354 réponses à ce sujet

[XqctaX]

Taboo-XX wrote...

The worst part about this is this guy writes film criticism.

He's why the film industry can't have nice things.

[What a Succulent Ass]

Honestly, the emphasis on cycles makes me suspect he never played ME1 or 2.

...And that he possibly just watched the third.

[The Heretic of Time]

Screw that. Video-games ARE art. The endings of Mass Effect 3 AREN'T poetic. Period. This exchange is over.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 07 août 2012 - 12:30 .

[D24O]

Part of me thinks that this was his review for RDR, that he mistitled Mass Effect there's a game with a focus on cycles, was kind of depressing, sent a message, and was actually well recieved and generally considered a work of art.

Or even GTA 4. That was also more about maintaining cycles than 3, and it fits the depressing criteria too.

Modifié par D24O, 07 août 2012 - 12:35 .

[Masha Potato]

I'm guessing the guy never touched first two games and lacks the perspective of the people who complained to him
So it's just blind talking to deaf

[Kildin_of_the_Volus]

Tried reading. Only got about half way before I caved to the CAPS and my bull**** radar going beserk.

I seriously don't think he played the game I did.

[obZen DF]

It's funny that HULK loves inconsistent and bad writing. Must be his integrity.

[eddieoctane]

"In depth conversation with the Catalyst." What game was that guy playing? I can respect opinions, but only ones that are grounded somewhere in fact. Then there's the whole bit about fatalism. No one buys games to experience a fatalistic metaphor. They buy them to be entertained. Sorry, but this "Hulk" is an idiot. He doesn't understand what people were paying for in the first place with the game.

"We are in a 'give us' culture." Well, considering most of us worked for the money used to purchase ME3, we are entitled to some enjoyment from the purchase. That's the nature of capitalism. The same capitalism that lets this guy make money from advertisers for each person that stumbles across his page. The hypocrisy is almost humorous. Almost, but in the way that any small country threatening a NATO member is humorous. It's the weird kind of funny that borders on sad, because you know it doesn't end well for the would-be comedian.

His whole spiel shows the fundamental problem with art and video games. At $60 a pop and north of 30 hours to see to completion, games are serious investments of time and money for the consumer. There is a point where the "art" ceases to belong to the "artist". Historically, this has applied to commissioned art. When the Vatican hired Michelangelo to paint the Sistine Chapel, it was done to the Pope's liking, not the artist's. The same applies to da Vinci's "The Last Supper", which would have been painted to the satisfaction of Ludovico Sforza. In games, the commissioner of the art is the player. Especially when you take pre-orders for said game. If a game makes north of $60 million in sales before it is even released, then it has been commissioned by the players. The game needs to satisfy them. When the ending of ME3 failed to do so, the game failed as a product. The artistic intent of the creators falls second to the happiness of the consumer. If ME3 was produced on Casey's dime, he can make it artistic as he wants. But when we are paying for the game up front, when it's marketed the same way as a summer blockbuster, it's not Casey's game any more. It's ours. That is what everyone who defends the "art" of the game fails to grasp. And that is the precise reason why this "Hulk" blogger is wrong.

It's a product. The customer is always right. You don't like it? Move to communist China and enjoy the censorship.

Modifié par eddieoctane, 07 août 2012 - 01:15 .

[3DandBeyond]

Random Jerkface wrote...

I also find it odd that he praises ME3 when he completely demolished Prometheus, especially since the two pieces made the exact same thematic fumbles.

Perhaps that is his genius.  Incoherent rambling.  ME3 was about rebirth and cycles.  And this art, in his words is about helping us be better at life.  What? 

I'm sorry but if I want Picasso, I buy Picasso.  If I want Kubrick, I'll actually watch something he did and not something that tries to pretend to be Kubrick.  If I want interpretive art, I buy interpretive art.  If I want a game that has relatable themes and is about people failing and succeeding, but is ultimately about people overcoming and not some random space ghost giving rebirth in cycles, I used to look to ME.

Yeah it's really brilliant that they used the kid nobody much cares for from the beginning to haunt the game and sit down and talk with Shepard at the end.  Really brilliant.

This guy thinks it's great that at the end we had a boss conversation.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 07 août 2012 - 01:17 .

