193 réponses à ce sujet

[shinyelf]

@translationninja

This is most certainly not some rebellious approach, I simply feel that should one make an impressive piece( and please, Bioware most certainly did) the audience should hav no right to impose their will upon the artist. I believe that the audience may argue and debate, and that they may critizice, simplify an analyze, and I believe that the artist should hear them out, and if at that point the artist feel that it would be right to change the work, by all means go ahead. But should the audience however demand that he "fix" his "broken" art he should not do it, unless of course he feel that it would be the correct course of action

[shinyelf]

abaris wrote...

shinyelf wrote...

Cute, but you don't make much of a point. Can I hear some arguments? And please, binary gives me headaches, use letters next time.

Well, you got all kinds of arguments. You only have chosen to respond to the one who put it in binaries.

Touché.

But I feel that when someone merely respond with a comment statin that I am wrong, it is my duty as a proponent of rational and friendly debate to promote said principles.

[Arik7]

Swordfishtrombone wrote...

I believe in artistic integrity too, but I also believe that there is such a thing as really, really bad art.

I also believe that a computer game that you market ahead of the time with specific promisses on what the customer can expect to get, is more akin to commissioned piece of art, than an independently made piece of art.

And when you are making a commisioned piece of art, your "artistic integrity" is limited to what you can do while still satisfying the terms of the commission - or, in this case, the promisses made and expectations created during marketing.

I think that the ending to ME3, after the certain hated character appears, is artistically poor, and betrays the terms of the "commission".

Leonardo da Vinchi's "Last Supper" was a commissioned work, and I doubt his patron would have been happy if he'd painted it with three jesuses and their pet llama, and he'd have had every right to demand a product that better met the specifications. Appeals to "artistic integrity" wouldn't have held much water.

THIS 100%.

ME3 is very much like a "commissioned" piece of art.  And unfortunately, the ending does not represent quality art.

[abaris]

Arik7 wrote...


ME3 is very much like a "commissioned" piece of art.  And unfortunately, the ending does not represent quality art.

Yeah, it's like Leonardo painting a carrot nose on Jesus as a finishing stroke.

[Gleym]

shinyelf wrote...


And no Dickens never changed just to please the crowd, he change it because he acknowledged that he ought to do better. He did not say "this is my work and I refuse to change it" had he said that I would no longer respect him, but he didn't so that is a moot point.

Dickens changed the ending to Great Expectations because some people criticized it as being too depressing or sad and they wanted something different than what he wrote. Mind you, just about all of Dickens' best works were written in monthly released chapters, kinda like how the total story of Mass Effect was released in 'acts' of three. And guess what? Dickens took fan feedback and response into consideration when writing the next chapter and the next installation. Just like Mass Effect did. ME3's ending, and how Bioware is acting, is pretty much if, at the end of Great Expectations, Dickens had a meteor crash and wipe everyone out because 'God willed it' and told everyone "This is my creative vision, f*ck you if you don't get it."

Modifié par Gleym, 19 avril 2012 - 05:07 .

[shinyelf]

Gleym wrote...

shinyelf wrote...


And no Dickens never changed just to please the crowd, he change it because he acknowledged that he ought to do better. He did not say "this is my work and I refuse to change it" had he said that I would no longer respect him, but he didn't so that is a moot point.

Dickens changed the ending to Great Expectations because some people criticized it as being too depressing or sad and they wanted something different than what he wrote. Mind you, just about all of Dickens' best works were written in monthly released chapters, kinda like how the total story of Mass Effect was released in 'acts' of three. And guess what? Dickens took fan feedback and response into consideration when writing the next chapter and the next installation. Just like Mass Effect did. ME3's ending, and how Bioware is acting, is pretty much if, at the end of Great Expectations, Dickens had a meteor crash and wipe everyone out because 'God willed it' and told everyone "This is my creative vision, f*ck you if you don't get it."

That is pretty much my point docked got feedback and made a deduction based on that, and I believe that as long as you listen to the crowd, and of te crowd don't demand stuff(demand, not ask for) unrealistic thing the artist ought to listen, but in the end it is his or her choice

[abaris]

shinyelf wrote...

