208 réponses à ce sujet

[JudasMesiah]

This whole debacle over the ending of ME3 has left me with a bad taste in my mouth due to the fact that some people out there, a very vocal division of the gaming community (like a unhealing, puss infested wound) have decided to stick their nose into no one else's buisness. 
This whole Take Back Mass Effect movement is just an attempt by a "entitled" few to (no pun intended) take back what they think are rightfully theirs. But here's the kicker. What Is To Take Back ?.
From what I can see none of of you wrote it, None of you did the art for it, None of you did the design for it and definitely NONE of you did the programming for it. So what to take back ? NOTHING!

As a art to be truly consider art (at least from my definition of art) should be left on the device of the artist and must not be influence or intervend by any outside influences, sure the artist can take outside influences (like players feedback) but that must not interfere with the art what so ever. 
So why and what gave the right to TBME movement to (what I see is) BULLY Bioware into changing there're art ? What entitles them to tell Bioware that their art is not good enough and should be change ?

Like them I hated the ending. But like I won't tell Vincent Van Gogh to change Starry Night so it can be brighter and have spaceships or tell Beethoven to get Lady Gaga to perform/sing in String Quartet No.14 and Im definitely won't tell Peter Jackson or J.R.R Tolkien to change the ending of the Lord of the Rings series. I simply won't.

Let's wind the clock back two years ago when a indignatous, useless old fart by the name of Roger Ebert wrote in his blog that "Video games cannot be art", I'm one of those who opposed that notion and called out Ebert for his bias. Well thanks to the *movement* and Bioware for bowing to their bullying I don't think so.

Not anymore.

PS: This is my two cents on the whole debacle and the results of it. Take it or leave it but I won't argue,sway or bullied into changing my opinion.

[Tazzmission]

oh look this again........................................

Are video games art? Ask the Smithsonian...


A new exhibit at the American Art Museum in Washington, D.C., just might settle a decades-old debate about the artistic merit of video games
Two years ago, Roger Ebert famously ranted that "video games can never be art." But today, video games seem to be receiving "recognition as a legitimate and significant form of art," says Chad Sapieha at Canada's Globe and Mail. The Smithsonian, the world's largest museum and research institution, has opened an exhibit at the American Art Museum in Washington, D.C., titled "The Art of Video Games: From Pac-Man to Mass Effect." With the Smithsonian on board, is the debate settled once and for all?
This settles it: Of course video games are art, says Kate Cox at Kotaku. And a visit to the museum proves it. The entire atmosphere of the American Art Museum, from the giant marble columns to the curious patrons, says: "This is the home of Serious Art." There's something "sacred about the space where over two centuries' worth of painting, sculpture, folk art, and more are displayed." And guess what: Seeing a "lovely and iconic" screenshot from Mass Effect 2 alongside those classic pieces just feels right.
"I played Myst at the museum: Visiting 'The Art of Video Games'"
But the exhibit doesn't make its case: "The Art of Video Games" is a "technologically impressive but intellectually inert exhibition," says Phillip Kennicott at The Washington Post. It would certainly make a worthwhile addition to a technology or history museum, but it has no business in an institution devoted to art. The exhibit "fails to grapple with questions about the definition and boundaries of art." Instead, displays about the evolution of graphics and interactivity focus too much on history and technical achievement. This is just another instance of a society that "would rather everything be art than anyone feel excluded from the realms of sanctified culture."
"In 'The Art of Video Games'"
Who knows? Art is so subjective: This exhibit is a boon to the "video games are art" cheerleaders, says Darren Franich at Entertainment Weekly, but "I've always thought it was pointless to argue" about this. After all, "art" may be the most loosely-defined word we have. A skilled athlete is described as an artist on the field. Virginia Woolf wrote about women who planned parties as a form of art. "Really, everyone could be called an 'artist.'"
"The Smithsonian will convince you that video games are art"

http://news.yahoo.co...-132000652.html

[Timstuff]

Video games are art. The problem is they are a new kind of art, and a lot of people fail to understand the medium's strengths and weaknesses so they just compare them to art forms that they are already familiar with. Obviously, that doesn't work, but people keep doing it which is why we either hear "video games aren't art" or "video games are art, which is why they have to be more like books or movies to be good."

