262 réponses à ce sujet

[ShadowyMOON]

By the way, a quick PS for Father_Jerusalem.

While the vast majority are rather vocal and demanding as you put it, should we not, now that we have the technological means and public acceptance, nay demand, improve and expand upon art in a video game form? Has it not been done plenty of times, successfully, by many other companies across other games? Is not all the other ME DLC expanding and improving upon the universe Bioware created?

As you said art should be allowed to, can, and does fail. But it also gets improved, re-imagined, and plainly fixed. Shouldn't that be allowed as well?

Signing off now, good night to you all.

[Father_Jerusalem]

ShadowyMOON wrote...

By the way, a quick PS for Father_Jerusalem.

While the vast majority are rather vocal and demanding as you put it, should we not, now that we have the technological means and public acceptance, nay demand, improve and expand upon art in a video game form? Has it not been done plenty of times, successfully, by many other companies across other games? Is not all the other ME DLC expanding and improving upon the universe Bioware created?

As you said art should be allowed to, can, and does fail. But it also gets improved, re-imagined, and plainly fixed. Shouldn't that be allowed as well?

Signing off now, good night to you all.

It's well within your rights. Working together is a GOOD thing.

It's only when it goes from discourse and dialogue to straight-out DEMANDING that it crosses, to me, a line;

I, personally, want ALL the content. ALL the DLCs. Ever. Because Mass Effect IS art, in my opinion, I want it to keep going and going and going for as long as we can get it. 

I just don't want BioWare's vision to be forcibly changed. If BioWare changes the endings, I want it to be because THEY wanted to - because they weren't satisfied, as was the case with Broken Steel. Not simply because the fans screamed at them until the gave in. 

[BeefoTheBold]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

ShadowyMOON wrote...

By the way, a quick PS for Father_Jerusalem.

While the vast majority are rather vocal and demanding as you put it, should we not, now that we have the technological means and public acceptance, nay demand, improve and expand upon art in a video game form? Has it not been done plenty of times, successfully, by many other companies across other games? Is not all the other ME DLC expanding and improving upon the universe Bioware created?

As you said art should be allowed to, can, and does fail. But it also gets improved, re-imagined, and plainly fixed. Shouldn't that be allowed as well?

Signing off now, good night to you all.

It's well within your rights. Working together is a GOOD thing.

It's only when it goes from discourse and dialogue to straight-out DEMANDING that it crosses, to me, a line;

I, personally, want ALL the content. ALL the DLCs. Ever. Because Mass Effect IS art, in my opinion, I want it to keep going and going and going for as long as we can get it. 

I just don't want BioWare's vision to be forcibly changed. If BioWare changes the endings, I want it to be because THEY wanted to - because they weren't satisfied, as was the case with Broken Steel. Not simply because the fans screamed at them until the gave in. 

Personally I'll accept screaming at them until they give in if their current version makes me

[Arkitekt]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

"Demand" and "Request" aren't semantics, they're two completely different attitudes. One implies unreasonability, one implies a willingness to work together. If someone comes up to me and "demands" something, my first response is always to say "Hell no." just because it's an attitude of "I'm entitled to..." or "You have to do this because I said so".

Other people may see it differently. If they had asked "REQUEST!" would that really have been seen as so much different? Or if so, wouldn't that have meant that the fans weren't angry enough for BioWare to care? This is politics. Sometimes politics plays less "nice" with its words. It also mirrors the recent PR blackout and all seriousness that BW and EA trolled us with. The more PRing they give the community, the less "nice" their words will be.

Was the charity a brilliant move? I don't know. I get a tingle of distaste any time someone attaches charity drives to a movement - even for causes I support, I get squeamish, and with how the donation drive ended... I don't know. I'm glad kids got helped, I truly am, and the people that donated - for whatever reason they donated - should be praised for what they did, just as those that are demanding refunds are, deservedly, being buried for their actions.

