1311 réponses à ce sujet

[StrawberryRainPop]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Cyph3rX wrote...


Stop the internet, this thread has been won.

Just shut the whole damn thing down.

agreed.....This thread is getting out of hand. Can someone report this to a mod or something?

[MetalCargo999]

FemmeShep wrote...

I still don't think this can be looked at like other stories. It's an interactive story, that asked the audience to participate. From a marketing point of view, it's how the sold the product. For you to be able to shape your own story.

If the core fan base is not happy with the ending, why is it so bad for BioWare to add more ending options? I can understand them not wanting to outright change the ending. But why not have multiple endings? This is a game about choice, no?

I agree.  I think the slippery slope argument doesn't really apply to art being altered in relation to market demands.  It's an overexaggeration.  That being said, I still respect "artistic integrity", or whatever they call it nowadays.

[Dethead123]

StrawberryRainPop wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Cyph3rX wrote...


Stop the internet, this thread has been won.

Just shut the whole damn thing down.

agreed.....This thread is getting out of hand. Can someone report this to a mod or something?

Aww but this is the closest thing we have to a conversation thread :/

[MetalCargo999]

I'm having a pretty good conversation with ashdrake1. I haven't really been following the rest, except a few comments here and there.

[ashdrake1]

[quote]MetalCargo999 wrote...

[/quote]

I disagree with the homogenized story.  This form of story telling lends itself to presenting several options the story can go.  Look at Mass Effect 2, for example.  You can actually die, as Shepard, in the end game.  I actually found this ending to be very powerful, and twhen Shepard's role in the conversation was filled by Joker?  Fantastic!  Risk isn't the problem.  Getting it right is the problem.  Do you think Bioware would be making changes or additions if people weren't poking holes through the endings like swiss cheese?  Probably not, because while people may personally dislike the ending, they can't really argue against its validity as an ending.

As for the DLC thing, I totally agree, and it scares me.  But I'm likely not going to play a lot of video games after ME3 because of how terrible it has made me feel about the gaming industry as a whole.  - metalcargo999[/quote]

I personally don't think that is a great example of risky story telling.  Regardless if you have a game where shepard dies his story still continues in the next one. There was going to be a sequel and shepard was the star.  If they had hired t2o more voice actors and had a fill in for shepard, it would have meant something in the long run.  By having mass effect 3 with shepard as the lead it was made canon.

The only thing about the end of 2 that had weight was the fact members of your crew could die, because that carried over. 

I very much think they would make changes and additions if you were not able to poke holes in the story.  Again that is not the sole drive behind this movement.  Many people of the movement want to be able able to put a bullet in the catalyst while shouting "reap this!", then go home and bang the cheerleader.  Enough people that EA would be able to make a fast buck.  I still stand behind Casey being resentful in his response to the fan outcry.  I think he honestly is willing to stand by the ending, it's not biowares call though.  

EA will make money off this and Bioware will take less chances.  This will affect our wallets and biowares stories.
- ashdrake1
[/quote]

You're sort of making my point in a weird way, though.  You're saying that risk, with respect to the Mass Effect 3 story, involves taking away player choice and forcing authorial intent.  This, I would argue, flies in the face of the very nature of this form of story telling.  I said earlier how hijacking your art to make a point instead of using it is not good work.  I think this applies here. 

While I understand where you're coming from, I can't accept such a constrained ending as being good seeing how one of the developers even said that there is no canon for Shepard.  Each of us makes our own canon.  There hasn't been any good justification for sacrificing the nature of this form of storytelling beyond, "because it's the ending.  Obviously."  This really doesn't work for me.  Ultimately, in a strange way, I'm asking Bioware to not sacrifice its art for the sake of polarity, and to do what it always has done, only in increasing measure.

But honestly at this point, just give me closure and fill whatever plot holes appear to exist, and I'm happy.  To watch them on Youtube and see if they're any good.  Then buy them if they're worth it.[/quote]

-MetalCargo999

Not really.  This form of interactive story telling has been this way since game one.  It has been as such for the entire series. It is interactive only to a point.  All of the endings have been the same with a hard choice to make at the end.  We get to modify the story a bit as it goes, but the end results have always been the same.  Sovereign is always destroyed, the collectors are always defeated and the reapers are no longer eating the galaxy.  There not being a cannon for shepard is just not true, points a, b and c are reached regardless.  It's just the bit's in the middle we get fiddle with.

