as facts. It's a FACT that cutscenes and story =/= video-games.

What a ridiculous assertion, that's about the equivalent of saying words and story =/= book, how does that further your point in any way?

Modifié par Atmospeer, 24 mars 2012 - 01:11 .