Modifié par Timstuff, 25 mars 2012 - 09:43 .

[rozar]

You do realize that it is very probable that many paintings we consider art, where influenced by people who commisioned the painting. they said they wan't a less starry sky or extra bright colors here and there, and it still is art.

[rozar]

Crap, clicked the quote instead of edit. ignore this.

Modifié par rozar, 25 mars 2012 - 09:44 .

[Vaktathi]

Video games very much *are* art.

The problem with people arguing that changing the ending is wrong from an artistic integrity perspective is because they either don't understand the nature of that art or the issue at hand.


Video games are art as a product. They are not purely an expression of the creators feelings/ideas. They are crafted for sale, to fulfill consumer demand. The art comes from how the product fulfills that consumer demand. If it fails to fulfill the consumer demand, then it fails as a product and as a work of art. Thus, they should be changed.

One will also notice that games are routinely changed to suit business needs. I can't think of a single game where something wasn't compromised in some way to suite a business need.

On top of that, even as art, the ME3 ending fails. It does not live up to the artistic intent that dominated the ME series up until the last 5 minutes of the end of ME3, and what results is a segment that feels like it was written by a different team for a different game and massively violates the reader-writer contract. This should be all that's needed to change the ending based on any artistic argument.

Modifié par Vaktathi, 25 mars 2012 - 09:48 .

[Bratinov]

Popular franchises are not art, they are commercial diarrhea and will become anything in order to appeal to everyone.
Bioware products are losing their identity imho.

[FatalX7.0]

Music, writing, storytelling, painting, drawing, cinematography, sculpting, etc.

Many traditional art forms go into making a video game. Video games are an expressive and artistic medium.

Paintings, drawings and sculptures are commissioned, bought, sold and traded every day.

Music and books are bought and sold every day.

Cinematography, movies, I shouldn't need to go further than that.

All art is bought and sold. For most artists, the sole purpose is money, it always has been.

Not only were video games officially declared art several years ago, but anything in the world can be art.

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

*EDIT*

But Video Games are also a collaboration with the fans. Bioware has called us Co-Creators, and has said that we have helped to shape their games. They have a feedback thread on this board where they ask for our suggestions on things that can be changed.

Other game companies do this too.

Gabe Newell, co-founded of Valve, said that listening to your fans is the best thing that a game company can do. I wish I had the actual quote, though, I know a few people who have it in their sig, but I do not know their names.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, writer of Sherlock homes back in the 1800-1900's, changed his story, brought Sherlock Holme's back to life because of fan outcry. Even his mother told him not to kill him off.

Modifié par FatalX7.0, 25 mars 2012 - 09:53 .

[SeventyOne]

Sometimes art in videogames is bad. That seems to have happened on the finale of ME3.

[JudasMesiah]

Tazzmission wrote...

oh look this again........................................

Are video games art? Ask the Smithsonian...


A new exhibit at the American Art Museum in Washington, D.C., just might settle a decades-old debate about the artistic merit of video games
Two years ago, Roger Ebert famously ranted that "video games can never be art." But today, video games seem to be receiving "recognition as a legitimate and significant form of art," says Chad Sapieha at Canada's Globe and Mail. The Smithsonian, the world's largest museum and research institution, has opened an exhibit at the American Art Museum in Washington, D.C., titled "The Art of Video Games: From Pac-Man to Mass Effect." With the Smithsonian on board, is the debate settled once and for all?
This settles it: Of course video games are art, says Kate Cox at Kotaku. And a visit to the museum proves it. The entire atmosphere of the American Art Museum, from the giant marble columns to the curious patrons, says: "This is the home of Serious Art." There's something "sacred about the space where over two centuries' worth of painting, sculpture, folk art, and more are displayed." And guess what: Seeing a "lovely and iconic" screenshot from Mass Effect 2 alongside those classic pieces just feels right.
"I played Myst at the museum: Visiting 'The Art of Video Games'"
But the exhibit doesn't make its case: "The Art of Video Games" is a "technologically impressive but intellectually inert exhibition," says Phillip Kennicott at The Washington Post. It would certainly make a worthwhile addition to a technology or history museum, but it has no business in an institution devoted to art. The exhibit "fails to grapple with questions about the definition and boundaries of art." Instead, displays about the evolution of graphics and interactivity focus too much on history and technical achievement. This is just another instance of a society that "would rather everything be art than anyone feel excluded from the realms of sanctified culture."
"In 'The Art of Video Games'"
Who knows? Art is so subjective: This exhibit is a boon to the "video games are art" cheerleaders, says Darren Franich at Entertainment Weekly, but "I've always thought it was pointless to argue" about this. After all, "art" may be the most loosely-defined word we have. A skilled athlete is described as an artist on the field. Virginia Woolf wrote about women who planned parties as a form of art. "Really, everyone could be called an 'artist.'"
"The Smithsonian will convince you that video games are art"