Bioware lets us tweak the story as we go, but the ending is always set in stone.  You can put a bit of personal spin on it, but the results are ultimately the same.  We can choose to save the council, blow up the base or choose red, green or blue.  As far as the over arching story it has little to no effect.  No one listens if you kill or save the council.  Nothing great comes from blowing up or saving the base. Red, green and blue probably has the biggest effect on the story because we have to speculate on it, instead of finding out it did not matter.

Hell my biggest problem with the game isn't the ending, it's choices I made that are flat out irrelevant.  I felt more betrayed by Udina being on the council and another rachni appearing.  Both should have had better repercussions.  But at this point we are back to personal views on what makes a good story and how we think it should have gone.  I would have liked a better telling of those two parts of the story and I still want to know wtf Jorker is doing.

I just think the cost is to high.

Modifié par ashdrake1, 24 mars 2012 - 04:48 .

[Lugaidster]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Lugaidster 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.

You really are stretching it there. Mass produced art is still art, whether you like it or not. Demanding that they change the ending because you paid for the game won't get us anywhere. That's about as anoyingly childish and entitled as you can get and does nothing but diminish the value of the movement. If you dismiss it as art, then there's no reader-writter contract in the first place as that only takes place as a result of art. 

Get your act together. Stay civil.

@OP I disagree with you. The decision about the ending was always going to be Bioware's and that it's ultimately their decision (again) on how to address the issues in the game. I'm not the executive producer or the director of it, so yeah, I won't pretend to do their job. But I won't support it if I'm left disappointed. PC Gamer's article goes to prove that it's their decision, nothing more, nothing less.

It's as much their prerrogative to "cave" to demands as is mine to make the demands and no one should feel bad or "entitled" about it, as long as the demands are reasonable in terms of argument (see above).

Let's play a game I like to call "Find the derogatory words."

Demanding
anoyingly
childish
entitled
cave
entitled

Let's play a game called "Name the guy missing the point":

Unit-Alpha 
Reptilian Rob

[Unit-Alpha]

I'm having a pretty good conversation with myself, over here.

[Unit-Alpha]

Lugaidster wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Lugaidster 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.

You really are stretching it there. Mass produced art is still art, whether you like it or not. Demanding that they change the ending because you paid for the game won't get us anywhere. That's about as anoyingly childish and entitled as you can get and does nothing but diminish the value of the movement. If you dismiss it as art, then there's no reader-writter contract in the first place as that only takes place as a result of art. 

Get your act together. Stay civil.

@OP I disagree with you. The decision about the ending was always going to be Bioware's and that it's ultimately their decision (again) on how to address the issues in the game. I'm not the executive producer or the director of it, so yeah, I won't pretend to do their job. But I won't support it if I'm left disappointed. PC Gamer's article goes to prove that it's their decision, nothing more, nothing less.

It's as much their prerrogative to "cave" to demands as is mine to make the demands and no one should feel bad or "entitled" about it, as long as the demands are reasonable in terms of argument (see above).

Let's play a game I like to call "Find the derogatory words."

Demanding
anoyingly
childish
entitled
cave
entitled

Let's play a game called "Name the guy missing the point":

Unit-Alpha 
Reptilian Rob

You love me, too?

Awww....

[StrawberryRainPop]

Dethead123 wrote...

StrawberryRainPop wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Cyph3rX wrote...


Stop the internet, this thread has been won.

Just shut the whole damn thing down.

agreed.....This thread is getting out of hand. Can someone report this to a mod or something?

Aww but this is the closest thing we have to a conversation thread :/

Theres some really insulting attacks though. I actually hope a mod comes over to either ban them or lock this down.

[DemGeth]

Reptilian Rob wrote...

Lugaidster 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.

You really are stretching it there. Mass produced art is still art, whether you like it or not. Demanding that they change the ending because you paid for the game won't get us anywhere. That's about as anoyingly childish and entitled as you can get and does nothing but diminish the value of the movement. If you dismiss it as art, then there's no reader-writter contract in the first place as that only takes place as a result of art. 

