1311 réponses à ce sujet

[Dreogan]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

aliengmr1 wrote...

Jackal7713 wrote...

RDSFirebane wrote...

Jackal7713 wrote...

The straw man is your can of soup for $2.89 and compairing it to $60 or $80 dollars.

cough 100 dollars some of us had to ship it.

I paid  $100 for mine cause it was shipped. So I feel your pain. And I sure as hell am not going to enterain the comparison to a can of F***ing soup.

LOL

Let me tell you, $100 Campbells is *fantastic.*

If it wasn't, do you think it would sell well? Even if they advertised it as "fantastic?"

[aliengmr1]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

aliengmr1 wrote...

Jackal7713 wrote...

RDSFirebane wrote...

Jackal7713 wrote...

The straw man is your can of soup for $2.89 and compairing it to $60 or $80 dollars.

cough 100 dollars some of us had to ship it.

I paid  $100 for mine cause it was shipped. So I feel your pain. And I sure as hell am not going to enterain the comparison to a can of F***ing soup.

LOL

Let me tell you, $100 Campbells is *fantastic.*

better be:)

[ScotGaymer]

FFS.

Are you people still arguing?

Sake!

[Unit-Alpha]

Luc0s wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Zix13 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.

This.

The day one dlc causes the "it is entirely art" argument.
The breaking of the reader-writer contract/ false advertising dismantles the entitlement argument. 

As far as I know, these are the only two arguments that keep appearing...

Read my OP again. Where did I make an "it's entirey art" argument?

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

Entirely*

Typo.

Typo =/= illiterate


Child.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You can't even hold yourself to your own decisions!

That's so, so very sad.

Also, I pointed that out as a comeback for the illiterate comment.

Modifié par Unit-Alpha, 24 mars 2012 - 02:39 .

[MrFob]

No OP, IMO you got it wrong. If you read the statement in the retake thread, you will se that the tone used is much more civil than you make it out to be.
The point here is not to DEMAND anything but to tell BW that there endings sucked big time for many many people. Because we are dealing with a huge company that will - due to it's size - move slowly and require a lot of motivation to move at all, we need to tell them over and over if we can hope for any chance to see something happening.
We ask them to change it but of course, it is their prerogative to either do it or not to do it, ultimately it is their choice and we have no intention to take that away from them. Organising ourselves to make our opinions on the matter known is not in any way unethical or misguided. It is the only way to achieve something.
Now i am not sure if I should make this part of my point but it is also noteworthy that to my perception, most of us bear no general ill will to BW (apart from the crowd that totally focuses on the "misleading ads" which IMO is a debatable point) but do this out of genuine concern for the ME franchise and because we want to make things better.

Now, I have read several of your posts in the last couple of days OP and I know that you are a well articulated, civil and genuine (I like this word way better than the "passionate" used by BW PR) ME fan and I'd hate to see you go. In the end you got to do whatever you got to do though and it was good you came along this far.

Hold the line!

[Unit-Alpha]

Dreogan wrote...

If it wasn't, do you think it would sell well? Even if they advertised it as "fantastic?"

Might require a different marketing tactic. Possibly involving strippers.

[TK EL_]

Then they shouldn't have botched the endings, simple as that.

[mmdestiny]

Keep in mind, all, that Bioware had no problem responding to fan outcry that Deception be rewritten.  They acknowledged that for the flawed product it was right away and vowed to amend that.

Books are just as much art as video games are.  HOWEVER, the interesting bits come in when you think about the difference in profit share books get as opposed to video games.  

The reasons for demanding an extrapolated ending are no different for the video game as they are for the book.  They're just more defensive because greater profits are being called into question.  Do not mistake that as the cause being wrong for one medium but not for the other.

[Jackal7713]

Dreogan wrote...

Jackal7713 wrote...

RDSFirebane wrote...

Jackal7713 wrote...

The straw man is your can of soup for $2.89 and compairing it to $60 or $80 dollars.

cough 100 dollars some of us had to ship it.

I paid  $100 for mine cause it was shipped. So I feel your pain. And I sure as hell am not going to enterain the comparison to a can of F***ing soup.

Of course, because reductio ad absurdum is just too angsty artistic logic to make much sense.

Yes compairing ME 3's cost to a can of sup is indeed absurd.

[Aiyie]

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.

soooo...

if i buy a painting by Rembrandt or Picasso its no longer art because i paid for it?

as for the second bit... i can't speak for everyone, but never once did i think to myself that i was lied to.  they sold the illusion of a story that changed according to our actions within in.  it was done well enough in ME1 and ME2 that i could suspend my disbelief... but in the end, the story still played out in ways that i could not change.  no matter what i did, sovereign would still attack the citadel, the collectors would still attack colonies and start making a human-reaper. 

it was always their story, they just crafted it so well that we were able to trick ourselves into thinking it was our story.  knowing that, i can't honestly say that i was lied to about what i was getting.

[MapleJar]

My current stance on this situation is this: ME3 doesn't have an ending...yet. It has this sort cliffhanger where you are knocked out, laying in a pile of rubble, and having the most nonsensical vision / dream / hallucination of all time. They can't change the ending because there is currently no ending to change to begin with.