And I fully understand why PA stopped it. However, it was a good move, because it directed sheer frustration and anger into something very very good and constructive. IOW, it changed the tone of the whole shebang and even if kids didn't get their stuff it would have been good just for this alone. Like it or not, this whole "retake" movement brought up a much more positive attitude regarding the "protests" than whatever else was going on in BSN, with all the flaming, trolling and just plain hatred speech.

The cupcake move... it's a publicity stunt, sure, but it's a good one. Hell, it made me want a cupcake earlier.

Me too!!

I'm not accusing everyone in the ReTake movement of being stupid or intolerant, though you need to concede that there are some among the group that are - just as there are some in the pro-ending movement that are. I'm simply saying that they don't have the right to try and force a change simply because they didn't like the way a video game ended. 

They have the right to demand it from BioWare, just like BioWare has the right to say "F OFF spoiled BRATS". It's about the relationship and how badly both "parties" want to maintain it. As you said earlier, it's entirely their choice. Remind yourself however that BioWare states multiple times that they co-author their games with their fanbase, that they consider their relationship with fans very close and important. These are not outsider comments. These are their own. They have shown how this was actually the case in multiple situations, but how is it really influential regarding the Endings is still something to be known. I'm actually kinda curious to know how far this is going.

[Drake-Shepard]

..''who demand bigger guns, bouncier boobs, and more facile storylines''

ermmmm no

[Mercedonius]

BeefoTheBold wrote...
Personally I'll accept screaming at them until they give in if their current version makes me

Haha too true, I can't imagine things being much worse than they already are. Even if they are completely unwilling to make a new ending and just do it because they caved in and have no passion... well the ending we have feels dispassionate already it will just be what we have with better technical execution. 

Which is better in my book. 

Many points in ME3 conveyed a lot of emotion, but the ending just left me empty and if a new one does the same then nothing has really changed...

[JexyG]

Yeah, well I'm sure if the sequels to The Matrix could have DLC and patches, they would do it since especially the 3rd one, was a complete joke compared to the original. And books can't be rewritten and then published again, so if they suck, they suck, and everyone knows it. Different medium, but still treated like art... and like The New Yorker has anything to do with video games... what a joke.

[DadeLeviathan]

I'm just surprised the author had time to pen it between sipping casually on his sapphire martini while musing to himself about how amazing he is, and that nobody "gets" it like he does while simultaneously looking down upon all of us worthless philistines. I wish I could be as smart as he is and truly appreciate art as he does.

I'll just go back to my silly video games which clearly have no more artistic merit than an episode of Walker: Texas Ranger as he puts it. I'll just go play a game like Planescape: Torment or Deus Ex. It's not like they explore anything meaningful like a book or movie does. It's not like anything in the medium explores the themes of Transcendentalism, Existenialism or Transhumanism.

*sigh* If only we were as sophisticated as those brilliant souls that write for the New Yorker.

[Arkitekt]

Drake-Shepard wrote...

..''who demand bigger guns, bouncier boobs, and more facile storylines''

ermmmm no

Yeah that line really did it for me.

[ParagonGreg]

Did anybody else get upset that he got the details for the movie "Misery" wrong? Annie wanted a NEW novel, not to rewrite the one she didn't like. Also, she never amputated anything, she hobbled the author. (At least she says that's what she's going to do. Full disclosure, I looked away during that scene.)

[Ravenmyste]

love the fact they said doctor post said they was going to change the endings when it didnt even say that in the entire post.. i sure that mr clark will be fined by the new yorker for posting false information and not actually reading the entire things of what doctor ray actually said and not put words in his mouth.

[ShadowyMOON]

@Father_Jerusalem again. (Argh I have work in the morning!)

Personally I'm not asking for any compromise of artistic integrity. (Although how much of that you can have in such a large company owned by an even larger company answering to shareholders is not a debate I want to get into.) I'm voicing my desire for an explanation. Be it DLC, free content, a Q&A session with the community, anything. The pure dismissal of (in my opinion) a masterpiece's single, most glaring flaw by the majority of gaming journalists and the extreme defensiveness is ridiculous.

