208 réponses à ce sujet

[InvincibleHero]

foo man chew wrote...

Its simple if i purchase it and it didnt deliver what was advertised as the consumer of said product i have every right to ask for change,refund or to refuse to support their company ever again.Why is everybody so sensitive on the pro art side.If you go to a restraunt and order a hamburger with no ketchup and they bring you a hamburger with ketchup by your logic you have no right to ask for them to fix it.Gues what they created it so its art and that argument can be made for every product ever created.Hence mass produced video games should be treated like every other product.

There is a world of difference between an IP and physical product like food. Not everyone agrees the endings need reworked and BW doesn't agree they are flawed, but if your burger has ketchup you can point that right out concretely and relaible to 100% and people will agree with you. It is a difference of opinion and not fact.

[o Ventus]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

*assuming he did something paricularly impressive in carving David*

If they were sold to generate profit, yes.

I think I see your stance. Once someone seeks to make a living off of something like painting or sculpting, you no longer consider it art?

In it's most basic and general form, sure. Except no one will be arsed into recreating a painting or sculpture millions of times, unlike video games or DVD's or Blu-Rays.

[CELL55]

CELL55 wrote...

I think that when a video game is created, it's art. When a video game is sold, it's a product. When promises are made about a video game that are patently false, it's lying.

When a painter paints a painting, it's art. When a painting is sold, it's a product. When a painter promises to paint a picture of apples, but when sold turns out to be bananas, it's lying.

Building up on my previous post (quoted for convenience), video games such as Mass Effect are built from the ground-up to be sold. As far as we know, Bioware doesn't spend large amounts of resources on games that won't ever get revenue. Mass Effect has always been planned as a marketable product. In order to sell this product, the Bioware team creates 'art' that people will consider a worthwhile purchase. A painter paints a picture of fruit because they know a picture of fruit will sell. This type of art does not exist in a vacuum; the consumer is a considered factor from the beginning of the artistic process.
Back to the example, a painter promises to paint a picture of fruit, and people like pictures of fruit, so they buy the picture based on a trust of the painter. The consumer takes the painting home, unwraps it, and discovers that they have a picture of vegetables. NO ONE LIKES PICTURES OF VEGETABLES. Trust has been broken, and the customer has earned the right to complain that what they purchased is not what they were promised.
     Sorry if that metaphor is incredibly obtuse; it's 2 AM, my time. 

[wolfstanus]

o Ventus wrote...

RocketManSR2 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Michelangelo wasn't carving millions of copies of David, was he?

No, but what if the statue had molds created of it and millions of copies were reproduced from them. Does that diminish what Michelangelo had accomplished?

*assuming he did something paricularly impressive in carving David*
If they were sold to generate profit, yes.

So he didn't spend a good portion of his life working as his back painting a ceiling for the church and earning a ****load of money at the same time? Dame good thing he didn't do that. That's not art

[Gabey5]

Yes they can be but like film there are crappy ones too.

Take shawshank redemption vs Jack and Jill

Just because it can be art does not mean it cannot be changed or critcicized.

many films have alternate endings,directors cuts, extended versions etc.

[RocketManSR2]

o Ventus wrote...

In it's most basic and general form, sure. Except no one will be arsed into recreating a painting or sculpture millions of times, unlike video games or DVD's or Blu-Rays.

Whatever we may think of ME3, the team spent 2 years crafting it. Just because modern technology has made it easy to mass produce things doesn't mean the original code wasn't art.

Modifié par RocketManSR2, 26 mars 2012 - 06:12 .

[foo man chew]

InvincibleHero wrote...

foo man chew wrote...

Its simple if i purchase it and it didnt deliver what was advertised as the consumer of said product i have every right to ask for change,refund or to refuse to support their company ever again.Why is everybody so sensitive on the pro art side.If you go to a restraunt and order a hamburger with no ketchup and they bring you a hamburger with ketchup by your logic you have no right to ask for them to fix it.Gues what they created it so its art and that argument can be made for every product ever created.Hence mass produced video games should be treated like every other product.

There is a world of difference between an IP and physical product like food. Not everyone agrees the endings need reworked and BW doesn't agree they are flawed, but if your burger has ketchup you can point that right out concretely and relaible to 100% and people will agree with you. It is a difference of opinion and not fact.

