706 réponses à ce sujet

[PRC_Heavy_Z]

This whole artistic integrity argument is a load of PR rubbish. Art is subjective.

However, what is not subjective is promising to deliver an epic decision based ending and taking paying customers money while providing the exact opposite. That is just spitting into the faces of the customers whose hard earned money support these developers (and their greedy publishers)

And people can make a happy ending artistic if they wanted to. Whether or not the ending is happy or not is not the determining factor for "artistic integrity". It all depends on execution.

Modifié par PRC_Heavy_Z, 27 mars 2012 - 06:38 .

[aliengmr1]

Zu Long wrote...

Dan Dark wrote...

RamilVenoard wrote...

I must have missed your post about that, or misread it. Perhaps just one different decision that is equally valid at some point in the game (aka doesn't force you to sacrifice someone or break your moral code meaning paragon or renegade). I could see them coexisting quite nicely actually. We are in accord.

Glad to hear it! Like I said, I don't see any reason for it not to be possible for there to be a variety of endings; good, bad, happy, sad, bittersweet, whatever. It looks like the main concern is just implementation, then, which, admittedly, could be tricky... ...kinda hate to say it, but I'm drawing a blank. I figure there should be pros and cons for both; I'm just having trouble trying to figure out how to balance them - if you choose to save yourself, something else should be lost...

...Hmm... If they're going to stick with the whole Crucible thing, maybe it takes longer to activate if you want Shepard to live, since it takes longer to calibrate and focus, so it only kills the Reapers - in that time, though, the Reapers are still tearing the fleets apart, whereas if you activate it immediately, the Reapers will be stopped right then and there, but since the energy isn't as focused, it will kill Shepard in the process? I'm not thrilled with this idea, but then again, that might be a reason it would work - if you're half-dead already anyway, why risk letting so many more potentially die, just to try to save your own skin? It would certainly play up the sacrifice route as a good choice, I'd think.

I think it would be even easier than that. If you want a simple way to determine whether shep lives or dies, have her discuss her plans after the war with one of the characters just prior to the final battle. If your shepard responds with something definite and life-affirming, your Shepard survives the ending into whatever sort of universe you built. If your shepard says something vague and fatalistic, you die in dramatic fashion. Simple and easy, and once again, your choice determines the outcome.

Exactly what I was thinking. Tie it to the LI. Cortez lives if you give him a reason to live. Same could be said for Shep.

[Iconoclaste]

RockSW wrote...

if you haven't figured out that we don't just want a happy ending, thats pretty retarded.

I read a lot of times that "saving the galaxy" was a good ending!

I get it : why not asking for a "better" ending? Ha! There we go!...

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 27 mars 2012 - 06:47 .

[oblique9]

I'd consider Shep reuniting with Tali, alive, to be a happy ending.

The rest of the universe can burn for all I care, as long as I get Tali in the end!

*hides*

[Sangheili_1337]

The conclusions to the Genopage and Geth-Quarian story arcs are art, the endings are not. Sacrifice was certainly present in the first two without ridiculous plot holes, inconsistencies, and choice taken out of the players hands. Artistic vision are not exclusive from satisfying outcomes.

Modifié par Sangheili_1337, 27 mars 2012 - 06:48 .

[Dan Dark]

aliengmr1 wrote...

Zu Long wrote...

Dan Dark wrote...

RamilVenoard wrote...

I must have missed your post about that, or misread it. Perhaps just one different decision that is equally valid at some point in the game (aka doesn't force you to sacrifice someone or break your moral code meaning paragon or renegade). I could see them coexisting quite nicely actually. We are in accord.

Glad to hear it! Like I said, I don't see any reason for it not to be possible for there to be a variety of endings; good, bad, happy, sad, bittersweet, whatever. It looks like the main concern is just implementation, then, which, admittedly, could be tricky... ...kinda hate to say it, but I'm drawing a blank. I figure there should be pros and cons for both; I'm just having trouble trying to figure out how to balance them - if you choose to save yourself, something else should be lost...