And if we get into the thorny and speculative side of things that is EA's involvement, they will monetize fan demand if they believe it can be monetized. How they do that may very well involve little say from Bioware.

While I too believe that games can be art, and Mass Effect certainly is, they are consumer products first and foremost. The damage has been done. Whether Bioware can get out unharmed, without compromises to their vision or budgets, is entirely up to them.

Modifié par ShadowyMOON, 27 mars 2012 - 12:05 .

[pikey1969]

Arkitekt wrote...

Bad article.

The end themes go against everything ME trilogy stood for. The end theme is all about caving to the master and a nihilistic perspective over the cosmos. ME was always about fighting against nihilism, against "impossible odds" - "never tell me the odds!!" - Mass Effect was always about Hope and Unity. I am not saying anything new here, everyone knows this.

Well, everyone but the New Yorker, who don't. The sheer twist from this battling against all nihilistic forces in the universe, against the Cosmicist perspective into accepting what the Master of the Universe tells you, into caving to his choices, into caving into nihilism and hopelessness, is the biggest problem here that was unaddressed by the article.

To sway these problems into "all those teens just want boobs n guns don't cave to those pricks" kindof an article just smacks of ignorant ranting. The New Yorker is ignorant about the real issues concerning the ending of ME3.

Bad reader.

The writer in the article clearly thinks the ending is crap, and inconsistant with the rest of the series as well.

His viewpoint is crap or not (and oh it definitely is, even in his opinion), what's done is done. I can kinda empathize/respect that view point certainly.

[Siegdrifa]

aLucidMind wrote...

Yeah, only a "mature fan" would accept the ending for what it is and not care that it makes absolutely no sense and negated everything they did completely on top of refusing any sense of real accomplishment in completing the trilogy. Idiots.

They are right... this is what mature people do, accept everything and move on.
Actualy, the monalisa with a beard wouldn'thave impacted her fame and popularity....  no ? ... humm... no ...

[Jedifan421]

First of all, can we seriously STOP having this discussion about whether video games are art or not? For the last time, they are but only certain kinds, the same with any medium. Shadows of the Colossus and Okami and Mass Effect 3 are all interactive art. Call of Duty and Madden are not in the same way movies like Drive and Citizen Kane are static art and a pornographic film or a slasher film are not. It's just general consensus at the moment in art culture but even then not for everyone because the definition of what is and isn't art is EXTREMELY SUBJECTIVE and maybe down the line 50 years from now, everything will be considered art. Who knows? Okay. With that out of the way...

The New Yorker has obviously never heard of a little game company called Bethesda Softworks which has produced three games that can all be considered art: Elder Scrolls IV and V and Fallout 3. Todd Howard, the lead on Fallout 3, responded to the feedback of fans, admitted to the game's shortcomings in terms of the ending and how it didn't make sense in terms of replay ability and storytelling and created "gameplay initiatives" for their post-release cycle of DLC that expanded the ending and allowed the player to continue playing past the ending as well as characters from the DLC be incorporated into the main game.

I can guarantee that BioWare and EA will do something like this and this is a good thing for both parties. BioWare and EA can make more money and win back fans while not changing the ending and keeping "artistic integrity", enticing fans to buy further DLC down the line and also fans will have a "better" ending hopefully that gives them more reason to play the game again and the first two games as well. Just because you "clarify and give closure" to "loyal fans" for a horrendous ending such as Mass Effect 3's or like with what Lost did with their Season 6 DVD exclusive epilogue doesn't invalidate video games as an art form.

To conclude, art is constantly changing and each piece of art will always become something much greater than its creators ever intended or expected. It's the culmination of all human experiences that we accrue over the course of our lifetime and in the end, art never ends or really beginnings; it is just constantly shaped, adapted, changed and incorporated into different forms, mediums and places for its audience to experience.

[catofnine]

"Mass Defect"...well, the title was apt.