Wrong bioware marketed the game with 16 endings,no abc ending and didnt deliver.They had no problem reaping the profits of how they marketed it and now that consumers want what was advertised they want to hide behind the art argument.Im glad people like the endings i never said they should take them out but the should live up to what they advertised for the people that didnt like them.

[o Ventus]

wolfstanus wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

RocketManSR2 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Michelangelo wasn't carving millions of copies of David, was he?

No, but what if the statue had molds created of it and millions of copies were reproduced from them. Does that diminish what Michelangelo had accomplished?

*assuming he did something paricularly impressive in carving David*
If they were sold to generate profit, yes.

So he didn't spend a good portion of his life working as his back painting a ceiling for the church and earning a ****load of money at the same time? Dame good thing he didn't do that. That's not art

There's only 1 Sistine Chapel.

There are a couple million copies of ME3.

[o Ventus]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

In it's most basic and general form, sure. Except no one will be arsed into recreating a painting or sculpture millions of times, unlike video games or DVD's or Blu-Rays.

Whatever we may think of ME3, the team spent 2 years crafting it. Just because modern technology has made it easy to mass produce things doesn't mean the original code wasn't art.

Even then, the original code was developed with the express interest of making the game and generating revenue.

If you make a painting because you truly like to do it and you aren't being forced into anything, then it's art. Even if you sell it to a collector or an exhibit, it still technically qualifies as art, but that's more or less subjective at that point.

If you make it to make money off of it, then it's a product/service from the get-go.

[VictoriousMarch]

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.

Some games could be considered art... in their own way... If I were to compare Mass Effect to Art though I would compare the first two games as being done in one style of art... Maybe like the Renaissance era... Mass effect 3 would be the same, except one corner of the work is done as an expressionism or an abstract... and poorly... Like say you have the Mona Lisa and instead of her nose there was a giant neon phallus drawn in crayon... thats what the ME3 ending is to me.

Some people would love it... and pay money for it... Unfortunately with ME3 it was really unexpect and we stumbled across it after buying it already...

Modifié par VictoriousMarch, 26 mars 2012 - 06:19 .

[Erode_The_Soul]

o Ventus wrote...
If you make it to make money off of it, then it's a product/service from the get-go.

So commissioned works don't qualify as art, in your opinion?

[RocketManSR2]

o Ventus wrote...

There's only 1 Sistine Chapel.

There are a couple million copies of ME3.

The Lord of the Rings is widely regarded as one of the best book series of all time. It has sold approx. 150 million copies. Mass production is helpful in allowing as many as possible to get their hands on your work. Either that, or Tolkien was one hell of a fast writer.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_books

- Are you really going to tell me none of those works of literature are art simply because they've been reprinted and rereleased countless times throughout the years?

Modifié par RocketManSR2, 26 mars 2012 - 06:21 .

[o Ventus]

Erode_The_Soul wrote...

o Ventus wrote...
If you make it to make money off of it, then it's a product/service from the get-go.

So commissioned works don't qualify as art, in your opinion?

In my opinion, no, because the artist isn't making his/her creation to express something.

[o Ventus]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

There's only 1 Sistine Chapel.

There are a couple million copies of ME3.

The Lord of the Rings is widely regarded as one of the best book series of all time. It has sold approx. 150 million copies. Mass production is helpful in allowing as many as possible to get their hands on your work. Either that, or Tolkien was one hell of a fast writer.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_books

... So? Tolkien may have written it with the intent of creating an indulging fantasy world with rich lore and backdrop, but it eventually became a product.

[Erode_The_Soul]

o Ventus wrote...


In my opinion, no, because the artist isn't making his/her creation to express something.

Hmm....interesting stance. I vehemently disagree, but to each his own I guess.

[o Ventus]

Erode_The_Soul wrote...

o Ventus wrote...


In my opinion, no, because the artist isn't making his/her creation to express something.

Hmm....interesting stance. I vehemently disagree, but to each his own I guess.

Fair enough. Finally, someone civil about it.

[RocketManSR2]

o Ventus wrote...

... So? Tolkien may have written it with the intent of creating an indulging fantasy world with rich lore and backdrop, but it eventually became a product.

Which does nothing to diminish the amazing world he created. It just made it easier for future generations to experience it.

[InvincibleHero]

foo man chew wrote...

Wrong bioware marketed the game with 16 endings,no abc ending and didnt deliver.They had no problem reaping the profits of how they marketed it and now that consumers want what was advertised they want to hide behind the art argument.Im glad people like the endings i never said they should take them out but the should live up to what they advertised for the people that didnt like them.