...Hmm... If they're going to stick with the whole Crucible thing, maybe it takes longer to activate if you want Shepard to live, since it takes longer to calibrate and focus, so it only kills the Reapers - in that time, though, the Reapers are still tearing the fleets apart, whereas if you activate it immediately, the Reapers will be stopped right then and there, but since the energy isn't as focused, it will kill Shepard in the process? I'm not thrilled with this idea, but then again, that might be a reason it would work - if you're half-dead already anyway, why risk letting so many more potentially die, just to try to save your own skin? It would certainly play up the sacrifice route as a good choice, I'd think.

I think it would be even easier than that. If you want a simple way to determine whether shep lives or dies, have her discuss her plans after the war with one of the characters just prior to the final battle. If your shepard responds with something definite and life-affirming, your Shepard survives the ending into whatever sort of universe you built. If your shepard says something vague and fatalistic, you die in dramatic fashion. Simple and easy, and once again, your choice determines the outcome.

Exactly what I was thinking. Tie it to the LI. Cortez lives if you give him a reason to live. Same could be said for Shep.

Could certainly work, though I'd think it shouldn't be dependent upon having a LI (though perhaps that would help?). My main concern at this point, then, would just be writing - it would need to be at least hinted that this is a major decision, and not just a normal conversation. Further, I wouldn't see a Renegade character having any problems here, but I'd expect my Paragon characters to be hopeful, yet still honest about their odds - they'll want to be able to come back from this, yet they'll admit it might not be possible - I'd want them to be able to say that, without it suddenly dooming them.

[Goneaviking]

If I'd realized I was buying an inviolable piece of art I wouldn't have.

[Iconoclaste]

Speaking of "art", I remember an artist in... New York? a few years ago, who was about to perform "art" in the following manner : he had a glass cube 1m x 1m with top opened, and there was a small rat or something at the bottom of it. On the set day for his "artistic performance", the guy was supposed to let a big cube of concrete fall into the glass cube to crush the poor furry thing. Of course, he was never allowed to do it. That must have shocked his integrity as an artist!

Those with the strongest hope will hold the line until the end. The others will be glad we did.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 27 mars 2012 - 07:04 .

[recentio]

Goneaviking wrote...

If I'd realized I was buying an inviolable piece of art I wouldn't have.

LOL. The perfect new quote.

[ShinAnubisXIII]

Not only does the Tali stock photo throw the 'artistic integrity' statement out of the window but also sacrificing a series character (Emily Wong) and replacing her with Jessica Chobot, a real life 'journalist' that has absolutely no connection to the universe.

On a side note... well... my Shepard always wanted to throw 'something' out of the airlock. Guess now he can

[tateel99]

txgoldrush wrote...

Face it.....a happy ending WOULD break the intergrity of the game.

The MAIN THEME of Mass Effect 3 is VICTORY THROUGH SACRIFICE.. This requires an ending that is bittersweet at best. Yes trilogies as a whole can overlying themes throughout, such as overcoming all odds (which WAS fuffilled in ME3, Shepard DID break the cycle), but single entries in a series or trilogy has their own themes.

Bioware should, and looks like they are, provide far more clarity and closure, however, not change the tone of the ending or provide a happy ending. To do so is selling out and breaking the relevance of the ending....

Hell, ME1 was not a fully happy ending, in fact had elements of victory through sacrifice, as either the a part of the alliance navy or the council is sacrificed, and ME2 is a hollow victory at best. This isn't Star Wars either, where Alderaan and Taris can be annihilated but be no longer relevant 5 minutes later....and end on a ceremony. And ME3 is so dark, a happy ending would not be appropriate.

In fact, ending the current universe and creating a new beginning IS A GOOD THING and a smart move. That needs to stay.

This is wrong.

