235 réponses à ce sujet

[Someone With Mass]

Cthulhu42 wrote...
And maybe him using his mind would have gone better if he wasn't indoctrinated as f**k and basically spounting nonsense the entire game.

Or had tried to go beyond "you can't comprehend my intellect" or "I'm so good at what I do" for once and actually tried to come up with a real counterargument to Shepard's accusations.

As it turned out to be, I'd rather have the boss fight. Literally nothing would have been lost.

[BonFire5]

David7204 wrote...

The Illusive Man isn't powerful because he's physically strong or skilled. He's powerful because of his intellect and will. He's defeated once he loses that to indoctrination.

Which would give all the more reason for a desperate gun fight. He's lost everything he thought he had. Say the gun fight is for failing the Paragon option, or Renegade.

[Someone With Mass]

The only reason TIM is even allowed to make his argument is the fact that he's holding Anderson at gunpoint.

That does not require much intellect to achieve.

[RukiaKuchki]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Outsider edge wrote...

One of the main defenses put up by Bioware concerning the Mass Effect 3 endings was the word artistic integrity.

*Citation needed.

Seriously, this is one of the most annoying self-propogating myths of the entire ending debacle.

Sorry to take this back a few pages, but yes, this 'artistic integrity' meme is both infuriating and damn-right boring now. Mainly because most of the people who use it clearly have no idea what the term means, but they are consistently (and willfully) using a quote out of context. Is it because they are still angry? Upset? A little bit stupid? I don't know, but it really is time to move on from this immaturity that is constantly highjacking potentially interesting discussions on these forums. 

With regards to the 'boss fights', and more specifically...the final boss fight...are they really needed in games anymore? What is their real purpose? Based on a number of comments above, they are certainly expected. Do people just want Bioware to do what everyone else does, in film and action-oriented games? Do people not want to think about what they have just seen, rather than take it all at face value? Do people not want to be challenged? There was an intense amount of criticism for the final boss fight in ME2, and lets be honest...the final fight with Saren in ME1 was rather silly and the real climax was the preceeding conversation - the battle of wills. ME3 gave us an ending that we never saw coming. It was an ending that generated a visceral reaction that arguably has not been seen before with this intensity in a gaming community. Petitions, youtube videos, cupcakes, road signs, borderline pyschosis.... With the EC, we were given a chance to converse with the Catalyst, understand the dilemma, and to digest the final choices. All of these choices offered a victory of sorts but at a terrible cost. This kind of decision shouldn't be made off the cuff, in the heat of a fire fight. It was the conclusion of Shephard's story and it required a change of pace. I'm not saying the execution of the endings were perfect, but I think they were different and challenging. I think boss battles are thing of the past. 

[Outsider edge]

RukiaKuchki wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Outsider edge wrote...

One of the main defenses put up by Bioware concerning the Mass Effect 3 endings was the word artistic integrity.

*Citation needed.

Seriously, this is one of the most annoying self-propogating myths of the entire ending debacle.

Sorry to take this back a few pages, but yes, this 'artistic integrity' meme is both infuriating and damn-right boring now. Mainly because most of the people who use it clearly have no idea what the term means, but they are consistently (and willfully) using a quote out of context. Is it because they are still angry? Upset? A little bit stupid? I don't know, but it really is time to move on from this immaturity that is constantly highjacking potentially interesting discussions on these forums. 

With regards to the 'boss fights', and more specifically...the final boss fight...are they really needed in games anymore? What is their real purpose? Based on a number of comments above, they are certainly expected. Do people just want Bioware to do what everyone else does, in film and action-oriented games? Do people not want to think about what they have just seen, rather than take it all at face value? Do people not want to be challenged? There was an intense amount of criticism for the final boss fight in ME2, and lets be honest...the final fight with Saren in ME1 was rather silly and the real climax was the preceeding conversation - the battle of wills. ME3 gave us an ending that we never saw coming. It was an ending that generated a visceral reaction that arguably has not been seen before with this intensity in a gaming community. Petitions, youtube videos, cupcakes, road signs, borderline pyschosis.... With the EC, we were given a chance to converse with the Catalyst, understand the dilemma, and to digest the final choices. All of these choices offered a victory of sorts but at a terrible cost. This kind of decision shouldn't be made off the cuff, in the heat of a fire fight. It was the conclusion of Shephard's story and it required a change of pace. I'm not saying the execution of the endings were perfect, but I think they were different and challenging. I think boss battles are thing of the past. 

On the whole point of artistic integrity we can agree to disagree. In my opinion the fact it was mentioned in the blog meant any change would have too be close in line with the original vision they had. In movies if an ending doesn't work more often then not it get's canned completely artistic integrity of the scenariowriter not withstanding.