http://news.yahoo.co...-132000652.html

I can see your point and see what the Smithsonian is doing. But what I'm trying to say is Bioware is tainting it's own artistic vision to satisfy the bullies and with what's happening right now.
Will this situation affect videogames (not just Bioware's products) in the future.

[BeefoTheBold]

I love how the Bioware zealot fans on the board all think it is a "few" people who are ticked off about Bioware. WE'RE the vocal minority. User ratings on metacritic be damned. Casual glance at any particular thread on the Bioware boards be damned.

It's pretty obvious that the people who ARE happy with Bioware right now are the vocal minority, not the other way around.

Edit: And by the way, the answer to the question "what gives people the right to tell Bioware to change their crap ending?"

Wallets. Cash. The fact we're paying for the game and if we think the "art" sucks, then we can spend our money on different "art".

Bioware is not Leonardo DaVinci here.

Modifié par BeefoTheBold, 25 mars 2012 - 10:02 .

[FatalX7.0]

BeefoTheBold wrote...

I love how the Bioware zealot fans on the board all thing it is a "few" people who are ticked off about Bioware. WE'RE the vocal minority. User ratings on metacritic be damned. Casual glance at any particular thread on the Bioware boards be damned.

It's pretty obvious that the people who ARE happy with Bioware right now are the vocal minority, not the other way around.

Edit: And by the way, the answer to the question "what gives people the right to tell Bioware to change their crap ending?"

Wallets. Cash. The fact we're paying for the game and if we think the "art" sucks, then we can spend our money on different "art".

Bioware is not Leonardo DaVinci here.

And when Bioware asks us what could be changed, we still have no right to say what can be changed?

Why do people overlook this?

[Han Shot First]

Da Vinci didn't invite strangers in off the street to take a paint brush and add to the Mona Lisa. If the Mona Lisa were created like the Mass Effect games, he would have handed his brush to a random stranger and allowed the stranger to decide what color his subject's hair or dress was, or to make changes to her facial features.

Mass Effect is a roleplaying game. While the writers may create the basic framework for the story, the players have always determined how the story played out within that framework. If Mass Effect is art, it is participatory art where the story is crafted by the players as well as the writers.

In short, the argument that players are anti-art in criticizing the ending or asking for it to be changed, simply does not hold any water.

[JudasMesiah]

rozar wrote...

You do realize that it is very probable that many paintings we consider art, where influenced by people who commisioned the painting. they said they wan't a less starry sky or extra bright colors here and there, and it still is art.

Van Gohg didn't sold a single painting when he was alive. His paintings where sold post-humoursly.

FatalX7.0 wrote...


*EDIT*

But Video Games are also a collaboration with the fans. Bioware has called us Co-Creators, and has said that we have helped to shape their games. They have a feedback thread on this board where they ask for our suggestions on things that can be changed.

Other game companies do this too.

Gabe Newell, co-founded of Valve, said that listening to your fans is the best thing that a game company can do. I wish I had the actual quote, though, I know a few people who have it in their sig, but I do not know their names.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, writer of Sherlock homes back in the 1800-1900's, changed his story, brought Sherlock Holme's back to life because of fan outcry. Even his mother told him not to kill him off.