[comrade gando]

just read it, what a tool

[Conniving_Eagle]

HULK SMASH?

[The Angry One]

All caps? Are we sure this isn't Harbinger?

[Arathyl]

video games are not art?... i read it only half way then stopped. dude doesn't understand the me universe. oooorrrr successful troll is successful

[Mathias]

Guess we know why this guy isn't popular.

[eddieoctane]

The Angry One wrote...

All caps? Are we sure this isn't Harbinger?

I didn't see anything about how a consumer having an opinion on art hurts me, but I'll go back and check again.

[Conniving_Eagle]

Arathyl wrote...

video games are not art?... i read it only half way then stopped. dude doesn't understand the me universe. oooorrrr successful troll is successful

He must be a sleeper agent for Hudson. Planted years ago to give genuine critique, earn some respect, and then try to justify ME3's ending.

[palician]

anorling wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

I personally disagree with the review however. Symbolism is subtle, this symbolism we see in the ending of ME3 is shoehorned in there like a square in a round shaped hole.

Furthermore, while Symbolism in literature is praiseworthy, its only praiseworthy when the symbolism is a cherry over a delicious desert. A bonus, not necessary to enjoy the desert itself.

Mass Effect 3's symbolism gives you nothing but the cherry, and you must imagine the desert.

The primary reason symbolism cannot be something you base the backbone of your story on is because symbolism is fully malleable to each individual person. That's why its considered an abstract concept within literature. It'd be like me holding up an ink blot picture. Someone will say they see two people dancing, someone else will say they see nothing but an inkblot.

This is why your story must be based solely on the concrete pieces of literature, exposition, central themes, character development, dialogue, plot and plot progression. Things that arent malleable, they happen in the story so they happen.

Think of a story as you would a building, with symbolism being the minor things, like a coffe table, curtains, a night table, things like that.

Mass effect three just foreclosed your home and left you with the night table, curtains and coffee table. Hardly a good trade off.

Whenever an Author cries symbolism as part of a defense of his work, most other authors don't take him seriously, or damn near outright dismiss it as crap right off the bat. Any person that can defend criticism with facts (X thing did not happen because of X or Y thing did happen because of Y) That's fine.

But the moment an author has to say to a major piece of story "Its symbolic"

Then he's most likely full of ****.

And before some of you people jump down my throat that symbolism is used all the time, take note that I specified major pieces of the story. If someone were to ask in a story why did you name the character So and so, and the author says 

Well his name is kinda symbolic because it derives from such and such who did X thing in his lifetime so it kinda paralells that"

That's symbolism that can and should be used. Cherry over a delicious desert.

Well said!

Second

[hot_heart]

Despite the annoying style, I generally find myself in agreeance on his film criticism. Though, every time I've read his thoughts on videogames, I've felt he misses the mark a little and I'd feel he'd benefit from considering the production side of things a little more. Simply because that aspect is so different to film (which it could be argued has become so much more refined) that it's easy to disregard its impact.

Also, I really liked this point, and hadn't seen it touched upon before. Thank you for sharing, ajb314.

ajb314 wrote...
A tragic hero is such because he is unable to overcome a failing within his character. There lies within the tragic hero, a flaw that prohibits the possibility of achieving a truly happy ending. This character flaw will inevitably be the demise of the tragic hero. For my part, I never discovered this flaw in Shepard.

Modifié par hot_heart, 07 août 2012 - 01:34 .

[TheImmortalBeaver]

I'm not sure how I feel about his criticism. I mean, I liked the original endings, and loved the extended cut. However, focusing on cycles as a central component to the ME story seemed a little... off. I did agree that many gamers sounded very entitled when demanding a new ending, but I would say that there were plenty of gamers that were just expressing disappointment over the original endings to BioWare.

As it is, I'm not sure I'd point anyone who dislikes the endings to that article. As someone who has played way too much Mass Effect, I'm pretty sure I could write a far more relevant article about the ME3 endings (as could many on these forums) that addresses issues like the Catalyst being Deus Ex Machina, the endings being unfair, etc. as opposed to taking the "You were all wrong about the endings in the first place!" approach.

It's kind of a shame, as I've liked some of Film Crit Hulk's stuff on movies. I guess it goes to show how different the mediums are.

