235 réponses à ce sujet

[CosmicGnosis]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...
I agree with you to a certain extent, CronoDragoon. Ray didn't intend for it to be a discussion-closer, but the community turned it into a meme that suited a certain victim mentality. I believe Ray was trying to stand behind his people who may have been concerned about the furor that popped up in gaming media and various online comunities regarding the endings.

In this case, "artistic integrity" represented all the hard work done by the dev team that they should be proud of and that they stand behind. Your mileage may, of course, vary.

In my mind the most unfortunate thing that happened in the weeks after the release (besides obvious things like death threats and verbal attacks) was the conflation of BioWare's words (which were remarkably few) and the gaming media's words. By the time Ray said artistic integrity, it had already been used by sites like IGN who had combined it with ridicule of Mass Effect fans. It became associated with something condescending before BioWare ever touched the phrase, and so people forget that when Ray used the phrase, it appears in a sentence which is actually about finding the balance between listening to fans and sticking by their vision, which is totally fair.

Exactly. I noticed this. "Artistic integrity" in Ray's context wasn't all that bad, and people had already been freaking out about the concept long before he had said anything.

[AlanC9]

Vortex13 wrote...
So what if the ending would be 'dumbed down' for us simpletons, we would buy it. There is a potential goldmine sitting unused here and I don't see why Bioware/EA hasn't taken advantage of it. I mean Bioware already has a precedence set for providing alternate endings to games; Darkspawn Cronicles anyone?

The difference is that nobody pretends Darkspawn Chronicles is real. Would people be OK with an IT DLC if Bio said that this isn't a real ending?

[Ninja Stan]

Agreed, and I can see how it might be interpreted that way. But Ray has always been a straight shooter and always been a class act, both as a boss and as an executive, and I always had a tremendous amount of respect and admiration for him. Still do.

So I give all his comments the benefit of the doubt. Of course, it helped that I had an insider's perspective at the time also.

[schebobo]

Just thinking about it now, the one ending idea is really the only way they could have done the series justice. Obv, after the ending things could vary like Da:O or even mass effect 2. If bioware had really focused on just one ending with different character conclusions and outcomes depending on gameplay choices then they probably won't have had as much, if any backlash at all.

THEN, the SP dlc wouldn't be pointless and they wouldn't need to focus on anything about the ending. They would just have been singular stories set either before or after the game that really feel separate and not tied to the game itself like me2 dlc.

[Hey]

So... [armadillo] awards.. seriously from my perspective you could bring up Oscar nominations, Emmys, VGA's and [wallaby] and i really could care less... Well look at the user metacritic score moron!

And I can't hear terms like: thematically, DEM and head cannon enouch... [anemone] off.
I could care less...

Without all these [honey badger] awards the lay woman/man kind of knows if it's good or not.. ME3 had some moments but at the end it didn't.. No [porpoise]...

MAKE A BETTER GAME YOU [WALRUSES]! yeah, its late and [llama]...

[No swearing, please.]

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 30 décembre 2012 - 02:30 .

[Vortex13]

AlanC9 wrote...

Vortex13 wrote...
So what if the ending would be 'dumbed down' for us simpletons, we would buy it. There is a potential goldmine sitting unused here and I don't see why Bioware/EA hasn't taken advantage of it. I mean Bioware already has a precedence set for providing alternate endings to games; Darkspawn Cronicles anyone?

The difference is that nobody pretends Darkspawn Chronicles is real. Would people be OK with an IT DLC if Bio said that this isn't a real ending?

But they are already saying that about the four existing endings. No ending is cannon, there is no true ending, all choices are valid, ect. It doesn't matter that the Darkspawn Chronicles is not cannon, it still is an alternative ending, if Bioware came out tommorow and said that they are releasing an IT/Conventinal Victory DLC but that they are using RGB as cannon going into ME 4 I am pretty sure people would still buy it. 

[Dr_Extrem]

AlanC9 wrote...

Vortex13 wrote...
So what if the ending would be 'dumbed down' for us simpletons, we would buy it. There is a potential goldmine sitting unused here and I don't see why Bioware/EA hasn't taken advantage of it. I mean Bioware already has a precedence set for providing alternate endings to games; Darkspawn Cronicles anyone?