 The Sherlock Holmes series is considered by most literary historians as a form of literary kitsh and have you played Shadow of the Colosus ?.
I can tell you with certainty that team ICO coudn't give a damn about what their fans think and yet they created a masterpiece of a game.

[FatalX7.0]

JudasMesiah wrote...

rozar wrote...

You do realize that it is very probable that many paintings we consider art, where influenced by people who commisioned the painting. they said they wan't a less starry sky or extra bright colors here and there, and it still is art.

Van Gohg didn't sold a single painting when he was alive. His paintings where sold post-humoursly.

FatalX7.0 wrote...


*EDIT*

But Video Games are also a collaboration with the fans. Bioware has called us Co-Creators, and has said that we have helped to shape their games. They have a feedback thread on this board where they ask for our suggestions on things that can be changed.

Other game companies do this too.

Gabe Newell, co-founded of Valve, said that listening to your fans is the best thing that a game company can do. I wish I had the actual quote, though, I know a few people who have it in their sig, but I do not know their names.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, writer of Sherlock homes back in the 1800-1900's, changed his story, brought Sherlock Holme's back to life because of fan outcry. Even his mother told him not to kill him off.

 The Sherlock Holmes series is considered by most literary historians as a form of literary kitsh and have you played Shadow of the Colosus ?.
I can tell you with certainty that team ICO coudn't give a damn about what their fans think and yet they created a masterpiece of a game.

Uh.

And?

[Dridengx]

Video games have already been proven to be art and treated as art lol if you still are debating this you are stuck in the past

Modifié par Dridengx, 25 mars 2012 - 10:15 .

[JudasMesiah]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

JudasMesiah wrote...

rozar wrote...

You do realize that it is very probable that many paintings we consider art, where influenced by people who commisioned the painting. they said they wan't a less starry sky or extra bright colors here and there, and it still is art.

Van Gohg didn't sold a single painting when he was alive. His paintings where sold post-humoursly.

FatalX7.0 wrote...


*EDIT*

But Video Games are also a collaboration with the fans. Bioware has called us Co-Creators, and has said that we have helped to shape their games. They have a feedback thread on this board where they ask for our suggestions on things that can be changed.

Other game companies do this too.

Gabe Newell, co-founded of Valve, said that listening to your fans is the best thing that a game company can do. I wish I had the actual quote, though, I know a few people who have it in their sig, but I do not know their names.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, writer of Sherlock homes back in the 1800-1900's, changed his story, brought Sherlock Holme's back to life because of fan outcry. Even his mother told him not to kill him off.

 The Sherlock Holmes series is considered by most literary historians as a form of literary kitsh and have you played Shadow of the Colosus ?.
I can tell you with certainty that team ICO coudn't give a damn about what their fans think and yet they created a masterpiece of a game.

Uh.

And?

I can tell you a hand full of titles like Braid, Ico. Little Big Planet, Bioshock, Heavy Rain, Journey, heck even the original Super Mario Bros is considered a fine example of medium w/out fan input.

Dridengx wrote...

Video games have already been proven to be art and treated as art lol if you still are debating this you are stuck in the past

I might be so, But if the medium would have the slithest chance to be considered art then as fans of the art we should at least stop sticking our colective noses into the artist buisness.

[Madmoe77]

JudasMesiah wrote...

This whole debacle over the ending of ME3 has left me with a bad taste in my mouth due to the fact that some people out there, a very vocal division of the gaming community (like a unhealing, puss infested wound) have decided to stick their nose into no one else's buisness. 
This whole Take Back Mass Effect movement is just an attempt by a "entitled" few to (no pun intended) take back what they think are rightfully theirs. But here's the kicker. What Is To Take Back ?.
From what I can see none of of you wrote it, None of you did the art for it, None of you did the design for it and definitely NONE of you did the programming for it. So what to take back ? NOTHING!