That is pretty much my point docked got feedback and made a deduction based on that, and I believe that as long as you listen to the crowd, and of te crowd don't demand stuff(demand, not ask for) unrealistic thing the artist ought to listen, but in the end it is his or her choice

As long as you want to be published and ultimately make money, you have to walk the walk.

Maybe Steven King or Robert Ludlum or whoever writes megaseller after megaseller can afford to play the integrity card nowadays. They certainly couldn't when they started out. And I doubt that Dickens could afford that luxury in his days.

[Gleym]

shinyelf wrote...

That is pretty much my point docked got feedback and made a deduction based on that, and I believe that as long as you listen to the crowd, and of te crowd don't demand stuff(demand, not ask for) unrealistic thing the artist ought to listen, but in the end it is his or her choice

The ONLY reason people are having to demand anything is because Bioware doesn't give a rat's ass about what their fans have to say on the matter, and would rather just ignore them and pretend to listen while giving non-answers left and right. The ONLY reason it's reached the point of having to demand like this is because they ignored their fans on ME2, they ignored their fans on DA2, and they ignored their fans on TOR. And now people have lost patience. And now that they've realized that they can't d*ck around with people anymore, they're trying to cover their asses.

[Arik7]

shinyelf wrote...

That is pretty much my point docked got feedback and made a deduction based on that, and I believe that as long as you listen to the crowd, and of te crowd don't demand stuff(demand, not ask for) unrealistic thing the artist ought to listen, but in the end it is his or her choice

In your original post, you seem to praise BioWare for ignoring the feedback, which has overwhelmingly been for a completely new ending, not an "extended cut."



There's a difference between DEMANDING a better product, which we should all be doing as consumers, and FORCING a company to do something.  You can only force a company to do something via lawsuit/legislation,
and very few people are advocating for that.

Modifié par Arik7, 19 avril 2012 - 05:30 .

[Arik7]

Arcian wrote...

abaris wrote...

Arik7 wrote...


ME3 is very much like a "commissioned" piece of art.  And unfortunately, the ending does not represent quality art.

Yeah, it's like Leonardo painting a carrot nose on Jesus as a finishing stroke.

Or like Leonardo being comissioned to draw Mentor Auditore but ending up doing the Mona Lisa instead.

You cannot compare the immaturely written, incoherent ending of Mass Effect 3 to Mona Lisa.

[abaris]

Arik7 wrote...

You cannot compare the immaturely written, incoherent ending of Mass Effect 3 to Mona Lisa.

But to Mr Beans rendition of Whistlers mother, if you know what I mean.

[Flashing Steel]

deatharmonic wrote...

I suspect you may have misunderstood, if that's the case allow me to clarify. The point i was making was that several claims were made and they failed to fulfil them, not only according to a portion of fans but also the BBB - showing a lack of integrity and Mr. Gambles comments further confounded things by basically saying we didn't realise players wanted their choices to be reflected in the endings - adding to aforementioned lack of integrity. Now, upon taking into consideration the advertisement claims, do you not find it slightly ironic? So, when Bioware put out the artistic integrity argument, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth because up to that point they haven't shown an awful lot of integrity.

As for the EMS, well, that is another issue altogether right? I remember devs saying categorically you do not have to play multiplayer in order to achieve full EMS. Well, i don't know if you've seen some of the threads up but its been proven and stated by Holmes that it is impossible to achieve full EMS in single player, which is sadly ironic as again this debacle shows a lack of integrity. 

Thus, I find it hard to swallow when Bioware want to talk about their integrity. 

+1 - I agree, lets talk about them having integrity when they're able to show some. Furthermore, they already compromised their integrity when they changed the endings because of the leak, what happened to sticking to their guns then? bioware could have said 'ok its out there, but its your responsibility if you look at it' so those who did only spoil it for themselves but no, they were willing to compromise their integrity then so how can they play that card now?

[Lotion Soronarr]

-Spartan wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Artistic integrity is not a copout. It is a very real thing totally independent from the quality of the art in question.

