241 réponses à ce sujet

[sistersafetypin]

Epiph1 wrote...

I just worked out what is really bothering me about the the artistic angle defense.

Monet, Mozart, Picasso, Austen, Dickens etc are all considered to be great artists not because they told us they were, but because the populace decreed it to be the case. "Great Art" isn't something you create and then tell people you made, it simply becomes and withstands the passage of time.

Arrogance is the lowest form of self-publicity Bioware.

[firebreather19]

VoodooDrackus wrote...

It seems so compelling, but alas you are trying to shoehorn what seems like good examples into an otherwise perfect conclusion. And yes, that is my opinion and what I took away from the game and I know it vastly differs from those commenting here.

Charles Dickens did in fact write 2 endings, after his first ending was deemed too depressing by a friend he was staying with. To which he made another version and sent it off to the publisher which was used. He didn't do it from fan uproar, and he did it before it actually hit the streets.

Really all of the examples used are from the Artist/Writer wanting to elaborate on things in their own works. They were not being told that their work sucks and it needs to change. In some cases they were given constructive feedback and felt like elaborating.

Tolkien changed the Hobbit because he felt giving the ring to Bilbo didn't make sense while he was working on the LOTR. He made that decision, he was not being told he needs to do it or being criticized for it. When he started working on the history with the Silmarillion he saw things he wanted to elaborate on in LOTR. Again not because of fan outcries, but because he wanted all of his works to have a consistent history.

And CD Projekt, the main part of your post.
They fixed a lot of issues fans were talking about which do not include a new cinematic for the beginning or new scenes in the epilogue that summarize the players choices made throughout the game. From fan feedback they added a better tutorial section and fixed a lot of issues (read patch). And for fans of the game who already finished it, they get some new content. Plus the fact that it is being released on 360 they were really adapting it and in the process adding some new content. So basically they re-released the game and the PC owners get the update as well. Thus it being called the Enhanced Edition. And the ending is the same, it is just elaborated on with a summary of your actions.

That doesn't apply to your argument that Bioware should do it because everyone else did. They probaby will in the future, it doesn't mean their current work (ie the ending) is invalid. I assert it is not, but that is just me.
Also, we are talking 2 weeks after the release of a game, and most of you in this thread seem to want it changed post-haste. The things that you keep bringing up are done years and years later by the Directors, etc that revised or wanted to express their vision. They didn't do it within weeks. Nowhere was there a blood thirsty fan uproar that demanded they change things, they did it on their own after reflection.

Just give Bioware time and they will more than likely release something that answers your questions and fills in some blanks for you.

I don't know, maybe give it a rest or something?

This this and more of this. 

[katamuro]

Agree with OP

[Megachaz]

Agree 100%. It's not artistic integrity at stake, it's pride.

Modifié par Megachaz, 24 mars 2012 - 10:05 .

[Star fury]

I like an example with Arthur Conan Doyle. Even British KING asked the author about death of Sherlock Holmes. So Conan Doyle was forced to resurrect Holmes.

[LPPrince]

WilliamDracul88 wrote...

At this point, I would also like to ask: Why so many of you think that EA is responsible for the ending of ME3?

It's like all goes down to "Bioware is the pure Paragon that has been corrupted by the malevolence of the Renegades of EA!". Why? Nothing I have read in the Bioware's statements (or any other sources) says that EA was even AWARE of the ending. Why do you think that EA would implement such massive failure of an ending?
I don't know, but that does not the style of EAs games. AT ALL.
Also, other people say: "The ending is so bad because EA rushed them to finish the game faster!"; and I think "And what?". Being rushed means that you have to make such HORRIBLE ending? It's not rushed, It's just plain bad. And, apparently, we all need to believe that the ending was planned in the LAST place? That they were making the game since the first mission and up, and when they were "near London" suddenly some EA Evil Overlord (EAEO) shouted "I want that game finished by tomorrow!"?

Come on... Bioware has made great games, but hell, EA is not the Devil. Bioware is the one who MADE this ending, not their parent company.

Also, since Neverwinter Nights "Aribeth's Fate" I was fearing something like this...

I think people miss the Bioware that existed prior to the EA acquisition of them so much that they blame EA for all mistakes Bioware makes.

[T-Zero]

I truly believe that video games are art. But I take exception with the idea that changing something that's poorly executed violates artistic integrity.

I write. I consider what I do to be a form of art. But I don't create art in a vacuum. First, after putting something down on paper, I review it and revise. Then do so again. And again. Finally, when I think something is ready, I put it out for the public to consume. After all, while I write for my own personal reasons, I don't intend to just keep it for myself, right? No, I want to see what the public reaction to it is. I want feedback. I want to know that what I've written is worthy of having been written.

And sometimes, after I've done all that work on something to the point that I'm sure it's exactly what I want, people tell me that they find it wanting (that's saying it politely, most of the time.) This always makes me feel bad... after all, I poured my heart and soul into something, and to find out that people don't get it, or just plain don't like it? It's always hard on an artist to find that their product doesn't meet the standards of their audience.