As a art to be truly consider art (at least from my definition of art) should be left on the device of the artist and must not be influence or intervend by any outside influences, sure the artist can take outside influences (like players feedback) but that must not interfere with the art what so ever. 
So why and what gave the right to TBME movement to (what I see is) BULLY Bioware into changing there're art ? What entitles them to tell Bioware that their art is not good enough and should be change ?

Like them I hated the ending. But like I won't tell Vincent Van Gogh to change Starry Night so it can be brighter and have spaceships or tell Beethoven to get Lady Gaga to perform/sing in String Quartet No.14 and Im definitely won't tell Peter Jackson or J.R.R Tolkien to change the ending of the Lord of the Rings series. I simply won't.

Let's wind the clock back two years ago when a indignatous, useless old fart by the name of Roger Ebert wrote in his blog that "Video games cannot be art", I'm one of those who opposed that notion and called out Ebert for his bias. Well thanks to the *movement* and Bioware for bowing to their bullying I don't think so.

Not anymore.

PS: This is my two cents on the whole debacle and the results of it. Take it or leave it but I won't argue,sway or bullied into changing my opinion.

Let's talk Van Gogh shall we! Vincent Van Gogh was a highly unsuccesful artist for his time. His brother went bankrupt trying to sell his work while Vincent went insane. Even when Vincent had any success it was generally in the form of giving his work away to pay for booze and shelter. One of the most deciding factors for his failure was the utter lack of the ability to take criticism. Vincent broke rules and molds that failed for his time. It wasn't until his suicide and many years later that anyone found his work appealing and that can be debated as a side effect of his untimely death.

People are still finding his work today in old attics where he gave his work away and people stowed them away because they weren't considered art. Now if you want to argue how great he is today-I must counter argue if it weren't for a select few paying millions for his work then his work would remain the same. Then we have to address quantity. What makes his work worth so much is the fact that they weren't mass produced. Although he is accredited with over 70 self portraits and painted many pieces, his work was never mass produced until the 20th century. Which brings me to my closing argument that Mass Effect may be considered a creative work but it is produced like anything other product for distribution. What people also fail in general to do is assign the fact that they deliberately leave themselves room to alter their work with DLC! 

Rarity drives value. These titles are not rare. Ignoring the details of such things just tears your, 'wouldn't ask Van Gogh to change anything' stance to shreds.  

I won't even touch the idea that you think disagreeing with someone is bullying. That is intellectually dishonest and something you should consider working on. 

*Edit to add: I am also a fine artist professionally with a college degree in art and art history. I have been commissioned many times for work that took many reworks to please the customer. The entire art argument of what is and isn't is utterly worthless here. It is some indefensible strawman that will try and subvert the real problem with game industries becoming barons with little to no repercussions. Not many products lose almost all of their pre-owded value as quick as an unopened video game. The very rules are set up against the consumer. What has also been ignored is that they somehow believe their consumer base is just children even though their titles are rated mature. Not a single adult on these boards hasn't had to argue a bill or tow the line with some retailer, business, or agency. This is business plain and simple. Feelings have little to do with it. 

Modifié par Madmoe77, 25 mars 2012 - 10:39 .

[FatalX7.0]

JudasMesiah wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

JudasMesiah wrote...

rozar wrote...

You do realize that it is very probable that many paintings we consider art, where influenced by people who commisioned the painting. they said they wan't a less starry sky or extra bright colors here and there, and it still is art.

Van Gohg didn't sold a single painting when he was alive. His paintings where sold post-humoursly.

FatalX7.0 wrote...


*EDIT*

But Video Games are also a collaboration with the fans. Bioware has called us Co-Creators, and has said that we have helped to shape their games. They have a feedback thread on this board where they ask for our suggestions on things that can be changed.

Other game companies do this too.

Gabe Newell, co-founded of Valve, said that listening to your fans is the best thing that a game company can do. I wish I had the actual quote, though, I know a few people who have it in their sig, but I do not know their names.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, writer of Sherlock homes back in the 1800-1900's, changed his story, brought Sherlock Holme's back to life because of fan outcry. Even his mother told him not to kill him off.