The ending may suck, the game may suck... but it's THEIR ending..THEIR story..and no one - NO ONE - has any right to demand any change. Even if it is the worst, crappiest, piece of s*** you ever ran across.

You can want change. You can express your desire for it. But that's it.

Putting aside historical context and general practices –etc… Even if I were to consider your position legitimately valid, in nearly every other industry the customer can demand and get money back or products changed when the product they were sold does not jive with what they thought they were buying but sadly that basic right does not hold true for this industry. 

Good luck trying to push for that "right" here. How do you legaly define it? How do you stop the obvious abuse?

If you reached the end, that means you played trough the whole product, used it, and now want your money back..because you're not satisfied with an atristic decision? How about I return ME2 and demand money back because I couldn't become a full part of Cererus at the end? Where do you stop? Where do you draw the line?

Your comparion is silly.
There is a legitimate reason for returning a product and then there's a redicolous reason.

[Il Divo]

Arcian wrote...

abaris wrote...

Arik7 wrote...


ME3 is very much like a "commissioned" piece of art.  And unfortunately, the ending does not represent quality art.

Yeah, it's like Leonardo painting a carrot nose on Jesus as a finishing stroke.

Or like Leonardo being comissioned to draw Mentor Auditore but ending up doing the Mona Lisa instead.

Well-played. I'm currently half-way through Brotherhood.

[shinyelf]

[quote]Arik7 wrote...

[/quote]
In your original post, you seem to praise BioWare for ignoring the feedback, which has overwhelmingly been for a completely new ending, not an "extended cut."


There's a difference between DEMANDING a better product, which we should all be doing as consumers, and FORCING a company to do something.  You can only force a company to do something via lawsuit/legislation,
and very few people are advocating for that.

[/quote]

I would lik to dispell the notion that i don't want Bioware to take feedback. I want them to, with the majority of fibers in my body. However I do not think we should DEMAND a better product, because demanding makes it seem like it is our right, while in reality it is not. I am however a proponent of constructive criticism without to many veiled threats, metaphors, analogies or similies that only make the critic seem like an entitled person(this is not directed at anyone), and I also like the idea of requesting a better ending, to actually ask for rather than demand. After all we, the fans, should at least show the people at Bioware a modicum of respect(don't care if you disagree on the respect part, tht I just how I feel)

[Almighty_Hoogs]

artistic integrity goes out the window when the artist promise to to one thing,but doesn't deliver said promises.

[ItsRed]

shinyelf wrote...

*snip* This is me saying that BW can do whatever they want with their product (neither you nor I own it) *snip*

Aaaaaaaaaand thats where I got angry. The thing is, that we do own it. All of us that have paid the price of the game are now part of Bioware, any future realease, any DLC, even the upkeep of the servers-- Our money.
Bioware have always said that the fans are a part of the game's development and that feedback is always taken into account when making the next game in a series. Thats the whole reason I used to be a Bioware fanboy.

> We own the game just as much as Bioware do. Without us, there is no Bioware. Without us, there is no Mass          Effect, no Dragon Age and no The Old Republic. Always remember that.

[shinyelf]

[quote]Gleym wrote...

[/quote]

The ONLY reason people are having to demand anything is because Bioware doesn't give a rat's ass about what their fans have to say on the matter, and would rather just ignore them and pretend to listen while giving non-answers left and right. The ONLY reason it's reached the point of having to demand like this is because they ignored their fans on ME2, they ignored their fans on DA2, and they ignored their fans on TOR. And now people have lost patience. And now that they've realized that they can't d*ck around with people anymore, they're trying to cover their asses.

[/quote]

But it is ultimately Biowares choice, not ours, I think we need to give them feedback, communicate our wishes, and do so in a respectful tone.
I am not saying that there is no other option, personally I liked the cupcake initiative, a wonderful ideas, but It have been made clear that Bioware die jot intend to change the ending, and thus the best thing we can do, bit for BW and for ourselves, is to try and help them figure it out. 
I am not saying that you cant keep suggesting that they change the ending, but let us not assume that "Bioware does not give a rats ass about what their fans have to say" we have no basis for saying so, perhaps they just really want to deliver the message that the ending is, but we don't know

[shinyelf]

ItsRed wrote...

shinyelf wrote...

