1311 réponses à ce sujet

[Shermos]

Cyph3rX wrote...

Shermos wrote...

Luc0s wrote...
They are within their right to do whatever they want with the narrative in their games and we players have no say over that.

This is exactly what I've been arguing from the start. Good on you for changing your mind though .

Actually we do, my wallets closed to them atm, and they're a for profit company. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Not buying a game or anything for that matter because you don't like it is entirely different to dammanding it be changed. The former is an entirely acceptable choice squarely in the hands of the average Joe, the latter is not.

[Unit-Alpha]

Dethead123 wrote...

Grasich wrote...

*cough*

True art:

www.youtube.com/watch

www.youtube.com/watch

www.youtube.com/watch

You and Unit are my favorite people in this thread so far.

I <3 you, too.

Also, I move to have this legally considered art.

Modifié par Unit-Alpha, 24 mars 2012 - 03:08 .

[MetalCargo999]

This does not mean I like the ending, but I love the stories bioware tells. After this, why would they risk trying to do something diffrent? - ashdrake1

I don't think the problem here is the risk they took. Again, there are actually errors in the ending that need to be fixed. Personally, I would have preffered that they would have worked on the dark energy ending, but I know that's not gonna happen. That being said, whatever the ending actually is needs to at least be logically coherant.

[Jackal7713]

Nyaore wrote...

Dreogan wrote...

Jackal7713 wrote...

Art is never finished, only abandoned.
~Leonardo da Vinci

Da Vinci also changed his art several times. This includes the Mona Lisa and The Adoration of the Magi.

So people are saying they can't change the ending because of "Artist integrity"? Interesting

Artistic integrity is a crutch for the artist without integrity.

Hilarious true, seeing as most of the artists I see using the term to describe why they refuse to improve or why they delivered a commission that didn't fit what they were asked for are usually the ones who can't take a constructive critique to save their lives. They also tend to be the ones with the largest number of white knights ready to stroke their egos.
Of course there is something to be said about staying true to yourself with your art, and I've seen some artists stay true to themselves without making complete asses out of themselves, but that tends to take a backseat when you're selling a product.

See that is the problem. If you can't take constructive critique, then you have truely failed as an artist. I love hear feed back about my paintings or photographs. How else will I get better at my art if I only listened to those that like it?

Modifié par Jackal7713, 24 mars 2012 - 03:06 .

[Almostfaceman]

Aiyie wrote...

aliengmr1 wrote...

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.

No, but if you have ownership you can change whatever you want it.

i won't argue that... but in a way you kinda just made my point for me.

Mass Effect and everything related to it is not our property.  We own the disc or whatever that we experience it through, but it's still Bioware's intellectual property.

So yea, in the end... they are the only ones who can change whatever they want.  We can ask and give them our reasons for asking... but the decision isn't ours... and acting like it is is where the "entitlement" insults come from.

Yeah, you can honestly say you were lied to, because what they said doesn't match up to what they delivered. Just a fact. Now, you can ignore it, but you can't pretend they didn't say one thing and then did another.

All this blah blah blah about ownerships is moot. Bioware has to sell games. Thus, they must make games that a lot of people like. If they stop making such games, they will go out of business. Bioware does not want to go out of business. So, if they listen to their customers, they will do what they can to fix the ending of ME3. If they want to hurt their business, they can ignore what the fans want. It's just that simple, there's nothing need be said about what is art, or what is ours and theirs and whatever. You're never going to change unsatisfied customers. You can't make them like something because you call it art. And calling it art will not put money in the bank. Satisfied customers, on the other hand, will. That's really what it's all about.

[Unit-Alpha]

Aiyie wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Aiyie wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

We are customers.

We paid money for a product. In the art world, it's called commission. And guess who makes the choices there?

You guessed it, the buyer.

difference is that a client generally specifies his needs prior to paying when he commissions a piece.

if there are no customer specifications, but payment is made prior to seeing the finished product in its entirety... then its entirely up to the artist's discretion if he wants to change it.  and along with that, the artist does not owe the client anything, no refund or anything.

we paid for ME3 based on faith.  that faith was not returned, but thats on us for paying for it without verifying our purchase ahead of time, not on bioware.