As for your statement that bossbattles is a thing of the past i wonder why you ever played this franchise too begin with since it's positively littered with bossfights apart from the final entry. Also the intensity people reacted too the original ending had nothing too do with how deep it was. It had a character introduced 5min from the end, three colours and a ton of unexplained questions. Each of those questions leading too dire consequences when using previous knowledge too explain them. No happy ending, no deep thoughtful ending, just a mire of nonsense only a few liked the rest either spouted their bile on the internet or simply shrugged and traded the game in.

Modifié par Outsider edge, 28 décembre 2012 - 03:33 .

[thefallen2far]

Andromidius wrote...

You all realise that if the endings went over your head and you didn't understand them, Bioware still have the right to be proud of their own art, right? Dumbing it down so people understand it would ruin it.

People just refuse to admit it, say its bad and then congratulate themselves for it. Criticising the literal ending isn't hard - because its designed to be criticised and analysed and then rejected. And then you need to realise what the ending actually ment.

Wow.... you obviously want this responded to, so I will.

ME1 and 2 were headed by a novelist, ME3 and its ending were written by a comic book writer. As such, the critical self editing of a novel writer is obiously absent from the final product to introduce a dumbed down version of a childish breakdown of conflict. Introducing "magic" technology like inexplicable random teleportation to the central hub of the enemy base, increased TP/TK of indoctrination by the I.m., magic of arbitrary hybridization of organic and synthetic all for the sake of some nonsensical naive plot that wasn't that good to begin with is already lazy uncreative writing of your average current comic writer. That's fine, they have their audiences that are easily entertaned.... like reality shows, there's no problem with someone liking dumbed down tv.

That said, if you establish an audience that appreciates intelligent and critically thought writing of a novel writer and switch it to the dumbed down concept of a comic book writer, of course the audience will be split between those entertained by avoidence of intelligence for magic and what they think is high concept. Again, not a problem. But you do have to accept the lack of respect for dumbing down the product for these people that are easily entertained.

[SpamBot2000]

The BioWare lawyers on this thread have failed. If 'artistic integrity' is not a major defense of the endings, just what is?

And there is no integrity in setting your work aflame in a panic AND then selling it to your loyal supporters with fraudulent hype.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 28 décembre 2012 - 06:33 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

David7204 wrote...

That's true. Along with "too-videogamey." I think that phrase was used literally once in the art book.

No this phrase was used by Casey Hudson as to the reason why they didn't use a boss fight, as the excuse why we got the original ending to the game. You can find it if you search Youtube.

[RukiaKuchki]

Outsider edge wrote...

On the whole point of artistic integrity we can agree to disagree. In my opinion the fact it was mentioned in the blog meant any change would have too be close in line with the original vision they had. In movies if an ending doesn't work more often then not it get's canned completely artistic integrity of the scenariowriter not withstanding.

As for your statement that bossbattles is a thing of the past i wonder why you ever played this franchise too begin with since it's positively littered with bossfights apart from the final entry. Also the intensity people reacted too the original ending had nothing too do with how deep it was. It had a character introduced 5min from the end, three colours and a ton of unexplained questions. Each of those questions leading too dire consequences when using previous knowledge too explain them. No happy ending, no deep thoughtful ending, just a mire of nonsense only a few liked the rest either spouted their bile on the internet or simply shrugged and traded the game in.

No, in my opinion, the ME franchise is not 'positively littered' with boss fights. There are ebbs and flows in the combat, but in the traditional sense (Resident Evil for an example) they are quite rare. We will have to agree to disagree on that one. My reasons for playing and enjoying the franchise are mine and mine alone, do not in your infinite ignorance presume to know what appeals to me about a particular game franchise. 

With regards to the ending, why do people like yourself continually assume that you speak for the majority, when you certainly do not? Arrogance is not a virtue. Perhaps you speak for the majority who post on this forum, but when it comes to people who have played this game, it is far from the majority who post here or even know of this forum's existence. And why do you assume that anyone that does not agree with you, and sees things in a story that you fail to see, is foolish and spouts bile? You need to improve your reasoning before you can be taken seriously as a critic. 

[AlanC9]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

The BioWare lawyers on this thread have failed. If 'artistic integrity' is not a major defense of the endings, just what is?

It's not like there's any defense that would make you feel better about them. What's the point?

[AlanC9]

thefallen2far wrote...

ME1 and 2 were headed by a novelist, ME3 and its ending were written by a comic book writer. As such, the critical self editing of a novel writer is obiously absent from the final product to introduce a dumbed down version of a childish breakdown of conflict.