[Unit-Alpha]

Aiyie 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.

soooo...

if i buy a painting by Rembrandt or Picasso its no longer art because i paid for it?

as for the second bit... i can't speak for everyone, but never once did i think to myself that i was lied to.  they sold the illusion of a story that changed according to our actions within in.  it was done well enough in ME1 and ME2 that i could suspend my disbelief... but in the end, the story still played out in ways that i could not change.  no matter what i did, sovereign would still attack the citadel, the collectors would still attack colonies and start making a human-reaper. 

it was always their story, they just crafted it so well that we were able to trick ourselves into thinking it was our story.  knowing that, i can't honestly say that i was lied to about what i was getting.

Actually, Hudson has been stated on the record as saying this story is as much our as it is theirs.

[Grasich]

Good lord, I leave for another thread for ONE MINUTE and this one explodes again.

[poundoffleshaa]

So Lucos from what I gather you agree the endings are rather sub par but think that trying to influence Bioware to change them is wrong because it would ruin the ending's artistic merit? Am I getting your opinion correctly?

Modifié par poundoffleshaa, 24 mars 2012 - 02:42 .

[aliengmr1]

mmdestiny wrote...

Keep in mind, all, that Bioware had no problem responding to fan outcry that Deception be rewritten.  They acknowledged that for the flawed product it was right away and vowed to amend that.

Books are just as much art as video games are.  HOWEVER, the interesting bits come in when you think about the difference in profit share books get as opposed to video games.  

The reasons for demanding an extrapolated ending are no different for the video game as they are for the book.  They're just more defensive because greater profits are being called into question.  Do not mistake that as the cause being wrong for one medium but not for the other.

this

Although how the author messed that up is mind-boggling

[Grasich]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Dreogan wrote...

If it wasn't, do you think it would sell well? Even if they advertised it as "fantastic?"

Might require a different marketing tactic. Possibly involving strippers.

I would approve of this.

[RedShft]

I don't want the ending changed. I would like for the ending to be clarified so that it makes sense.

[Jackal7713]

aliengmr1 wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

aliengmr1 wrote...

Jackal7713 wrote...

RDSFirebane wrote...

Jackal7713 wrote...

The straw man is your can of soup for $2.89 and compairing it to $60 or $80 dollars.

cough 100 dollars some of us had to ship it.

I paid  $100 for mine cause it was shipped. So I feel your pain. And I sure as hell am not going to enterain the comparison to a can of F***ing soup.

LOL

Let me tell you, $100 Campbells is *fantastic.*

better be:)

An "expletive deleted" better come with it.

Modifié par Jackal7713, 24 mars 2012 - 02:42 .

[DukeOfNukes]

BioWare sold out their artistic integrity when they changed the fundamental nature of the game in order to sell more copies with ME2.

That's why ME1 is my favorite in the series. When you play that game, you see their dreams and hopes and ambition, despite the flaws. ME2 seemed more "self congratulatory"...where they accomplished a basic set, and had no real ambition beyond what you could see on the screen. They upped the ante with impressive shooter mechanics, which were even more refined in ME3, but at the cost of the soul of the series.

[PSUHammer]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Art is for the people. Paying for it makes it a commodity.

LOL...ok.  That defies pretty much everything about art, including the buying and selling of paintings, music and film, but keep telling yourself that.

[wantedman dan]

I see I haven't missed anything.

It's like a soap opera.

[Unit-Alpha]

Grasich wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Dreogan wrote...

If it wasn't, do you think it would sell well? Even if they advertised it as "fantastic?"

Might require a different marketing tactic. Possibly involving strippers.

I would approve of this.

They could sell me soup *all day* if that was the case.

[MetalCargo999]

mmdestiny wrote...

Keep in mind, all, that Bioware had no problem responding to fan outcry that Deception be rewritten.  They acknowledged that for the flawed product it was right away and vowed to amend that.

Books are just as much art as video games are.  HOWEVER, the interesting bits come in when you think about the difference in profit share books get as opposed to video games.  

The reasons for demanding an extrapolated ending are no different for the video game as they are for the book.  They're just more defensive because greater profits are being called into question.  Do not mistake that as the cause being wrong for one medium but not for the other.

Exactly.  Errors need to be fixed.  That is integrity, artistic or otherwise.

[Unit-Alpha]

wantedman dan wrote...

I see I haven't missed anything.

It's like a soap opera.

Much more entertaining.

[Nyaore]

Whenever I hear people crying 'artistic integrity' I'm always reminded of this one chef in a Food Network cake competition who nearly set her kitchen on fire because she thought it would be 'artistic' to pour alcohol on her commissioned cake and throw a match on it. Of course also worth mentioning is the fact that the cake she made went completely against what the client wanted, and she ended up dead last as a result.

But I digress. There's artistic integrity, which is all well and good when you're making art (or art made of cake as the case may be) for yourself, and then there's common and good business.sense. The latter two of which are decidedly more important when you're trying to sell a product to people, regardless of your artistic sensibilities. Try doing artistic commissions with the idea that it's your art and you can do whatever you want with it regardless of what your clients ask for, and you'll learn very fast that that's not a wise way to earn a living as you watch all your future commission opportunities dry up as word of your stubbornness gets out. Artists have to walk a fine line with all of the work they intend to sell, between what they want to do with their art and what their clients expect from them. If the clients aren't please with the final product, you can bet they have a right to demand it be changed - or refuse to pay outright for a piece of work that doesn't fit what they were promised. Is it fair to the artist's 'integrity' for this to happen? Not really, but as I said integrity takes a back seat when you're plying your art to put food on the table. And while I'm an artist myself, you can bet I'd demand a refund or changes if a fellow artist made me a commission that went completely against what I asked from them. 

Modifié par Nyaore, 24 mars 2012 - 02:45 .