But, you know what? I don't sit and think, "well, they're just uneducated peons who can't fathom my work." No. I *ask* them why they didn't like it. I listen. And then I rewrite it. I don't change my message, the artistic heart of my work, but I *do* examine and rework its' execution. Because if the audience didn't "get it," that's not their fault... it's mine. And for my work to truly have meaning, it must accurately convey what I'm trying to say.

Modifié par T-Zero, 24 mars 2012 - 11:50 .

[Verhalthur]

This entire thread is assuming that Bioware is changing the ending, which is definitely not a concrete assumption.

In fact, most of the information released through official channels either suggests or directly states that they are clarifying the already existing endings.

[IronVanguard]

I think the real point of the OP is just to buy more Witcher.
That's voting with my money, right?

[FellishBeast]

Great post, OP. Undeniably valid points

[luzburg]

Eivuwan wrote...

Artistic integrity is just an excuse for not correcting your mistakes.

agreed!

[Conduit0]

Lanceare wrote...

J. R. R. Tolkien released several iterations of The Lord of the Rings in order to improve things, clarify and fix problems. He also went back and rewrote parts of The Hobbit years later in order to bring it in line with the Lord of the Rings (i.e. fix plot holes and provide foreshadowing for the LotR). The version of The Hobbit we have now is not the version that was originally published, and it's better for it.

Eight years after killing off Sherlock Holmes, Sir Aurthur Conan Doyle went back and retroactively un-killed him based on overwhelming fan feedback. Then he wrote 'The Hounds of the Baskervilles'. His work, and he, benefited greatly.

CD Project Red, the developer behind the amazing 'The Witcher' and 'The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings' (which were already excellent) have retroactively made major changes to both games; changed content, added content, changed and added dialog, changed and added cut-scenes - based on interaction with fans and their own artistic integrity and desire to make the best games possible.

In The Witcher 2 they have both added a new beginning to the game as well as changed/expanded the ending of the game, based upon fan feedback. And they've done it all at no cost to the player. If you bought the game, you get all updates to the game, all new content and DLC, for free.

As a result they have some really excellent games and have garnered a great deal of love from the community for having such integrity and love for the fans.

Fans and critics alike have praised CD Project Red for all of this. Yet over this issue with Bioware and Mass Effect 3 people do a 180 and claim that if they fix the problems with the very unworthy ending to ME3, they are somehow violating some 'artistic integrity'.

False. Hypocrites.

Mass Effect could be a masterpiece. Instead it is a very good series with a terrible ending. The right thing to do, for the integrity and legacy of the series and for the fans is to redo the ending of ME3 as well as fix a couple of other missteps in the game (the Rachni being present no matter what you do, Tali not getting a proper reveal, etc.).

After all, Bioware did this for the Mass Effect novel - Mass Effect: Deception. Or maybe they should have just left it full of plot holes and inconsistencies...

Your argument has several flaws, none of the stories mentioned had their endings completely rewritten.

J. R. R. Tolkien did revise and edit parts of The Hobbit several times, but frankly this is completely normal, Authors routinely make minor changes to their books to fix small issues and inconsistencies with later chapters of the story.

Sir Aurthur Conan Doyle did not rewrite the ending of The Final Problem at all, it is still as it was originally written. Doyle simply utilized the vagueness of The Final Problem's ending to his advantage in bringing Holmes back to life.

CD Project Red are not rewriting the ending of the Witcher 2, they're simply expanding the final chapter to bring better clarification to the existing ending.

[rivqa]

Epiph1 wrote...

I just worked out what is really bothering me about the the artistic angle defense.

Monet, Mozart, Picasso, Austen, Dickens etc are all considered to be great artists not because they told us they were, but because the populace decreed it to be the case. "Great Art" isn't something you create and then tell people you made, it simply becomes and withstands the passage of time.

Arrogance is the lowest form of self-publicity Bioware.

This bothers me too. Most artists I know (and I actually know quite a few!) refer to themselves as musicians, writers, painters etc. They NEVER call themselves artists because they're not pretentious. Implications... unpleasant.

[lillitheris]

Geepers, people. The definition of art is a distraction, and will just bog you down (as evidenced by these countless threads about it). Accepting that games in general are art allows you to make the real argument.

The real argument: Mass Effect 3 is INCOMPLETE. The artists responsible for it were not given opportunity to finish it. There's as much justification asking for it to be fixed as if someone was peddling the Mona Lisa before Leo painted the lips. Artistic integrity only applies to completed works.

(And yes, I do think that games are art, just as much as any story is. Moreso, perhaps. Art is any work produced to express one's feelings and/or intended to evoke feelings in observers. Sometimes things where it's not intended, but does anyway. And yes, I think artistic integrity is important. Trying to evaluate the quality of a work of art is yet another axis, and also mostly irrelevant here.)

Modifié par lillitheris, 25 mars 2012 - 12:26 .

[eddieoctane]

Star fury wrote...