 The Sherlock Holmes series is considered by most literary historians as a form of literary kitsh and have you played Shadow of the Colosus ?.
I can tell you with certainty that team ICO coudn't give a damn about what their fans think and yet they created a masterpiece of a game.

Uh.

And?

I can tell you a hand full of titles like Braid, Ico. Little Big Planet, Bioshock, Heavy Rain, Journey, heck even the original Super Mario Bros is considered a fine example of medium w/out fan input.

Dridengx wrote...

Video games have already been proven to be art and treated as art lol if you still are debating this you are stuck in the past

I might be so, But if the medium would have the slithest chance to be considered art then as fans of the art we should at least stop sticking our colective noses into the artist buisness.

And what's your point?

I never said that they had to listen, just that they do, and others do.

I also never said that games are bad if they don't.

Modifié par FatalX7.0, 25 mars 2012 - 10:34 .

[Damien Shepherd]

US Supreme Court Votes in Favor of Protecting Video Games As Art

Read more: http://technorati.co.../#ixzz1q7eEU1MJ

It was voted 7-2 last june, your free to your own opinion just know your gonna have a hell of a time convincing anyone here especially since it's the law of the land.

Videogames are malleable art and as such can be changed, mmo's do it all the time based on player feedback, bioware has told us several times that we were part of the creative process, Casey Hudson himself even went as far to say we were co-creators of ME3, so even if it is undeniably art we are not in the wrong to ask for change to the endings.

[jimfixedit]

JudasMesiah wrote...

 I can see your point and see what the Smithsonian is doing. But what I'm trying to say is Bioware is tainting it's own artistic vision to satisfy the bullies and with what's happening right now.
Will this situation affect videogames (not just Bioware's products) in the future.

I kind of agree with this but not completely.
If Bioware had stuck the original story laid out at the beginning regarding Dark Energy etc, and people complained, then yes the artistic vision arguement could hold water.

However it was Bioware that changed their own vision half way through and rolled out the current story.
You can't have it both ways.

If JK Rowling has used the last chapter of the Harry potter series to say that actually magic doesn't exist, HP isn't really a wizard, it's all just clever physics and chemistry, then the whole world would have been screaming for her blood.
This may have happened, I don't know. I haven't read the books or watched the films. Magic isn't my thing. I read Einstein and Hawking for fun.

Turning a science based franchise to magic at the end is not really a defensible "artistic vision".

Just my 2 cents.

[DaGhostDS]

Vaktathi wrote...

Video games very much *are* art.

The problem with people arguing that changing the ending is wrong from an artistic integrity perspective is because they either don't understand the nature of that art or the issue at hand.


Video games are art as a product. They are not purely an expression of the creators feelings/ideas. They are crafted for sale, to fulfill consumer demand. The art comes from how the product fulfills that consumer demand. If it fails to fulfill the consumer demand, then it fails as a product and as a work of art. Thus, they should be changed.

One will also notice that games are routinely changed to suit business needs. I can't think of a single game where something wasn't compromised in some way to suite a business need.

On top of that, even as art, the ME3 ending fails. It does not live up to the artistic intent that dominated the ME series up until the last 5 minutes of the end of ME3, and what results is a segment that feels like it was written by a different team for a different game and massively violates the reader-writer contract. This should be all that's needed to change the ending based on any artistic argument.

In other words the ending were like Michelangelo decided that the last part of the chapel Sixtine ceiling would be done with stickman styled drawing. Nothing is coherent about it.

Modifié par DaGhostDS, 25 mars 2012 - 10:38 .

[Camthalon]

JudasMesiah wrote...and have you played Shadow of the Colosus ?.
I can tell you with certainty that team ICO coudn't give a damn about what their fans think and yet they created a masterpiece of a game.

Never heard of it.  Until you mentioned it.  Obviously it couldn't have been that good.

[FatalX7.0]

Camthalon wrote...

JudasMesiah wrote...and have you played Shadow of the Colosus ?.
I can tell you with certainty that team ICO coudn't give a damn about what their fans think and yet they created a masterpiece of a game.

Never heard of it.  Until you mentioned it.  Obviously it couldn't have been that good.

Now that I think about it, I haven't heard much about it either.