1311 réponses à ce sujet

[MetalCargo999]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

MetalCargo999 wrote...

Alrighty then.  I challenge you to a debate-off.  Pick a topic.

Potatoes.

I don't know anything about potatoes except I don't like them.  You win by default.

[Unit-Alpha]

Cyph3rX wrote...

Went away to eat, and this is still going strong. My God what has the OP done.

[Grasich]

Cyph3rX wrote...

Went away to eat, and this is still going strong. My God what has the OP done.

I have work I need to get done tonight, and this damn thread just won't go away!!!

[Jackal7713]

Cyph3rX wrote...

Went away to eat, and this is still going strong. My God what has the OP done.

I think we highjacked it! whoot!

[Dethead123]

Cyph3rX wrote...

Went away to eat, and this is still going strong. My God what has the OP done.

This

[Unit-Alpha]

MetalCargo999 wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

MetalCargo999 wrote...

Alrighty then.  I challenge you to a debate-off.  Pick a topic.

Potatoes.

I don't know anything about potatoes except I don't like them.  You win by default.

Easiest debate I've ever won. Thanks

[ninjaNumber1]

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.

I oppose demanding a change to the ending as well, but I believe that this "It's art" reasons is a complete sham though.

You seem to be under the impression that you can call anything ART as long as you develop it. Bioware might develop cutscenes, and they have their right to promote it as their "Art". BUT, given that we already know their artistic vision from interviews and statements priori, we can also make an objective judgement on whether Bioware met the artistic vision they set out to meet.

If they did not meet their artistic vision, then they have promoted a failed piece of art. Just as with real ART, when you produce a piece of art which does not meet standards, you get condemned and asked to REDO it or REDO something else if you want to get ahead. So same thing here.

Why you seem to be confused is because you decided that as long as someone can call something ART, it means that they SHOULD NOT change it to meet criticism. That is not true. Artist do that all the time. It's not because they are bending to the needs of the people either. They do it because THEY WANT TO CONVEY THEIR ARTISTIC VISION. If they produce a piece of art that no one understands any meaning from it, then that artist has failed. So it is actually in the best interest of the artist to change their piece of work to better communicate their artistic vision. In fact, that is what ART is.

[Dethead123]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Easiest debate I've ever won. Thanks

Stir-fried. Or baked. Your move Unit.

Modifié par Dethead123, 24 mars 2012 - 03:47 .

[MetalCargo999]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

MetalCargo999 wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

MetalCargo999 wrote...

Alrighty then.  I challenge you to a debate-off.  Pick a topic.

Potatoes.

I don't know anything about potatoes except I don't like them.  You win by default.

Easiest debate I've ever won. Thanks

Anytime.

[Elite Midget]

Video Games haven't earned the classification of Art yet. Their Day 1 DLC isn't helping matters.

You don't see an  Artist finish a painting than say that if you want to see the rest of the painting on revealing day than you must pay extra. If you don't than the painting of the woman will not have a face.

Modifié par Elite Midget, 24 mars 2012 - 03:48 .

[Cyph3rX]

ninjaNumber1 wrote...

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.

I oppose demanding a change to the ending as well, but I believe that this "It's art" reasons is a complete sham though.

You seem to be under the impression that you can call anything ART as long as you develop it. Bioware might develop cutscenes, and they have their right to promote it as their "Art". BUT, given that we already know their artistic vision from interviews and statements priori, we can also make an objective judgement on whether Bioware met the artistic vision they set out to meet.

If they did not meet their artistic vision, then they have promoted a failed piece of art. Just as with real ART, when you produce a piece of art which does not meet standards, you get condemned and asked to REDO it or REDO something else if you want to get ahead. So same thing here.

Why you seem to be confused is because you decided that as long as someone can call something ART, it means that they SHOULD NOT change it to meet criticism. That is not true. Artist do that all the time. It's not because they are bending to the needs of the people either. They do it because THEY WANT TO CONVEY THEIR ARTISTIC VISION. If they produce a piece of art that no one understands any meaning from it, then that artist has failed. So it is actually in the best interest of the artist to change their piece of work to better communicate their artistic vision. In fact, that is what ART is.