The difference is that nobody pretends Darkspawn Chronicles is real. Would people be OK with an IT DLC if Bio said that this isn't a real ending?

the darkspawn cronicles are really good. they were not only fun to play, they showed us a different angle - this is always welcome.

if bioware would release an alternate ending, everybody would win or have at least, less reasons to cry.

it did not matter how we finished dragon age - the choices were relatavised in dragon age 2 anyway.

i expect the same for mass effect 4 as well, if it is a sequel. a galaxy without krogan, quarians or geth/other ais would loose a lot of potential and it would be hard to explain, why there are no quarians around, if you saved them.

there could be a problem though .. if bioware brings an alternative ending and people like it more than the old ones, they would have to react, or the next [maelstrom] would break loose.


my guess is, that they dont not want to risk that - no matter how much it would please people or cash it would bring.



[No swearing, please.]

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 30 décembre 2012 - 02:30 .

[Ninja Stan]

Seriously, guys. Can we stop it with the swearing? Even using asterisks to self-censor is considered circumventing the language filter.

[TheJediSaint]

Off topic: Watching Stan moderate reminds me of the ninja mission videos from Shogun Total War.   


On topic:  I agree artistic integrity was twisted outside of its intended meaning.  I do not think Dr. Muzyka meant to put down fans with it.   I think it was mostly the condecension from certain parts of the gaming media that caused many fans to interpret it that way.

Modifié par TheJediSaint, 30 décembre 2012 - 02:40 .

[Archonsg]

Part of the problem is unfortunately the theme behind the endings, which while I do understand are meant to be sacrifices, the way they are presented, that the protagonist death is required, in fact dictated by the antagonist with no recourse to refuse (we'll come to that later) or change Shepard's fate deemed the act as a forced suicide under duress.
Whether this was the intention or not, for some, the player cannot help but feel that the message is nihilistic in nature and one that promotes suicide as a means to an end.

Again, whether this was the intent or not, it can be viewed as such.
I believe that for many this was the case. Thus the ending didn't sit well when a great deal of ambiguity and uncertainty was thrown into the mix on top of this.

Or at least that is my own feelings and opinion. So every time I see that sequence with the Catalyst play out, even today, it grates on my senses and trigger my revulsion for what seems to be a promotion on suicide.

[Yate]

Archonsg wrote...

Part of the problem is unfortunately the theme behind the endings, which while I do understand are meant to be sacrifices, the way they are presented, that the protagonist death is required, in fact dictated by the antagonist with no recourse to refuse (we'll come to that later) or change Shepard's fate deemed the act as a forced suicide under duress.
Whether this was the intention or not, for some, the player cannot help but feel that the message is nihilistic in nature and one that promotes suicide as a means to an end.

Again, whether this was the intent or not, it can be viewed as such.
I believe that for many this was the case. Thus the ending didn't sit well when a great deal of ambiguity and uncertainty was thrown into the mix on top of this.

Or at least that is my own feelings and opinion. So every time I see that sequence with the Catalyst play out, even today, it grates on my senses and trigger my revulsion for what seems to be a promotion on suicide.

the antagonist asks it

it's up to the player whether Shepard dies or not

nobody's forcing you to choose synthesis

[Archonsg]

Yate wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

Part of the problem is unfortunately the theme behind the endings, which while I do understand are meant to be sacrifices, the way they are presented, that the protagonist death is required, in fact dictated by the antagonist with no recourse to refuse (we'll come to that later) or change Shepard's fate deemed the act as a forced suicide under duress.
Whether this was the intention or not, for some, the player cannot help but feel that the message is nihilistic in nature and one that promotes suicide as a means to an end.

Again, whether this was the intent or not, it can be viewed as such.
I believe that for many this was the case. Thus the ending didn't sit well when a great deal of ambiguity and uncertainty was thrown into the mix on top of this.

Or at least that is my own feelings and opinion. So every time I see that sequence with the Catalyst play out, even today, it grates on my senses and trigger my revulsion for what seems to be a promotion on suicide.

the antagonist asks it

it's up to the player whether Shepard dies or not

nobody's forcing you to choose synthesis

Right.
Please re-read my post.
I am referring to *all* three choices, four if you count refuse, as it is a "critical failure" ending in which the message behind it is, "you choose this, you are committing suicide and dooming the rest if the galaxy with you." Which little wonder why some think of the refuse ending as an "FU!" ending. 

Modifié par Archonsg, 30 décembre 2012 - 04:35 .

[Dr_Extrem]

Yate wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

Part of the problem is unfortunately the theme behind the endings, which while I do understand are meant to be sacrifices, the way they are presented, that the protagonist death is required, in fact dictated by the antagonist with no recourse to refuse (we'll come to that later) or change Shepard's fate deemed the act as a forced suicide under duress.
Whether this was the intention or not, for some, the player cannot help but feel that the message is nihilistic in nature and one that promotes suicide as a means to an end.