[Sundance31us]

"Somehow that news fails to disquiet me." -- Cyrano De Bergerac

Seriously, you expected better from that rag?

[Tazzmission]

BeefoTheBold wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

jds1bio wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...


thats funny because you dont know how the gaming buisness works either

dont be walking around saying people dont know squat when you in fact no nothing either

Keep it civil please.

im being civil im just saying the guy has no right to say otherwise when he himself isnt involved in such a buisness

alot of people have that attitude lately and frankly im sick of it

even the same people who say omg im so mad im going to boycott all dlc when in fact they wont

they sit on there computer talk alot of hot garbage demonizing ea and bioware and yet they still post on a ea bioware forum

ive tried to stay silent but when i see bs im going to call them out on it

Move over folks! The Internet police is here to set the world straight.

internet police huh? : puts on riot gear: well if thats the case alright that gives me an excuse to pepper spray your lets occupy bioware movement .

[Arkitekt]

pikey1969 wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...

Bad article.

The end themes go against everything ME trilogy stood for. The end theme is all about caving to the master and a nihilistic perspective over the cosmos. ME was always about fighting against nihilism, against "impossible odds" - "never tell me the odds!!" - Mass Effect was always about Hope and Unity. I am not saying anything new here, everyone knows this.

Well, everyone but the New Yorker, who don't. The sheer twist from this battling against all nihilistic forces in the universe, against the Cosmicist perspective into accepting what the Master of the Universe tells you, into caving to his choices, into caving into nihilism and hopelessness, is the biggest problem here that was unaddressed by the article.

To sway these problems into "all those teens just want boobs n guns don't cave to those pricks" kindof an article just smacks of ignorant ranting. The New Yorker is ignorant about the real issues concerning the ending of ME3.

Bad reader.

The writer in the article clearly thinks the ending is crap, and inconsistant with the rest of the series as well.

His viewpoint is crap or not (and oh it definitely is, even in his opinion), what's done is done. I can kinda empathize/respect that view point certainly.

Not bad reader, specially considering what he said about "gamerzzz" intentions regarding ME3 ending.

[Edrick1976]

Well thank GOD I am not mature lol....

[Doofe2012]

>The New Yorker

Stopped reading there.

[kbct]

I love the comments at the bottom of the article.

[LilyasAvalon]

MageTarot wrote...

And as we all know, "The New Yorker" is SO knowledgeable about video games...


(rolls eyes)

This. Seriously, guys, nearly all video gamers are painted in a pathetic/bad light by anything outside of REAL technological news.

[Tovanus]

It's funny, every article that does a literary breakdown of the ME 3 ending comes away almost in shock at the level of.... what's the right word for it.... maybe "artistic laziness" found in the end of this game? There are games out there with extremely rich, detailed and even thought-provoking plots that put the average television show and movie to shame.

One reviewer put it best when he said that, "No one with artistic integrity would have released an ending like this." Even a dark ending might have been a lot more appreciated if only the ending sequence wasn't riddled with plotholes. Hell, they could have given us closure in the form of epilogues discussing the implications of Shepherd's actions hundreds or thousands of years in the future when the various organic races could make contact again.

Every time someone writes an article about the ending without actually discussing why it's considered a failure by so many (they don't even need to do the whole discussion themselves, they can just link to one of the reviewers who has), you can be guaranteed that the author of the article has no idea what they're talking about or defending.

I don't think any objective writer would want to defend anything so bad as the ME 3 ending if they actually had to take time to dissect it. It's funny that he made the reference to George Lucas early on. Most people wouldn't doubt for a second that George Lucas sullied his franchise terribly and should probably have asked for a lot more oversight of his plot when he wrote the prequel trilogy. Talking about the ending to ME 3, as it stands, demonstrating artistic integrity is like talking about George Lucas having artistic integrity when he decided that Greedo shot first.

[nikki191]

a well written article. that said as well written as it is, its still an opinion piece that i dont agree with