Sounds like you don't read any actual comic books.

[SpamBot2000]

AlanC9 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

The BioWare lawyers on this thread have failed. If 'artistic integrity' is not a major defense of the endings, just what is?

It's not like there's any defense that would make you feel better about them. What's the point?

Correct, there is no point in BioWare defending them, especially now since they are continuing the story. There is a point to making that story acceptable to more paying customers though. 

[Sejborg]

And then there was Blade Runner. A movie that was turned into complete nonsense because the test audience was dimwitted. Hello stupid voice over. hello lore breaking ending, hello missing unicorn scene, hello commercial disaster.

[archangel1996]

AlanC9 wrote...

thefallen2far wrote...

ME1 and 2 were headed by a novelist, ME3 and its ending were written by a comic book writer. As such, the critical self editing of a novel writer is obiously absent from the final product to introduce a dumbed down version of a childish breakdown of conflict.

Sounds like you don't read any actual comic books.

I laughed at the ending, because i tought of this

Then this

because i understood it was not a crappy joke

So yes, for 3 minutes the RBG was funny

Modifié par archangel1996, 28 décembre 2012 - 07:49 .

[RogueBot]

Ultranovae wrote...

No, just simply no.
Commercial writing was what gave us the abomination that was the ending to "I am Legend" because the original ending didn't test well with audiences.
If fans always got their way every time, we wouldn't have masterpieces like The Windwaker, Resident Evil 4, or anything by Suda51.
Instead we would just have the hackneyed writing of a generic shooter. While not excellent, the endings are great, specially because they are different than what people wanted.

You make a good point.

Not to imply that ME3 is on the level of TWW or RE4 (although it is a good game overall IMO), but I agree with your post.

Except for the last part. Something being different than what people want doesn't inherently make it great. I'm sure any one of us could make a joke ending that none of us would want or expect.

Modifié par RogueBot, 28 décembre 2012 - 08:52 .

[Jenonax]

Andromidius wrote...

You all realise that if the endings went over your head and you didn't understand them, Bioware still have the right to be proud of their own art, right? Dumbing it down so people understand it would ruin it.

People just refuse to admit it, say its bad and then congratulate themselves for it. Criticising the literal ending isn't hard - because its designed to be criticised and analysed and then rejected. And then you need to realise what the ending actually ment.

Its that niggly little phrase 'dumbing it down' that really irks me.

It implies that I am not intelligent enough to understand what Bioware were trying to get across.  I do, it just wasn't very good.

Indeed I would put forward that it was Bioware themselves that didn't understand their own ending and its consequences.  The original stank of being poorly thought through, evidenced by the fact that rather a lot of the well documented mistakes have been completely retconned in the EC. 

Bioware have every right to be proud of it.  We have every right to criticize it.  Smarter people than I have analyzed the end and come up with a whole list of faults.  They don't need to 'dumb it down' they needed to fix it.


I certainly do not 'congratulate' myself for saying the ending is bad.  Its my opinion and I have the evidence to back it up.  I did not want to hate the ending, I wanted to love it.  It was so out of the blue and unexpected that it completely ripped me out of the game.  That is not what a narrative is supposed to do.  Its supposed to raise points and questions within context.  If not it becomes a philosophy exercise and not a story.  I and others have analysed it to death.  We know what it means.  There is no deeper meaning we've all missed.  I would argue that in the context of the story we were presented before the elevator bit, the end has no meaning at all.  You have problems if the story could have ended twenty minutes before it actually did without any detriment.

[Ninja Stan]

Fans believe they know exactly what they want, and that they can communicate that effectively to the creators of the products they love. And even if they could, if you ask 100 people what they want to see in the next game, you'll get 120 responses.

But hindsight is 20/20. It's not really possible to predict just how a game is going to be received by the public until it is released. All you have to do is look at the myriad shows, films, or games to find characters that were originally intended to be one-offs, but turned out to be so popular, they were made more prominent. Who could have predicted Conrad Verner or Blasto would have such a following?

So no, "artistic integrity" was never used as a dismissal of fan criticism or a catch-all escape clause. It was a response to the overwhelming hue and cry from those who felt "betrayed" by a videogame and unreasonably abusive in the community to the devs and the companies involved. No one likes to see the work they spent years of their life on, spat on and kicked into a burning orphanage. When "I was disappointed with the product you created" turns into "you lazy, incompetent money-grubbers cheated me out of all my money and destroyed videogaming forever, and I can never trust or love again!", I think the response from Ray Muzyka was not only necessary, but very much in line with his own passions and values, since he loves both videogames and the company he created. He wanted to demonstrate that he stood behind his company and his people.