Again, whether this was the intent or not, it can be viewed as such.
I believe that for many this was the case. Thus the ending didn't sit well when a great deal of ambiguity and uncertainty was thrown into the mix on top of this.

Or at least that is my own feelings and opinion. So every time I see that sequence with the Catalyst play out, even today, it grates on my senses and trigger my revulsion for what seems to be a promotion on suicide.

the antagonist asks it

it's up to the player whether Shepard dies or not

nobody's forcing you to choose synthesis

this is right - if you know what happens. the only thing shepard knows is:

- destroy: also kills synthetics and i am patrially synthetic - the catalyst implies/expects, that shep will die
- control: my organic body gets destroyed in the upload process (my mind might survive as me)
- synthesis: i will die - seriously jumping off a cliff into a big energy beam, kills people

shepard has no idea, that he/she can survive in destroy. only a meta gaming player knows this.


my pov: the lesson of this ending is, that you solve problems, by killing yourself.

[urbanshiv]

This idea of artistic integrity brings up an interesting question how much influence should gamers have on the development side and why have Bioware not drawn a solid line in this area, in ME 1 some fans wanted to romance Tali so in ME 2 they made her a romance option, in ME 2 people wanted to see more of the old squad mates so the released the lair of the shadow broker Dlc, in ME 3 fans wanted new endings but this time round bioware released the extended cut to expand the original endings rather than adding different ones.

[macrocarl]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Outsider edge 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.

Not really it was heavily put forward in Ray Mayzuka's blog. Go read it if it's still somewhere on this site. Artistic integrity and 75+ perfect scores was about the main content of that blog.

No... Stop making things up. 

It wasn't said 'heavily' he spoke of it and now BSN'ers who hate ME3's ending use it as sort of a swear phrase. But it's a fan made mountain out of an off hand mole hill.

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

Vortex13 wrote...
So what if the ending would be 'dumbed down' for us simpletons, we would buy it. There is a potential goldmine sitting unused here and I don't see why Bioware/EA hasn't taken advantage of it. I mean Bioware already has a precedence set for providing alternate endings to games; Darkspawn Cronicles anyone?

The difference is that nobody pretends Darkspawn Chronicles is real. Would people be OK with an IT DLC if Bio said that this isn't a real ending?

If it could be played out instead of the current ending, it's very possible, yeah

[Alex_Dur4and]

Hello all!

I truly believe that there was absolutely no reason for the Bioware team to not have added a "best ending" scenario. The fact is that all other endings would still be there no matter what.

It's even better for them as it gives them an extra ending to choose from when it comes down to deciding which of them would become the "canon" ending for ME4. No one would argue with them if they, for instance, would choose the "control" ending as their "canon" ending if they had really good ideas for the next game... It's their game and their choice but, at least, the players would have had their moment with ME3. And, who knows... After playing through all the endings, some might prefer the original ones.

Personally, I don't really care how tragic the endings are... I just want closure and truth. I don't care about open endings. In fact, it irritates me to no end! I really don't like "breath scenes" and "red, blue, green" endings that leave us with a gazillion "what if" questions. I've played these games for over 1500 hours if I include multi-player and I deserve answers rather than speculations!

Modifié par Alex_Dur4and, 30 décembre 2012 - 07:38 .

[LucasShark]

Written in another topic and transplanted here after said topic was locked by mods for some reason...

With all the talk of "artistic integrity", and said words becoming a meme, I think some clarification is in order, particularly on my part, as I despise the conclusions of ME3, and much of the game in general.

The statement "the ending should not be questioned because it is art!" is idiotic, as is the assertion that "videogames (or Mass Effect) is not art". The former is placing meaning where there is none to be found, and the latter is an absolutism which has little foundation.

There IS art in the mass effect series, a great deal in fact. BUT: it is not to be found in the conclusion, or in a great deal of ME3. It is in the rich universe which Mass Effect 1 went into such detail in creating. There are entire reems of information which NEVER needs to be seen in order for the story to work, but exist purely because someone cared to put in that thought on the setting. Art can be found in Mass Effect 2's rich character-based "short stories" which we get to see told inside said rich universe (even if the core narrative gives it a few blemishes). Art can be seen in ME3's resolution to the Tuchanka (and to some degree) the Rannoch story arcs, but there is little to none to be found in ME3's astetics, or its conclusion.