1. ME1 had an uplifting ending - saved the Galaxy, got rid of Saren, kept the girl (or guy maybe for you).
2. ME2 had an uplifing ending - took out the collectors, saved the team (maybe all of them),
    kept the girl (or guy maybe for you)

ME is Space Opera told in an interactive medium that is created by committees with changing personnel.
The use of DLC to add/enhance the story because the game media construct allows it is a new way to
improve the interactive collaboration.

BTW: Space Opera always has sacrifice, huge threats, and the hero always wins and gets the girl/guy. That's
the kind of story it is.

Bioware sold ME3 sight unseen to it's patrons based on promises. A lot of customers that purchased and played through the game feel they did not deliver anything like the promised work of art but instead delivered something more akin to a portrait that was fatally flawed - trying to keep the art analogy going here. Since art truly is in the eye
of the beholder we feel that we did not receive the value promised for our money. We are unhappy and want that value added to the finished product. This is a normal process for purchased art that is bought sight unseen.

Comparing upset patrons to a ficticinal crazy woman in Misery (as done repeatedly by Adam Sessler) or some
of the other jibes from the incestuous gaming industry is ridiculous. I am a consumer that believes he did not
get the product he was told he was buying. The ending IMO turned the whole ME3 interactive whole into a work of very bad art or a very bad gaming experience - take your pick. Since Bioware has promised not to change the ending but only to clarify it then I expect I will have to live with this disappointment.

As a consumer my only way to fight back against something like this is financially but just myself not buying any more ME related products means nothing to Bioware. It would take a boycott of any new ME prodcuts that do
not fix the ending choices (at least 2 that are really choices and are really different). Without the type of ending/product/workofart Bioware promised to deliver I would be happy to participate in a large boycott of any future ME products that is conducted in a civil and legal manner.

Note that I am not accusing Bioware of lying, devil worship, laziness, or lack of talent. I am only accusing ME3 of not being the product/workofart promised to me by Bioware when I purchased it. If they had instead promised the
Star Child magical ending I would have not purchased the product.

Bioware did not do anything illegal (even in Canada) by over promoting the product. There is nothing morally 
wrong with consumers/patrons rejecting what they see as a flawed product and seeking redress through legal
means. There is nothing morally or legally wrong with Bioware keeping the ending as it is or changing the ending
in some way (I would prefer my way of course). All of the outraged sermons and name calling are just opinions -
not moral absolutes or legalities. I could also throw ethics in the conversation in the same manner.

If a group of patrons (I will quit using patrons when I quit seeing cries of woe about the "art") were to kidnap the
writers, hold them hostage, and torture them for a changed ending that would run rampant over some moral absolutes and quite a few legalities (even in Canada). This is not happening and, Mr. Sessler, that is why this
is not like Misery by Stephen King.

Long post - only my 3rd or 4th on Bioware Forums ever over the last 5 years so I apologize for any forum cultural
rules I broke - it was unintentional. For the record I have played all of the Dragon Age and ME games and I am
62 years old. I wasn't going to post a long diatribe but I read one too many topics with "breaking artistic integrity"
in the header.

[Dridengx]

kookie28 wrote...

If someone says "artistic integrity" again I WILL punch a baby.

yeah because your side hasn't done enough threats already

[QuantumSheep13]

Artistic integrity went out the window when they popped up that "BUY MORE DLC" message at the end.

[Nightdragon8]

PRC_Heavy_Z wrote...

This whole artistic integrity argument is a load of PR rubbish. Art is subjective.

However, what is not subjective is promising to deliver an epic decision based ending and taking paying customers money while providing the exact opposite. That is just spitting into the faces of the customers whose hard earned money support these developers (and their greedy publishers)

And people can make a happy ending artistic if they wanted to. Whether or not the ending is happy or not is not the determining factor for "artistic integrity". It all depends on execution.

Exactly, Mordin and Legion sacerficing themselves, honestly, the most sadest but also the most beautiful moments in the game. All because we know why they are doing it... why they are sacerficing themselves. At the end its like... what? Build a race of AI's to kill organics to prevent them from killed off by AI's..... up to that line, I was going with it... and was fine... then the whole Joker racing off trying to outrun the blast, "With all your squadies on board" Like... what??? I don't seriously think Ash Liara or Javik would seriously or willingly run away like that, that is soo not in there charcter.