The BioWare developers I know (and I know a lot of them) don't have thin skins and aren't looking to avoid all negative crticism, but that doesn't mean they would enjoy going out of their way to be verbally abused and shouted down.

[thefallen2far]

Annie Hall would have been a badly written murder mystery, Thelma and Louise would have been another 10 minutes longer after the drive off the cliff, Little Shop of Horrors would have ended with the end of the world andthere would've been a new ending to T2 if they didn't have test audiences. Now, you cannot say "I am legend" or "Clerks" would have been better received in their original release, and the sole issue of the endings do not constitute the movies as a whole. However, if the end is crap and people don't like it, there is no integriy, only pride or you don't have the money.

Hipster art is not the only art in existence.

[dorktainian]

http://blog.bioware....012/03/21/4108/

i wont criticise any one person in particular. to me the most mind boggling thing is how did it get to this? I know that the Doctor asked us to play through it and form our own opinion, but what then happens if you still think it is very poor? This is how IT sprung up. People see indoctrination and then because everything else is meh, they cling on to the most obvious other thing. Yeah I can see why it might be art. But bad art is still....bad art. If forums exist for honest comment, then surely it must accept that bad comments are equally as valid as good comments? No one here as far as i know is here just to drag bioware down. they are here cos they give a damn.

FWIW i still play the game, but just stop at london. Hey since it's art, it's just as valid an ending imo as going through the mind.... that is everything after london. Shep is dead. Game over. the rest is pointless.

[StayFrosty05]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Fans believe they know exactly what they want, and that they can communicate that effectively to the creators of the products they love. And even if they could, if you ask 100 people what they want to see in the next game, you'll get 120 responses.

But hindsight is 20/20. It's not really possible to predict just how a game is going to be received by the public until it is released. All you have to do is look at the myriad shows, films, or games to find characters that were originally intended to be one-offs, but turned out to be so popular, they were made more prominent. Who could have predicted Conrad Verner or Blasto would have such a following?

So no, "artistic integrity" was never used as a dismissal of fan criticism or a catch-all escape clause. It was a response to the overwhelming hue and cry from those who felt "betrayed" by a videogame and unreasonably abusive in the community to the devs and the companies involved. No one likes to see the work they spent years of their life on, spat on and kicked into a burning orphanage. When "I was disappointed with the product you created" turns into "you lazy, incompetent money-grubbers cheated me out of all my money and destroyed videogaming forever, and I can never trust or love again!", I think the response from Ray Muzyka was not only necessary, but very much in line with his own passions and values, since he loves both videogames and the company he created. He wanted to demonstrate that he stood behind his company and his people.

The BioWare developers I know (and I know a lot of them) don't have thin skins and aren't looking to avoid all negative crticism, but that doesn't mean they would enjoy going out of their way to be verbally abused and shouted down.

In all honesty I don't think it takes a great leap in logic to assume that many of the gamers would want a happy ending possibility for their protaganist....and the epic overcoming of tremendous odds...especially one they have to become so involved with to create....persona, morality, choice, visage, LI's, etc....

I do not want to see the Devs openly post on the Forum because 'yes, they will be torn to shreds' and I don't want to see that happen...there are some questions I would absolutely love to ask them and recieve a thought out answer....but not see them get abused for it.

[Brovikk Rasputin]

There is a happy ending in the game. The problem is that some of you people consider a happy ending to be an ending with zero sacrifices, which is just not going to happen, and that's just not BW's problem. It really is that simple. 

Modifié par Brovikk Rasputin, 28 décembre 2012 - 09:52 .

[dorktainian]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

There is a happy ending in the game. The problem is that some of you people consider a happy ending to be an ending with zero sacrifices, but that's just not BW's problem.

are you refering to refusal?...if so i agree.

[Jenonax]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

There is a happy ending in the game. The problem is that some of you people consider a happy ending to be an ending with zero sacrifices, but that's just not BW's problem.

You people?

Im sorry is there an underclass of people im not aware of?  Are some opinions more equal than others?

[Brovikk Rasputin]

dorktainian wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

There is a happy ending in the game. The problem is that some of you people consider a happy ending to be an ending with zero sacrifices, but that's just not BW's problem.

are you refering to refusal?...if so i agree.

Sure, the ending where everyone dies because Shepard is acting like a stubborn child. Yeah, that's such a cheerful ending.

[Brovikk Rasputin]

Jenonax wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

There is a happy ending in the game. The problem is that some of you people consider a happy ending to be an ending with zero sacrifices, but that's just not BW's problem.

You people?

Im sorry is there an underclass of people im not aware of?  Are some opinions more equal than others?

The people who claims that ME3 doesn't have a happy ending.