Get your act together. Stay civil.

@OP I disagree with you. The decision about the ending was always going to be Bioware's and that it's ultimately their decision (again) on how to address the issues in the game. I'm not the executive producer or the director of it, so yeah, I won't pretend to do their job. But I won't support it if I'm left disappointed. PC Gamer's article goes to prove that it's their decision, nothing more, nothing less.

It's as much their prerrogative to "cave" to demands as is mine to make the demands and no one should feel bad or "entitled" about it, as long as the demands are reasonable in terms of argument (see above).

Day one DLC.

Not art. 

DA:O wasn't art?

[Grasich]

I leave for half an hour and this thread becomes much more angry.

Allow me to make things better.

[Lugaidster]

Reptilian Rob wrote...

Lugaidster 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.

You really are stretching it there. Mass produced art is still art, whether you like it or not. Demanding that they change the ending because you paid for the game won't get us anywhere. That's about as anoyingly childish and entitled as you can get and does nothing but diminish the value of the movement. If you dismiss it as art, then there's no reader-writter contract in the first place as that only takes place as a result of art. 

Get your act together. Stay civil.

@OP I disagree with you. The decision about the ending was always going to be Bioware's and that it's ultimately their decision (again) on how to address the issues in the game. I'm not the executive producer or the director of it, so yeah, I won't pretend to do their job. But I won't support it if I'm left disappointed. PC Gamer's article goes to prove that it's their decision, nothing more, nothing less.

It's as much their prerrogative to "cave" to demands as is mine to make the demands and no one should feel bad or "entitled" about it, as long as the demands are reasonable in terms of argument (see above).

Day one DLC.

Not art. 

That's a logical fallacy, but assuming it wasn't then there is no reader-writter contract broken as that only applies to literary(art) work. Why claim it was?

[Cyph3rX]

MetalCargo999 wrote...

FemmeShep wrote...

I still don't think this can be looked at like other stories. It's an interactive story, that asked the audience to participate. From a marketing point of view, it's how the sold the product. For you to be able to shape your own story.

If the core fan base is not happy with the ending, why is it so bad for BioWare to add more ending options? I can understand them not wanting to outright change the ending. But why not have multiple endings? This is a game about choice, no?

I agree.  I think the slippery slope argument doesn't really apply to art being altered in relation to market demands.  It's an overexaggeration.  That being said, I still respect "artistic integrity", or whatever they call it nowadays.

Mainly because its been done several times over several different mediums, including gaming, like with Fallout 3. Personally, I think "artistic integrity" is just a copout, both those words assume the product was good and the followthrough was honest. What we got for $60 was an ending ripped from another game and sprinkled with plotholes. Essentially, an incomplete product they felt they could charge full price for, and the backlash so far has been staggering.

[Dethead123]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

I'm having a pretty good conversation with myself, over here.

Dethead123 aka myself.

[Unit-Alpha]

DemGeth wrote...

DA:O wasn't art?

I still think we are all getting in the mindset that any game is art. That's simply not true. No, DAO is not art. There are very few that actually are.

Games like Journey, fl0wer, Child of Eden, etc are.

[Unit-Alpha]

Dethead123 wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

I'm having a pretty good conversation with myself, over here.

Dethead123 aka myself.

We are Geth, obviously.

[Dethead123]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Dethead123 wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

I'm having a pretty good conversation with myself, over here.

Dethead123 aka myself.

We are Geth, obviously.

We haven't reached that kind of consensus yet.

[RedundantAccount]

If all of this is really about semantics, respectfully, I don't think you really understand that point of protests... If someone or a group of someones dislikes something enough to actually form a cohesive protest, we've moved beyond the point of passive words. No, I'm not saying we've escalated to Syrian level violence in the streets either. But, protesting 101: there has to be a strong unifying cause or it will collapse. This "movement" would never have been able to rally the support for Childs Play that it did, for example, based on a bunch of dissatisfied customers "really asking nicely, but it's totally up to you if you want to, but if you could possibly change the endings that'd be great 'cuz a bunch of us really didn't like them".  Imagine the banners. I'm being slightly facetious, but I hope my point is made.