Mass Effect 3 is where the "art" begins largely to end, and the "artsy" to take its place. What is the difference? Well: it is the difference between deep thought, and the created appearance of deep thought. It is the difference between a philosopher asking "why?" in a cosmic sense, and a toddler asking "why". Case in point: the choice in mission names for Mass Effect 2 often was a reference to what sort of question it was tackling. For example: Thane's mission is titled "sins of the father", a reference to the bible, and designed to highlight the subject matter of the story. This title had thought behind why it was chosen and not simply "Thane's son". To contrast: take the inclusion of the Catalyst, and his appearance. The inclusion of a "mysterious child" is a cheap gimmic, often used in poorly written horror novels and the like. His appearance has no artistic merit besides instinctive emotional ties to children. The same can be said for Mass Effect 3's heavy reliance on the "sad piano music": in scenes of Earth retreating and burning, but it lacks true content, because we have never seen this world before. It is relying on our attachment to "a" planet called "Earth", but it isn't this one.

ANd of course: the conclusion. It could easily have the appearance of "art", it does kind of raise questions... but that's about where it ends. It raises questions already raised in the series, presents them as though they were the "core" issues all along, and both presents and resolves them in a way which is counterpoint to what has (potentially) already transpired. Their presentation was shoddy at best, and even included cheap thoughtless alusion, as opposed to the formerly mentioned well-intensioned one. It even ended with an advertisement, the ultimate insult to injury.

There is art here, but just like throwing paint at the wall doesn't make you an accentric genious, or writing downer poetry doesn't make you a litterarry master, the appearance of art is not the same as art.

[Ninja Stan]

Good post. That's why you're the accredited Artmaster, LucasShark. I wish there were more of you so we could more easily determine what is and is not art.

[The Night Mammoth]

I don't give a [hoot] if it's art or not.

There are flaws regardless, and I take great pleasure pointing them out.

[No swearing, please.]

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 31 décembre 2012 - 04:09 .

[SDW]

Oooh, why did I only now see this thread? Is it too late to reply to the first posts?

Literary analysis follows:
I kind of see your point, OP. Just can't quite agree to it.  If I understand it correctly, you're saying the ending should have been made to be mass-appealing? And that the problem was that it wasn't?

I agree with some of the opinions here in that it can be bland if writers try to appeal to the largest group of people - if that means they spoon-feed their audience every bit of information, leave out things a part of the people might not understand and try not to make anybody unhappy (which is a losing game anyway).
On the other hand - yes, IMHO Shepard should have "really" beaten the Reapers, minus the Catalyst. But not (only) because that's how most of us would have liked it. Some posters seem to think it was a clever move to go against expectations. It can be in certain stories. Here, though, it doesn't fit because it goes against the premise. 


-----
Side note on "premise" and "Mass Effect's premise"-----
There is a book by dramatist and screenwriter Lajos Egri, "The Art of Dramatic Writing", dealing with what to take into consideration when you write a play. Yet it has been recommended for novelists as well - some things about storytelling are universal. It was published in 1947 and is still available today. So for anyone saying that this is an "appeal to authority": Whoever this guy is, at least it seems that a lot of the intended professional audience find his advice good enough to keep buying and/or recommending it.
He puts a strong emphasis on giving your story a premise, a statement that is proven true by the narrative.
From what I experienced in the Mass Effect games, I conclude their premise is "You can beat impossible odds when you work together".

Examples:
ME 1 - the Mu relay is only a legend but we do find it, the Reapers are slowly revealed as super-powerful and never having been beaten before but we kill one
ME 2 - nobody has crossed the Omega 4 relay and come back but we make it, it's a suicide mission but we come back
ME 3 - the genophage has been incurable and the Krogan seemingly too dangerous to be healed, but if we made the right decisions, both things can be changed, the Geth-Quarian war has gone on for centuries but we can make peace

You could object that we can kill off all the squadmates in ME 2, so, not "work together". But that proves the premise insofar as Shepard needs at least 2 to make it to the end alive. If too many squaddies die, he will die himself and there is nothing you can import to ME 3. Then, the story literally ends there because of his choices.
Also, for ME 3, if your choices lead to Wreav being the Krogan leader, Eve dying and the genophage not being healed or a similar scenario for the Geth/Quarian plotline, you get less EMS. So you have less to fight with in the final stand, lessening your chances of beating the odds. Until the actual end, you don't know how that will play out, but at least the numbers tell you you are better off when you choose in such a way that everybody makes it.

-----
End of sidenote
-----


The ending seems to forget about the "cooperation" and "beating the odds" premise and instead gives us the new premise of "as long as there's synthetic and organic, they will always eventually come into conflict".
So I suggest the ending would have been better received had they led their former premise to its conclusion.