Um, wrong, a comissioned piece that is not on par with what was originally agreed upon is subject to refusal without legal repercussions.

agreed. 

so... could i see the contract you, or anyone else, had with Bioware that stated specifically what was to be included, and not included, in the final product you purchased?

if nobody has such a contract, you paid for a product without having any sort of agreement with the manufacturer beforehand.

That's the point of advertising. That is our contract. They stated for the record and as marketing material that we were going to get something we didn't. The metaphorical contract has been broken.

[Dethead123]

Ziggeh wrote...

I'm not sure the ass hurting was actually my analogy.

But yes, they probably would. But they wouldn't have to. You would be requesting, and they would be seeing the value in doing so. They wouldn't be fulfilling an obligation.

I didn't say your analogy included ass hurting or was the basis of it. Also once again very few people believe Bioware is obligated to make a new ending. We do think if they want to keep their giant fanbase and heaps of money coming their way then they should throw "artistic integrity" out the window and take our advice. I DEMAND a new ending not cause I think I deserve it but because Bioware will be out of a customer if they don't.

[Yeslew]

Man... art can be change, its changed all the time, do you think in a movie for example... if an actor says "I think this scene would be better if i do X instead of Y" and the director says " OK do it " ... then he changes the script and everyone is happy... the people that write that's article didn't go to art college they are just protecting the developers because they gain something doing so , don't be fooled , and keep holding the line.

As was said in the firsts post we can ask for them change, they are not forced to do so... it is their choice.

[Torrible]

Is it just me when I feel that there is a subtle difference between 'deserving an ending' and 'being owed an ending'? If so, which is the default position of the movement?

Modifié par Torrible, 24 mars 2012 - 03:10 .

[Cyph3rX]

Shermos wrote...

Cyph3rX wrote...

Shermos wrote...

Luc0s wrote...
They are within their right to do whatever they want with the narrative in their games and we players have no say over that.

This is exactly what I've been arguing from the start. Good on you for changing your mind though .

Actually we do, my wallets closed to them atm, and they're a for profit company. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Not buying a game or anything for that matter because you don't like it is entirely different to dammanding it be changed. The former is an entirely acceptable choice squarely in the hands of the average Joe, the latter is not.

Except I bought a PC version which I cannot return, and now I'm stuck with this god forsaken ending that came totally out of left field contrary to what the series has established thus far, and what Bioware explicitly promised beforehand.

Damn right I'm going to demand a change to the ending, I paid $60 bucks for an incomplete game that I cannot return.

[Aesieru]

Why is thread still here? I ended it on page 2, with "Art is changed all the time".

Alrighty then.

[Ziggeh]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Sorry, I'm using a different meaning of circular logic that's applied to some specific forms of debating.

The FTC deals with consumer rights. That's as close as we are going to get. To say we don't have the right to merely demand that the problem be fixed is like saying that we don't have the right to express grivences. Nobody is planning to literally force them, so the whining over the word "demand" is just based around us airing grievences.

I think you'll find it's because I'm a pedant. Words are important, otherwise we're just filling the screen with squiggles.

At best "demand" is unhelpful rhetoric, at worst it's inaccurate.

I have zero problem with venting and requesting change, I have done both here myself. I do have a problem with the use of demand when what is meant is ask.

Which is also why I'm not keen on your use of circular.

[Unit-Alpha]

Torrible wrote...

Is it just when I feel that there a subtle difference between 'deserving an ending' and 'being owed an ending'? If so, which is the default position of the movement?

For me, we deserve one. That's why I'm okay with paying for ending DLC.

[Dethead123]

Torrible wrote...

Is it just when I feel that there a subtle difference between 'deserving an ending' and 'being owed an ending'? If so, which is the default position of the movement?

Neither of these are the idea of the movement. The idea is IT'S IN BIOWARE'S BEST FINANCIAL INTEREST TO REDO THE ENDING.

[Aiyie]

Jackal7713 wrote...

Art is never finished, only abandoned.
~Leonardo da Vinci

Da Vinci also changed his art several times. This includes the Mona Lisa and The Adoration of the Magi.