Well so much for levity. Here we go again.

[NeoGuardian86]

 I think Susan O' Connor, Greg Kasavin, and David Grossman really hit the nail on the head from my perspective.

but all of them are incredibly insightful.
very good worthwhile read. 

[Unit-Alpha]

Dethead123 wrote...

Stir-fried. Or baked. Your move Unit.

Stir-fried? Really? What's up with that?

Fried maybe, but stir-fried, never.

Baked, in that case.

Modifié par Unit-Alpha, 24 mars 2012 - 03:50 .

[malra]

this may get me drawn and quartered (well hopefully not in this thread) but I personally don't think we should ask for a new ending simply because its "sad" or "dark" so while I may find things in common with retake I don't have everything in common. which is okay. for me the more important thing was for them to know that there is a significant number of people unhappy and this in itself may prompt them to rethink what they have done.

[Unit-Alpha]

Cyph3rX wrote...

Well so much for levity. Here we go again.

Damn those people for being on topic! Damn them to hell!!

Modifié par Unit-Alpha, 24 mars 2012 - 03:52 .

[Unit-Alpha]

malra wrote...

this may get me drawn and quartered (well hopefully not in this thread) but I personally don't think we should ask for a new ending simply because its "sad" or "dark" so while I may find things in common with retake I don't have everything in common. which is okay. for me the more important thing was for them to know that there is a significant number of people unhappy and this in itself may prompt them to rethink what they have done.

Well, there's no chance they would ever change them unless a significant number of people were unhappy, so that's the case here. We are not arguing for happy or sad, we're arguing for sensible endings.

Modifié par Unit-Alpha, 24 mars 2012 - 03:52 .

[Grasich]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Dethead123 wrote...

Stir-fried. Or baked. Your move Unit.

Stir-fried? Really? What's up with that?

Fried maybe, but stir-fried, never.

Baked, in that case.

What?! Stir fried potatoes are great!

Then again... I stir fry basically everything

[firebreather19]

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.

I don't get it, they did you a favor. Collector's Editions almost ALWAYS gets extra DLC which is released later on. By releasing Javik on Day One, they gave everyone--even those who didn't get a CE--the chance to at least use the character.

No offense inteded, but sounds pretty ungrateful.

[MrGone]

The best point made by that article I think is that of Tim Grossman.

He mentions Monkey Island 2 and the Curse of Monkey Island.

Monkey Island 2 also had a funky ending a lot of people hated, but from my understanding, it was made the way it was not only on purpose but because the three men involved with the game:
A) didn't want to make any more sequels and were somewhat trying to kill the series.
and
If there were going to be sequels, THEY would have to be in charge in order to explain the ending.

He says if he had to go back, he wouldn't change the ending, again, because at the time they had their reasons for it.

On the other hand, the guys behind Curse of Monkey Island he says ALSO had complaints over their ending, mostly as it was VERY short. But he knows the guys who made it would probably go back and fix that, since they had plans for a MUCH more expansive ending, but ran out of time and budget.

To me, the ME3 ending is the way it is because of one of three things:

1) The devs and writers literally thought it was a genuinely good idea, despite common sense.
2) They wanted to do much more, but couldn't either due to time or budget (the copy/paste nature of the endings is a strong indicator of this being a factor). The possibility of further ending DLC to add onto it later in order to fix this particular issue may have also been a factor if this was specifically the problem.
3) The devs and writers, not wanting to continue making ME games in order to pursue other projects, but not wanting to let the rest of EA be in charge of a franchise they no longer fully own, decided to willingly nuke their franchise at its end. Poison the well so EA couldn't keep dumbing it down enough that it eventually tied in with Battlefield 2186.

In case 1, I would agree. Demanding a change to the ending would be wrong. It's their game, and they think this is the best thing for it. We can disagree, but they probably shouldn't do a damn thing.