I like an example with Arthur Conan Doyle. Even British KING asked the author about death of Sherlock Holmes. So Conan Doyle was forced to resurrect Holmes.

Well, Canada is a commonwealth country. Maybe if we could get William or Harry on our side....

[BadgerladDK]

Lanceare wrote...

syroz wrote...

CDprojekt is the new bioware, they really rocks. If only they could do some SF

They are working on a new Sci-Fi IP alongside the Witcher series. I can't wait!

Ooooh, now that is interesting. I enjoyed TW and TW2 ok, but the fantasy setting is really a very, very distant second place to sci-fi for me. Will also be interesting to see how they deal with creating their own universe, since with the witcher they've enherited a *very* detailed setting from the books.

That's one thing Bioware's always done well, despite my misgivings about what they've done to the ME universe.

[Dominator24]

Larg_Kellein wrote...

Lanceare wrote...

syroz wrote...

CDprojekt is the new bioware, they really rocks. If only they could do some SF

They are working on a new Sci-Fi IP alongside the Witcher series. I can't wait!

Ooooh, now that is interesting. I enjoyed TW and TW2 ok, but the fantasy setting is really a very, very distant second place to sci-fi for me. Will also be interesting to see how they deal with creating their own universe, since with the witcher they've enherited a *very* detailed setting from the books.

That's one thing Bioware's always done well, despite my misgivings about what they've done to the ME universe.

Oh that is something I didn't knew.
I love Witcher 1&2 and (I loved it even before it was in game form).The second game was just superb.

CDProject maikng a Sci-Fi is (if its true) like a dream come true. I'd love to see what they can do in othere setings, I just hope the tone will stay as grim down to earth as it was in Witcher( I don't want no cookie cuter)

Modifié par Dominator24, 25 mars 2012 - 02:05 .

[LPPrince]

Mock The Week-

Next topic: Games that won't exist, but totally should.

*Frankie Boyle walks to the microphone*

Frankie Boyle- "CDProjekt's next title-

Mass Effect 4."

*crowd cheers*

[ZiegenkonigIII]

luzburg wrote...

Eivuwan wrote...

Artistic integrity is just an excuse for not correcting your mistakes.

agreed!

Yep!

[Reciever80]

Great point, OP. I completely agree with what you're saying and I sincerely hope that they do something about this ending.

If they charge for the ending, I might throw this desk out the window. Unless it's really freakin' good, then I'll just be pissed.

[Ruari]

Dominator24 wrote...

Larg_Kellein wrote...

Lanceare wrote...

syroz wrote...

CDprojekt is the new bioware, they really rocks. If only they could do some SF

They are working on a new Sci-Fi IP alongside the Witcher series. I can't wait!

Ooooh, now that is interesting. I enjoyed TW and TW2 ok, but the fantasy setting is really a very, very distant second place to sci-fi for me. Will also be interesting to see how they deal with creating their own universe, since with the witcher they've enherited a *very* detailed setting from the books.

That's one thing Bioware's always done well, despite my misgivings about what they've done to the ME universe.

Oh that is something I didn't knew.
I love Witcher 1&2 and (I loved it even before it was in game form).The second game was just superb.

CDProject maikng a Sci-Fi is (if its true) like a dream come true. I'd love to see what they can do in othere setings, I just hope the tone will stay as grim down to earth as it was in Witcher( I don't want no cookie cuter)

My favorite/most hated Youtube video ever was a scene from the Witcher 2, and the author had put the title as "reveal trailer for Dragon Age 3." I couldn't help but just laugh at all the souls who thought it was true. "Oh look at those graphics! THEY'RE AMAZING. Look what we can look forward to in the years to come!"

Yeah, despite being from Europe I'm pretty sure CD Project is the one who has taken over my heart (replacing Bioware). They actually try to make the graphics the best possible (makes DA look like crap and even ME3 barely came up to it), and their stories have actual consequences that can be felt within the game. As in an entire city is cut off from you if you make one decision. So you get to replay the game and experience a totally different side of the story.

So back on topic: Yes. Game companies can fix their products. All it takes is courage and pride in providing the best product you can possibly make. Sadly I think this all comes down to greed.

[vorianxavier]

Great points OP, plenty of works have been tinkered with post-release and often for the better....but wait. The rachni mission happens even if you killed the queen in ME1? Seriously? <_< It seems my canon Shepard made just the right choices to mask a lot of the game's flaws...

[Auralius Carolus]

VERY few artistic endevours are perfect upon genesis; they often evolve in the story-teller's/artists mind, and then again on paper. This process can take years for truly passionate authors who favor novel or epic sized tales. Games are probably the most evolutionary of all artistic venues, as they have so many aspects and many are subject to change via patches, DLC, expansions, and sequals.

But on CDProjekt RED- they are not so much the artistic source of "The Witcher" as they are responsible for rehashing the tale on a new platform. The Witcher was largely a composite of various events in the novels, which became it's own animal in The Witcher 2. As of last check, The Witcher video games aren't even considered canon.