[3DandBeyond]

hot_heart wrote...

Despite the annoying style, I generally find myself in agreeance on his film criticism. Though, every time I've read his thoughts on videogames, I've felt he misses the mark a little and I'd feel he'd benefit from considering the production side of things a little more. Simply because that aspect is so different to film (which it could be argued has become so much more refined) that it's easy to disregard its impact.

Well I did try to read it and I do think he misses the mark as well.

Film is freer to explore art in a way because it benefits from a variety of outlets in order to guarantee a minimum of sales.  It can afford to be less consumer driven in a way.  But it is also very less an interactive medium that requires the user/viewer to move it forward.  A film goes on regardless of the viewer's wishes.  It is a performance.  And it is meant to make one statement that can be interpreted different ways.

Games are interactive and live and die based on mainly one thing-the sale of the game itself.  Whereas movies can be sold as a ticket to the theater or a dvd or streaming video or as part of a satellite or cable package, a game is a game.  It may have franchise items to go along with it, but those are meaningless if no one likes the game.

A movie can afford to be an art project and experimental.  Games can't.  That doesn't mean they shouldn't try, but the risk is too great especially if it's something tacked onto another experience altogether.  Most people would laugh if CoD tried to incorporate an artsy ending to one of the games.  And I'm not comparing ME to CoD, but just saying you stick with the genre.

Games have to sell in order to be profitable.  And games must hit it big right away.  Movies can do lousy at the box office and find a niche audience that make them winners over time.  I saw Rocky Horror Picture Show when it first came out.  There were exactly 2 of us in the audience-my friend and I.  A year or so later it was a cult classic. 

Games are pretty much only sold as the best new thing.  They sell big right after release and then they drop off as newer games come out-they get into bargain bins and can be gone in 6 months.  I can watch 60 year old movies on my satellite tv or buy them outright. 

There actually is a new category that's up and coming for games and some experimental ones have been made (I've got some on my PS3), that are art games.  I've got one (not easy to play) that is based on M. C. Escher optical illusions.  And another one is like interactive visual and musical art. 

The whole of ME would have been art had they stuck with its themes and had the endings done something uplifting and/or poignant.

[Giggles_Manically]

@ The Review:


No seriously that guy is a complete drooling idiot, who deserves to be laughed at.
A person in a coma COULD TELL YOU that ME3 has terrible endings.

Anyone who says that the endings were good, has sniffed a few to many glue bottles for their own good.

[suprhomre]

Oh dear BioWare next time you decide to make art instead of video games, could you kindly state it somewhere in you product description, so I don't need to purchase any of your so called "art".

Thank you from a former fan.

[3DandBeyond]

suprhomre wrote...

Oh dear BioWare next time you decide to make art instead of video games, could you kindly state it somewhere in you product description, so I don't need to purchase any of your so called "art".

Thank you from a former fan.

The trailer for ME3 should be replaced.  Instead of Take Earth Back showing lots of fighting, it should be called, Ask the Enemy to Give Earth Back and show the Catalyst and Shepard having a conversation.

There should have been a big warning on the box that said don't expect to win this game and saying that it was a work of art (as you say) and not an ME game where the player's previous actions determine the outcome.  It's an ego fest for someone.

[suprhomre]

3DandBeyond wrote...

suprhomre wrote...

Oh dear BioWare next time you decide to make art instead of video games, could you kindly state it somewhere in you product description, so I don't need to purchase any of your so called "art".

Thank you from a former fan.

The trailer for ME3 should be replaced.  Instead of Take Earth Back showing lots of fighting, it should be called, Ask the Enemy to Give Earth Back and show the Catalyst and Shepard having a conversation.

There should have been a big warning on the box that said don't expect to win this game and saying that it was a work of art (as you say) and not an ME game where the player's previous actions determine the outcome.  It's an ego fest for someone.

LOL...............LOL................LOL................

[BDelacroix]

The problem with symbology is that it is meaningless without the meaning defined somewhere. Even religion defines its symbols somewhere.

I didn't think Citizen Kane was that great, either. It wasn't rotten, but not the best movie ever made.

I guess being obscure is the new thing. If you don't get it, then you are just not enlightened enough. Oh well.