Edit: @Quantum that and the video "epolige" of "tell me more about the Shepard" line which = buy DLC to find out.

Modifié par Nightdragon8, 27 mars 2012 - 08:37 .

[vallore]

RamilVenoard wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

If it's OK for Shepard to die "on duty" then next time he gets killed during a mission, just do not load a savegame and stop the game there. It should make it the same way as reaching the actual ending, from what I read, and without breaking "artistic integrity" or player's expectations.

I bet not many would like to try that.

Well there's something about the ultimate sacrafice that makes Shepard the man/women he/she is. His/her willingness to go the extra mile regardless of renegade or paragon, the willingness to walk into hell and bring everyone back by going out with a bang. It's just that when he goes out in the current ending of ME3, there's no bang, and there's no point... lol

EDIT: OO I misread your post my apologies. I though we were disagreeing. We're on the same page, never mind

Indeed. Further, I would point that the sacrifice of the player character is only meaningful if it is somehow the result of player input, and therefore if it is optional.  This is not an NPC. Making it one in the end just cuts the player from the most important decision she could make in the game.

Instead of a sacrifice we get fate.

Modifié par vallore, 27 mars 2012 - 09:37 .

[iiTzCyAniiDe]

Stop hiding behind "Artistic integrity" it's a load of rubbish.

[Goneaviking]

Mass Effect was as much a commercial endeavour as an artistic one, if not moreso. The game is a product like any other game, boasts and promises were made concerning the game that were not delivered so dissatisfaction was to be expected.

I was looking forward to working my way through those 16 possible endings, sadly that will never happen.

Personally I never expected a meaningful reworking of the ending because the magic bullet is too deeply embedded in the game to remove altogether without remaking the entire product, and frankly the whole notion of the crucible implicitly diminishes all of our efforts over three games by making us dependant on a solution devised by the protheans tens of thousands of years ago. Even if they remove the entity that delivers the arbitrary decision the overall story is lessened for it's inclusion.

So I will accept the closure and clarification DLC. I will probably even pay for it if I must, further DLC purchases will depend on how I feel about the game after the new resolution. I make no threats or promises. I am not a "loyal fan", I am an assertive consumer.

Claims that resisting consumer pressure is about protecting artistic integrity are unconvincing. There is nothing sacred about an artists work, the difference between the work of a major artist and that of a talentless hack is one of degree not of nature.

Artistic works have been rewritten when convenient, or profitable, for centuries (if not millennia), so this is not a new issue and was decided before any of us were born. Sorry, the artistic elite lost.

My final point. The part of the "artistic integrity" argument that is offensive is the disinformation being peddled that the complaints are about earning a "happy ending". For the most part they aren't, the ending we were given disempowered us and forced us to choose from a series of fates offered to us by the reapers; it had nothing to do with anything that we had strived for or discussed within the three games and so it was always going to be a meaningless ending to one of the most meaningful stories in computer gaming history.

If the nihilistic nature of the universe were a recurring theme throughout the series that would be fine, but previous games drive us to refute that worldview and so the ending leaves many of us cold.

Failure, or a pyrrhic victory, would have been an admirable end if it was one that we'd earned for ourselves instead of having it offered to us by the unlikely combined effort of the protheans and reapers to solve our problems for us.

[luzburg]

cant really say that the endings are art in any form if the indoctrination theroy is right then it genius providing we get to continue... i happily pay 10bucks for a good continued ending and hopefully has a happy outcome

no offense to bioware but the endings and lack of choise and the possebilety of a happy ending IS violating artistic integrity by not doing it in the original mass effect style/tradition

[Cody211282]

Dridengx wrote...

kookie28 wrote...