So people are saying they can't change the ending because of "Artist integrity"? Interesting

not at all.

they can change it.  hell, i think most of us would be thrilled if they changed it.

what people are saying is that its not our decision about if it should be changed or not.  its their's.  just like it was Da Vinci's decision to change his art, and nobody elses. 

Of course, Da Vinci was probably pressured to change it.  Let's just hope our pressure on Bioware has the same effect as the pressure on Da Vinci had.

[aliengmr1]

You know all this arguing is redundant. the only real difference of opinion is the like/dislike of the ending.

Demanding or asking

Lying or misleading

Art or ...not Art

Bunch of people said the ending sucks. Bioware is considering making improvements. We all keep saying the same thing.

[abch4]

Luc0s wrote...

 Because this article has opened my eyes: http://www.pcgamer.c...-writers-think/ 


I've read that article 3 times and I've read really carefully what each developer had to say. Now I have to say that I agree with them, especially this part:

"But things like “cutscenes” and “endings” are completely authored by the developers, and the developers altering the authored content of a game after the fact has nothing to do with the systemic player-developer collaboration described above. "

I want to clarify, that I still absolutely HATE the ending of Mass Effect 3, but only now do I realize how silly it is that we demand that BioWare changes it. That does not mean that I think BioWare shouldn't change it. I think BioWare should make up their own mind and then THEY should decide what to do with the endings, NOT US.

So if BioWare wishes to change the endings for us, then I fully support them.
If BioWare doesn't want to change the endings but instead they choose to expand the current endings, I fully support them.
If BioWare decides to do nothing, I'll be hugely dissapoined, but I'll still fully support them.
They are within their right to do whatever they want with the narrative in their games and we players have no say over that.


If we players demanded a change within the gameplay, then I'd fully support that, because that is part of the interactive  relationship between player and developer. The developer creates an interactive product, we as the players interact with it and the result of that interactive relationship is gameplay. 


But is it fair and/or realistic for players to demand a new ending, especially when the ending is a non-interactive part of the game, a cut-scene that is part of the narrative, the story? Are we players within our right to demand changes in that?

Let me ask you this: Are we in our right to demand a new ending for Lord of The Rings? Is it fair if we demand a new ending for Harry Potter?


And before you come with the argument that games aren't the same as movies, I advice you to read my entire post again, until you understand that demanding a different ending in a game is the same as demanding a different ending for a movie. Yes, games are different, but I already explained why an ending or any cutscene within a game is not part of the interactive experience, it's not part of the interactive relationship between the player and developer. A cutscene is an artistic expression and in my opinion, art should not be changed because the viewer demands it. Art should only be changed if the artist decides that it should be changed.

But the Harry Potter was changed.....lol don't believe everything you read

[Dreogan]

Torrible wrote...

Is it just me when I feel that there is a subtle difference between 'deserving an ending' and 'being owed an ending'? If so, which is the default position of the movement?

I think it's pretty safe to say the movement is diverse enough for the answer to your question to be "yes."

[Siegdrifa]

PrinceLionheart wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

Let me ask you this: Are we in our right to demand a new ending for Lord of The Rings? Is it fair if we demand a new ending for Harry Potter?

Fans did demand a better ending for Harry Potter because the original had Harry dead. The ending got changed, and there was much rejoicing.

No it didn't. 

J.K. Rowling kept making cryptic comments about possibly killing off Harry, but the ending was never revised. The only character that she ever really spared from killing off was Arthur Weasley.

Now, Great Expectations was definitely a novel that had it's ending changed though. I'm pretty sure that hack Charles Dickens went into obscurity after selling out his artistic integrity.

New ending for lord of the rings ? You actualy know the movie come from books right ? and the author is dead.
But those who actualy own the right could if they wanted.

Beside, while talking on missing point (books and movies, that are passive media and so, not really comparable to active media like video game).
Why would it be legit in first place to adapt books, novel in movie ?
You can't adapt a written story on the screen without compromising and cuting corner, it's change the "original" art, to FIT the new "technical environement" of the movie media.

Why not everybody go rampage against that ?
Because they could like it, and you know what ? you don't like the movie from the book, stick with the book alone as it is optional.
You wouldn't like alternative ending or extended ending for ME3 ? don't download it?

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 24 mars 2012 - 03:13 .