Google "resume action words," for example. Passive wishy-washy words do not get results - on resumes or in protests. If the word "demand" was not used, I promise this whole entire movement would not have received one iota of press coverage or the very attention from BioWare that is its raison d'etre. That's fact. Every protest has a demand. Every single one does - whether it's voiced loudly (i.e "What do we want ___, when do we want it, NOW) or softly with passive resistance type movements. 

Just my $.02

Modifié par RedundantAccount, 24 mars 2012 - 05:00 .

[DemGeth]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

DemGeth wrote...

DA:O wasn't art?

I still think we are all getting in the mindset that any game is art. That's simply not true. No, DAO is not art. There are very few that actually are.

Games like Journey, fl0wer, Child of Eden, etc are.

So what makes it art?

[Madecologist]

Grasich wrote...

I leave for half an hour and this thread becomes much more angry.

Allow me to make things better.

Awwww.... Liara... she was my first. I mean in ME. Don't you all get any allusions here.

Modifié par Madecologist, 24 mars 2012 - 04:53 .

[Cobra's_back]

Luc0s wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

If the ending is bad, sure, we're in the right to ask for something better. If the gameplay is bad, do you have the right to ask for a patch? If there are bugs, do you have a right? If the classes are unbalanced, are we to shut up and not say anything?

Did you even read my entire opening post? You clearly didn't, did you?

Demanding a patch or change in gameplay =/= demanding a different story or a different end to that story.

Gameplay is not part of a video-games "artistic integrity". But narrative and cutscenes are very much part of a video-games "artistic integrity". I already explained this in my OP.


So yes, when the story in a video-game is bad, or when the end to that story is bad, you just have to suck it up. You are free to express your dissapointment. You are even free to ask BioWare for  change, but you are not within your right to DEMAND change.


I did not like the way Harry Potter ended. Do I now have the right to demand that J.K. Rowling changes the end? Wouldn't I look like a complete retard when I would do that?

You could choose not to buy her books.
You could choose not to see a producer's movies.
It not a bad thing for customers to speak their mind. It actually helps BioWare. Peter Jackson and M. Night Shyamalan wouldn't be in business if they didn't deliver something we all wanted to watch. It is Art but it is Commercial Art  intended to sell to the masses.
I actaully just want BioWare to clarify some point about the ending. There are several theories out there and I really just want to know if one of them is correct.

[Unit-Alpha]

Dethead123 wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Dethead123 wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

I'm having a pretty good conversation with myself, over here.

Dethead123 aka myself.

We are Geth, obviously.

We haven't reached that kind of consensus yet.

We are building consensus now.

[Grasich]

DemGeth wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

DemGeth wrote...

DA:O wasn't art?

I still think we are all getting in the mindset that any game is art. That's simply not true. No, DAO is not art. There are very few that actually are.

Games like Journey, fl0wer, Child of Eden, etc are.

So what makes it art?

That is a VERY loaded question.

[DemGeth]

Grasich wrote...

DemGeth wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

DemGeth wrote...

DA:O wasn't art?

I still think we are all getting in the mindset that any game is art. That's simply not true. No, DAO is not art. There are very few that actually are.

Games like Journey, fl0wer, Child of Eden, etc are.

So what makes it art?

That is a VERY loaded question.

Is it?   :P:P

[FemmeShep]

MetalCargo999 wrote...

FemmeShep wrote...

I still don't think this can be looked at like other stories. It's an interactive story, that asked the audience to participate. From a marketing point of view, it's how the sold the product. For you to be able to shape your own story.

If the core fan base is not happy with the ending, why is it so bad for BioWare to add more ending options? I can understand them not wanting to outright change the ending. But why not have multiple endings? This is a game about choice, no?

I agree.  I think the slippery slope argument doesn't really apply to art being altered in relation to market demands.  It's an overexaggeration.  That being said, I still respect "artistic integrity", or whatever they call it nowadays.

Plus if what I think is true (that the ending didn't have the input from the rest of the staff), it kind of makes it harder to swallow the artistic integrity argument. Why? Because BioWare has always ran their model on being a collaboration. A collaboration between the fans. A collaboration between writers. And so they abandon this for the ending moments of the trilogy? 

Modifié par FemmeShep, 24 mars 2012 - 04:58 .