Modifié par SDW, 31 décembre 2012 - 06:06 .

[BleedingUranium]

Of course, assuming IT, then it is art, and their integrity is a very good thing, but noooo, it has the be "bad riting lulz"

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Alright, I'm going to finally enter this after avoiding this thread...

First off I get very emotional. I love the series. Stan, if you can convey that to any of the writers please do so. I wouldn't still be here talking about it, b**** moaning and complaining if I didn't. In fact, I just bought the entire series on Amazon for my PC (not the Trilogy pack though -- it was the DLC thing, plus the price was great). I've already completed it on my 360. Bioware made out again.

I'm a musician, and a composer. I write orchestral music and I'm working on something at the moment. I'm no Beethoven, but I do what i can. I also do techno and other stuff for fun. I know artsy from art. I also know when something is great art, but is just not what we would call accessible art. If a work is not accessible I mean that the average person won't necessarily be drawn in by it, or in the music world it is not a type of music to which one would be able to listen on a daily basis.

There is art. And then there is pretentious.

I've always looked at the Mass Effect series as a place of escape. Shepard was this action heroine who was about beating the odds. I liked that. The theme that we learned about the reapers and their allies throughout 2/3 of the series was that they in ME1) we learned from Vigil that they locked out the mass relays and took out one system at a time. In ME2) the Collectors did hit and run attacks on isolated human colonies.

* we overcame the odds and stopped a reaper invasion in ME1
* we overcame the odds and stopped the collectors in ME2
* we overcame the odds and delayed a reaper invasion in Arrival
* we overcame the odds and cured the genophage
* that last action allowed the "Miracle on Palaven"
* we overcame the odds and forged an alliance between the Geth and Quarians and the rest of the Galactic community.
* and heck Balak even joined up.

The reapers had never faced a united galaxy before. We started preparing for Earth. We were ready to take them on. We had the Crucible ready. 7650 EMS.

I know things were rushed so as not to have to ask EA for another extension. From some of the glitches in the game it's obvious. From the equality of femShep male:female LI ratio it's obvious when compared to maleShep's that wasn't thought out well.

The soundtrack to the game was excellent, but at times it was over done to draw out tears in scenes -- like the evac scene, which IMO should have been slow motion, and the child should have been helped by one of the marines. The dream sequences were overdone. They were supposed to make us care more, but they had the opposite effect. Why no battle music in London? It felt sterile. This was the big buildup.

Skipping to the very end. I had the pleasure of viewing a community mod MEEM which replaced the Child with a Prothean and used the Dark Energy script. This did show me something that it wasn't the Child/Catalyst at the end or the messenger, or even necessarily the content. It was that the entire action stopped and that suddenly the story became something that up to that point it hadn't been. It had been an rpg/action adventure. That story ended with Anderson's death.

Now it was: here is a new story with a new character now telling you there are three choices on how you die, and how you blow up the universe you grew to love; pick one. That was the real main objection in March 2012. It didn't fit. The breath scene is still controversial.

They did the EC, and that's still a band aid. It still doesn't really fit. It's still a new story. It's just longer. People have had more time to get used to it.

How do these endings fit with the bullet points I made above? The theme of overcoming the odds? They don't. That's been my point. This is what is pretentious. This is artsy.

In music we have counterpoint. This where you have a melody and you weave counter melodies against that melody throughout a piece. You can have one counter melody or you can have several. The master of counterpoint is J.S. Bach. There are rules to using counterpoint. You weave counterpoint to tell your story in your music.

Likewise in a story there are rules as well. In music and in story writing some rules need to be followed otherwise you end up with a mess. When I'm writing a piece of music I have the advantage of being able to go back and listen to it with my software and hear where I broke a structural rule, and I can fix it. It may not seem like one note may be critical, but enough one notes will add up.

[o Ventus]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Outsider edge 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.

Not really it was heavily put forward in Ray Mayzuka's blog. Go read it if it's still somewhere on this site. Artistic integrity and 75+ perfect scores was about the main content of that blog.

No... Stop making things up. 

Have you actually read Dr. Muzyka's blog? He actively uses the term "artistic integrity".

Well, he says "artistic vision", but the two phrases are synonymous.

[BleedingUranium]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Alright, I'm going to finally enter this after avoiding this thread...

*awesome wall of text*

You should really look into the Indoctrination Theory, Julia. I hate that this makes me sound preachy and such, annd there are a lot of misunderstandings about what it actually is, but with an understanding of story, themes, and all the rest that you clearly show here, you should give it a chance.