[malra]

Ziggeh wrote...

malra wrote...

actually you do.  whether they change it is up to them but you'd be surprised at the things the big companies take into effect.  the company I work for takes customer suggestions all the time.  why do you think they have a number on the lables or websites with contact email listed.  companies cannot improve, making inroads into markets that they have never been able to capture before, without listening to the customer.

The key word there is "suggestions". I'm not saying that they shouldn't listen, indeed, I would really rather they did. What I'm saying is that they are under no obligation to do so. I am a customer buying a product, not a client engaging them in a service.

i never though they were, i don't think most f us are under the impression that we can legally force them to rewrite the game, i think we are standing up for ourselves however and saying "Hey your game sucked, you lied to us and took our money.  Make it right."  since their are so many of us, i think we have a pretty fair chance.  otherwise, i have no problem never giving them my money again. 

[Nyaore]

Jackal7713 wrote...

Nyaore wrote...

Dreogan wrote...

Jackal7713 wrote...

Art is never finished, only abandoned.
~Leonardo da Vinci

Da Vinci also changed his art several times. This includes the Mona Lisa and The Adoration of the Magi.

So people are saying they can't change the ending because of "Artist integrity"? Interesting

Artistic integrity is a crutch for the artist without integrity.

Hilarious true, seeing as most of the artists I see using the term to describe why they refuse to improve or why they delivered a commission that didn't fit what they were asked for are usually the ones who can't take a constructive critique to save their lives. They also tend to be the ones with the largest number of white knights ready to stroke their egos.
Of course there is something to be said about staying true to yourself with your art, and I've seen some artists stay true to themselves without making complete asses out of themselves, but that tends to take a backseat when you're selling a product.

See that is the problem. If you can't take constructive critique, then you have truely failed as an artist. I love hear feed back about my paintings or photographs. How else will I get better at my art if I only listened to those that like it?

Agreed, tenfold. I'm much the same with my own art. I want you to critique it, I LIVE for critiques. Tear it apart and throw it back in my face if you have to. Just the fact that you're taking the time to give me your opinion on how to improve is worth more than it's weight in gold. Yet so many artists and non-artists just don't seem to understand this. They're happy with staying in a rut, and see any attempts to tell people how to improve as a slight against the artist's character. 
It's sorry day when more people associate critiques with blind bashing than with how helpful they're actually meant to be. Of course that doesn't excuse blind bashing in and of itself, but when people sit down and calmly tell you what you're doing wrong I think that you at least owe it to yourself to take their advice seriously.

Modifié par Nyaore, 24 mars 2012 - 03:13 .

[Grasich]

Torrible wrote...

Is it me or is there a subtle difference between 'deserving an ending' and 'being owed an ending'? If so, which is the default position of the movement?

Now THIS is an interesting question.

I don't think you can really attribute any default position to the movement, simply due to it's lack of real organization.

My personal stance is that ME3 itself deserves a better ending. We, the customers, are owed one due to the fairly blatant lies we were told weeks before release. Does this mean I think we should go after them in any legal sense? Hell no. However, it means we have every right to be on here demanding they give us a better end.

Had they not lied about the ending, then I would say we "deserve" one.

EDIT: Would just like to clarify, I am all for paying for this, simply because otherwise it isn't feasable.

Modifié par Grasich, 24 mars 2012 - 03:13 .

[Bourne Endeavor]

Since apparently some people do not under a contract does not necessarily equate to a legal document but can be a simple promises just not legally binding. I shall educate you.

con·tract
noun
1. an agreement between two or more parties for the doing or not doing of something specified.

Notice this definition makes no distinction between a document but specifically notes an agreement? By BioWare promising us various things in their marketing, it constitutes a contract, which they breached by failing to deliver. Therefore, we have every right to call them on it.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 24 mars 2012 - 03:14 .

[Torrible]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Torrible wrote...

Is it just when I feel that there a subtle difference between 'deserving an ending' and 'being owed an ending'? If so, which is the default position of the movement?

For me, we deserve one. That's why I'm okay with paying for ending DLC.

Thanks for clarifying. I think often one position is mistaken for the other.

Modifié par Torrible, 24 mars 2012 - 03:13 .

[ziloe]

Dude. You can't compare a game that involves choices, to a movie or a book that you have no control over.