In case 2, to me, the most likely case, yest, we SHOULD demand a new ending. If EA wanted to scrimp on the budget and make sure they got ME3 out before the fiscal year was over (which they did) in order to meet shareholder demands, rather than push it back a few more months in order to best serve the project then damn straight we should demand a new ending! In fact, us doing so would bolster whatever faction within BioWare would have fought for a better ending before getting shutdown by their superiors due to the budgetary/timefram concerns.

Of course, as a subset, if they charge for it, or it is other wise revealed that this was "all a part of the plan" we should also voice our immediate disapproval. Holding narrative hostage for extra cash is about the most despicable practice I could imagine for a producer of fiction.

In case 3 though, I think we should basically accept their choice and let Mass Effect (as a whole) die. If they are esentially killing the series to prevent it from becoming something far worse, then hey, respect that decision. But, we kind of need to be let in on it this is the case.

Of course, six minutes of condensed terrible MIGHT have been their way of letting us in on it. It's just hard to believe if that's the case.

[LegatoSkyheart]

So it's ok to make everyone believe that your choices matter and to tell everyone there are 16 different endings when there are really just 3/1?

Modifié par LegatoSkyheart, 24 mars 2012 - 03:52 .

[Dethead123]

malra wrote...

this may get me drawn and quartered (well hopefully not in this thread) but I personally don't think we should ask for a new ending simply because its "sad" or "dark" so while I may find things in common with retake I don't have everything in common. which is okay. for me the more important thing was for them to know that there is a significant number of people unhappy and this in itself may prompt them to rethink what they have done.

I'd like to have a choice to keep Shepard alive pretty much because 16 different endings is a lot to fill (unless you're just gonna do different colored explosions and having a different teamate come out of the normandy for each one <_<) but I can understand the whole killing off the hero mentality. Besides my shepard was renegade so he never wore protection. You can be sure there's a minishep in the galaxy

[Unit-Alpha]

Grasich wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Dethead123 wrote...

Stir-fried. Or baked. Your move Unit.

Stir-fried? Really? What's up with that?

Fried maybe, but stir-fried, never.

Baked, in that case.

What?! Stir fried potatoes are great!

Then again... I stir fry basically everything

Love stir-fried everything else, but potatoes? Really? You would need a lot of seasoning for that to be good.

[Chronor]

All this bs about cutscenes and similar being art and whatnot is just that, bs. It stopped being "art" once we bought the game. Plus, those cutscenes do not happen on their own. There's always some sort of prompt or trigger.  The so called art then becomes interactive, and since we are dictating our story within the confines of BW's sandbox, I do not think they should be immune to any criticism we may have.

Guess what? Player choice (prompt) gets you to that end (singular) so as to trigger your favorite colored explosion. I'll give you that any cutscenes and similar is artistic. But, with this game, they have to follow a cohesive narrative. BW did an excellent job, right up to the point where we unfortunately killed the last boss, Marauder Shields. See where our bad decision got us.... :-/

Modifié par Chronor, 24 mars 2012 - 03:56 .

[MetalCargo999]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

malra wrote...

this may get me drawn and quartered (well hopefully not in this thread) but I personally don't think we should ask for a new ending simply because its "sad" or "dark" so while I may find things in common with retake I don't have everything in common. which is okay. for me the more important thing was for them to know that there is a significant number of people unhappy and this in itself may prompt them to rethink what they have done.

Well, there's no chance they would ever change them unless a significant number of people were unhappy, so that's the case here. We are not arguing for happy or sad, we're arguing for sensible endings.

Agreed.  But I think I also have a good argument for happy vs sad endings, and how ideally they should be presented as options.  One thing at a time, though.

[Jackal7713]

malra wrote...

this may get me drawn and quartered (well hopefully not in this thread) but I personally don't think we should ask for a new ending simply because its "sad" or "dark" so while I may find things in common with retake I don't have everything in common. which is okay. for me the more important thing was for them to know that there is a significant number of people unhappy and this in itself may prompt them to rethink what they have done.

Sorry but I feel that I earned a Happy LI ending, hell even throw in a beer with Garrus on a Reaper leg. I'm not asking to change grim dark ones, I would just like Shepard to get something for himself after saving the universe countless times.