*snip* This is me saying that BW can do whatever they want with their product (neither you nor I own it) *snip*

Aaaaaaaaaand thats where I got angry. The thing is, that we do own it. All of us that have paid the price of the game are now part of Bioware, any future realease, any DLC, even the upkeep of the servers-- Our money.
Bioware have always said that the fans are a part of the game's development and that feedback is always taken into account when making the next game in a series. Thats the whole reason I used to be a Bioware fanboy.

> We own the game just as much as Bioware do. Without us, there is no Bioware. Without us, there is no Mass          Effect, no Dragon Age and no The Old Republic. Always remember that.

Please don't put words in my mouth, I do so dislike that.
Mass effect is the intellectual property of Bioware and EA, in they end they have the final say. Yes Bioware is entirely dependent on us, but if we want to play their games we depend on them. And a I stated earlier I am all for input to Bioware, but we should do it in a respectful manner. And if we  decide I demand stuff they may very well call us out on it, and since I for one does not intend to stop buying their products I don't want to be put in that situation

[Mylia Stenetch]

ItsRed wrote...

shinyelf wrote...

*snip* This is me saying that BW can do whatever they want with their product (neither you nor I own it) *snip*

Aaaaaaaaaand thats where I got angry. The thing is, that we do own it. <snip>

Here is also a problem (I have fought with over the last few years) RIAA, MPAA, etc are making sure you do not own the software. You are only getting the right to use the software. 

It is an oldish article on this, but they are trying to make sure we never own the software just pay for the rights to use it: 
http://arstechnica.c...re-licenses.ars 

[JasonDaPsycho]

BioWare did not intend Mass Effect to be a piece of art. It was intended to be a product to be PURCHASED through monetary means by consumers. Artistic integrity, in this case, is the consumers' as much as it is the artists'.

In addition. customers purchase the product based on the description provided by BioWare or EA through various sources. At one point, BioWare did promise more than 3 endings. In the end, all we got were 3 endings. What does that indicate? It indicates that the product was not as described by the producer. Of course you could call it word play, but the confidence is gone nonetheless.

Then the producer decided to pull out an argument known as "artistic integrity". I'm sorry but artistic integrity is not an excuse for one to lie, cheat and steal. If they had kept their mouth shut about the endings prior to the game's release, I would not have joined the retake movement. I would have just let it be. I might even purchase future BioWare games (no more pre-orders though). However, they have decided to disrespect artistic integrity - something that I wholeheartedly respect since I would like to be a writer someday. There is no way in hell I could ever condone such an act. Therefore, I have decided to not purchase any BioWare products in the future. It's not done out of spite, but rather, a complete lost in faith and trust towards the producer.

BioWare, you win.

Modifié par JasonDaPsycho, 19 avril 2012 - 08:56 .

[translationninja]

shinyelf wrote...

@translationninja

This is most certainly not some rebellious approach, I simply feel that should one make an impressive piece( and please, Bioware most certainly did) the audience should hav no right to impose their will upon the artist. I believe that the audience may argue and debate, and that they may critizice, simplify an analyze, and I believe that the artist should hear them out, and if at that point the artist feel that it would be right to change the work, by all means go ahead. But should the audience however demand that he "fix" his "broken" art he should not do it, unless of course he feel that it would be the correct course of action

Point taken, you make a compelling argument.

However, I would agree more if there wasn't the issue of a marketing department having pulled about every string possible to make me believe I'll get what I want when it was in fact very predictable that I'd be very much under the impression that I haven't.

I applaud your staying well composed and stating your opinion in a reasonable and respectful manner.

I think we have found enough common ground to agree that we can disagree on this issue then

[HighFlyingDwarf]

abaris wrote...

Yeah, it's like Leonardo painting a carrot nose on Jesus as a finishing stroke.

Would have been funny though.