If someone says "artistic integrity" again I WILL punch a baby.

yeah because your side hasn't done enough threats already

Like your side hasn't

[luzburg]

well i think mordin, legion, thane and not to mention millions of soldiers and civilians that dies in the war it is already a huge sacrifice in my eyes

even larger than if you insted just blew up the sol relay causing a super nova getting the reaper main force in the prosses, 11 bilion humans is far less lives lost when the war spread
and humanity has spread enough to sustain itself whitout earth and is probably the smallest sacrifice that culd have been made in this war

and a note: i dont like this planet it cold and it rains all the time XD

Modifié par luzburg, 27 mars 2012 - 11:41 .

[Bocks]

The main theme of the mass effect series is characters and choice.

I just want endings that vary between Bad ending to Good ending.

Is it too much to ask for? I don't think so, because Mass Effect is about CHOICE. If you don't like the happy ending, just don't go for it. It's about customizing the story to your own heart's desire. There is no artistic integrity to break here. This is fixing, not changing.

[Myrmedus]

RamilVenoard wrote...

Psychlonus wrote...

Pornographers have artistic integrity. They would never let you force them to change then ending.

*ehem* Because the ending is presumably, always the same, but enough of that.

Yes, I cant remember who, but somebody voiced my exact concern with a happy ending. A happy ending makes a bittersweet or blaze of glory ending into a gameplay failure which makes it seem like a less worthy ending since it means you did something wrong and should go back and fix it.

And that's a problem.

Well, if the ending is always the same that would make it a pretty good analogy for ME3's ending no?

And regardless, I don't subscribe with this notion that having a happy (or happier) ending invalidates the bittersweet ending because there is evidence that disproves this: DA:O had multiple endings and one of them was to sacrifice your character to stop the Blight - many people did this (including myself - at least until Awakening!) in spite of alternate paths being available which led to more typically "happy" endings.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 27 mars 2012 - 11:53 .

[MakeMineMako]

Goneaviking wrote...

Mass Effect was as much a commercial endeavour as an artistic one, if not moreso. The game is a product like any other game, boasts and promises were made concerning the game that were not delivered so dissatisfaction was to be expected.

I was looking forward to working my way through those 16 possible endings, sadly that will never happen.

Personally I never expected a meaningful reworking of the ending because the magic bullet is too deeply embedded in the game to remove altogether without remaking the entire product, and frankly the whole notion of the crucible implicitly diminishes all of our efforts over three games by making us dependant on a solution devised by the protheans tens of thousands of years ago. Even if they remove the entity that delivers the arbitrary decision the overall story is lessened for it's inclusion.

So I will accept the closure and clarification DLC. I will probably even pay for it if I must, further DLC purchases will depend on how I feel about the game after the new resolution. I make no threats or promises. I am not a "loyal fan", I am an assertive consumer.

Claims that resisting consumer pressure is about protecting artistic integrity are unconvincing. There is nothing sacred about an artists work, the difference between the work of a major artist and that of a talentless hack is one of degree not of nature.

Artistic works have been rewritten when convenient, or profitable, for centuries (if not millennia), so this is not a new issue and was decided before any of us were born. Sorry, the artistic elite lost.

My final point. The part of the "artistic integrity" argument that is offensive is the disinformation being peddled that the complaints are about earning a "happy ending". For the most part they aren't, the ending we were given disempowered us and forced us to choose from a series of fates offered to us by the reapers; it had nothing to do with anything that we had strived for or discussed within the three games and so it was always going to be a meaningless ending to one of the most meaningful stories in computer gaming history.

If the nihilistic nature of the universe were a recurring theme throughout the series that would be fine, but previous games drive us to refute that worldview and so the ending leaves many of us cold.

Failure, or a pyrrhic victory, would have been an admirable end if it was one that we'd earned for ourselves instead of having it offered to us by the unlikely combined effort of the protheans and reapers to solve our problems for us.

Excellent post.

And one worth quoting.

[curdy]

There is no artistic integrity if the ending was stolen from deus ex.

just saying

[zarnk567]

curdy wrote...

There is no artistic integrity if the ending was stolen from deus ex.

just saying

QFTW