Did they really say 16 unique endings? If they did you might have some hay there. Come on track record says they give you 2-3 endings and just have variations. They are obviously talking about who lives and dies based on EMS. Might be misleading but not proveably false.

Problem is people are demanding different things. They could address that without any DLC or patch. A great many want less bleak endings.

[o Ventus]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

... So? Tolkien may have written it with the intent of creating an indulging fantasy world with rich lore and backdrop, but it eventually became a product.

Which does nothing to diminish the amazing world he created. It just made it easier for future generations to experience it.

It's still a product (In our time anyway). A damned good product, but a product nonetheless.

[VictoriousMarch]

InvincibleHero wrote...

foo man chew wrote...

Wrong bioware marketed the game with 16 endings,no abc ending and didnt deliver.They had no problem reaping the profits of how they marketed it and now that consumers want what was advertised they want to hide behind the art argument.Im glad people like the endings i never said they should take them out but the should live up to what they advertised for the people that didnt like them.

Did they really say 16 unique endings? If they did you might have some hay there. Come on track record says they give you 2-3 endings and just have variations. They are obviously talking about who lives and dies based on EMS. Might be misleading but not proveably false.

Problem is people are demanding different things. They could address that without any DLC or patch. A great many want less bleak endings.

I think I heard or read the 16 unique endings in one of the pre launch adds... I do recall watching on Pusle last summer this would not be an ABC ending and the Ending would be impacted by your choices... The stuff you did in the game was... which is fine... but the ending had no barring at all with your choices, just your EMS or what ever it is... And you can get that high enough by just playing multiplayer and scanning planets... whoohooo... You can make your 3 quasi endings range from good to bad... good being you actually played the game... bad being you actively tried to sabotage the game and or did not do anything other than primary quests.

Modifié par VictoriousMarch, 26 mars 2012 - 06:31 .

[RocketManSR2]

Wow, I just realized, there is a civil and interesting discussion going on on the BSN.

[wolfstanus]

There's millions of them. Does it make it less art? He ****d himself to the church after all

o Ventus wrote...

wolfstanus wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

RocketManSR2 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Michelangelo wasn't carving millions of copies of David, was he?

No, but what if the statue had molds created of it and millions of copies were reproduced from them. Does that diminish what Michelangelo had accomplished?

*assuming he did something paricularly impressive in carving David*
If they were sold to generate profit, yes.

So he didn't spend a good portion of his life working as his back painting a ceiling for the church and earning a ****load of money at the same time? Dame good thing he didn't do that. That's not art

There's only 1 Sistine Chapel.

There are a couple million copies of ME3.

[RocketManSR2]

o Ventus wrote...

It's still a product (In our time anyway). A damned good product, but a product nonetheless.

When you read those books, you weren't thinking "Wow, this is a great product," you were amazed by Tolkien's talent as a writer and his imagination. I know I couldn't have come up with such a detailed world.

[KevShep]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

It's still a product (In our time anyway). A damned good product, but a product nonetheless.

When you read those books, you weren't thinking "Wow, this is a great product," you were amazed by Tolkien's talent as a writer and his imagination. I know I couldn't have come up with such a detailed world.

I could think of a few thousand people that could have come up with a better ending. Bioware have lost there art on themselves that they so cling to.

[Siegdrifa]

o Ventus wrote...

Erode_The_Soul wrote...

o Ventus wrote...


In my opinion, no, because the artist isn't making his/her creation to express something.

Hmm....interesting stance. I vehemently disagree, but to each his own I guess.

Fair enough. Finally, someone civil about it.

Art start to exist in the eye of those who look at it.

We consider some creation to be art now while a few hundred years ago they weren't.
Some artist have better reputation after their death then during their life time, not because they were unknown, but because their creation wasn't considered as master pieces for their time.

The vision of Art is not static, it change and elvole with the time. If you see art through it, it is, but it doesn't mean it will ring a bell to other.

Art can be objectif or subjective, it can either need lot of work or a few minute to creat it.
There is no rule to etablish art and many rule to etablish art.
If i can put it with word, to considered art for you, it needs to check some case in your list to reach this standard, the thing is, not everydoby have the same check list, that's why art or not art can be hard to gasp, it's not about "can we all agree to what art is please ?" because we are all different, with our life, our experience, our knowledge, so does the view of the artiste, so does art.

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 26 mars 2012 - 06:38 .