232 réponses à ce sujet

[d-boy15]

only when developer use it to hide their false promise and advertise.

Modifié par d-boy15, 21 mars 2013 - 06:42 .

[NCommand]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

NCommand wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

does that make their art better?

if an autor work gets criticised, he tries to do better. mass effect 3s ending was criticised, based on objective errors within the narrative. sticking to those errors (and adding new ones) is a bad decision.


the critics did not demand that the writers change their work - but they certainly hoped for it. criticism is not a bad thing and every artist should be thankful if he gets criticies in a constructive way.

the problem is, that the writers of mass effect behave, like their art is not to be criticised at all.

Never heard they said it makes it better, but I understand their usage of it to defend not changing the ending (which they did anyway eventually)

If I have a vision for something, but in the end people demand that I change the end product it's well within my right to claim it would damage my artistic integrity and that it will stay as it is

but you still have to live with the bad critique and the fact, that people will not like their work, because of their bad handywork.

if you dont change it for the better, you have to man up and swallow the critique. bioware response was, that we just dont get it.

Well, there's never anything to stop critics from being criticized, if people demand something to be changed even though I claim it would break the "artistic integrity" of my work I would feel it's well within my right to say they don't get it

[Wayning_Star]

How many works of art are immersive with viewer interactions?

(must be some sort of new wave fad or some thing?

[JamesFaith]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

the critics did not demand that the writers change their work - but they certainly hoped for it. criticism is not a bad thing and every artist should be thankful if he gets criticies in a constructive way.

the problem is, that the writers of mass effect behave, like their art is not to be criticised at all.

I have to disagree with this.

Critics don't hope for changes in authors works. They hoped for changes in next work from author or for a new version (f.e. in drama), but not in current judged work. Only a special group of critics - testers - doing this.

And that was problem with critism of ME3 - fans demanded changes of current game when BW wanted use feedback for their next work which is normal reaction on critism.

  

i would agree, if we were discussing a book or movie ... but this is a computer game, where the content can easily be changed with addons, dlcs and patches. this medium is the most flexible and less static.

So double standard critics for videogames and other forms of art?

Book can be reprinted in new version. Painting can be alterned. Movie can be take away from cinemas and altered by new scenes. Sculpture can be change at some limit.

This isn't about technical difficultness, this is about "moral rights" of artist.

[Xamufam]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Say if I were to compliment mass effect as a good work of art, would that be too taboo? If I said I enjoyed the sounds and musics of mass effect, the rich visuals mass effect has, or the well written portions of it, would that be crossing the forbidden line within the internet on how you can compliment a game?

Has ME3 made the word "art" akin to a black spot on any and all video games now?

Well, it's not wrong to discuss games as art at all but in so doing you must be prepared for strong disagreement and to have your opinion challenged, just as I must in answering you.

ME as a whole had the potential to be real "written" art.  The visuals, well I can't say they achieved that-I've seen some amazing visuals in other less "artistic" leaning video games, including Uncharted games and Killzone 2 and 3, even CoD games had some even more amazing visuals than ME(3).

As a derivative product, I'd also challenge the concept of it being art and not just that ideas were derived from other subjects.  ME3 specifically took (at the end) whole pieces of other products out of context and then dumped them into the story largely unchanged.  You can borrow ideas from others, you can borrow pieces of content from others, but in order to create true art, you must make it your own-adapt it to fit your creation.

ME was art-the greatest art within it was in the writing of the characters and their interaction, the emotions we ended up feeling about pixels on a screen.  That's art at its best.  As flawed as many things were some of the stories within the games and the characters themselves were the best gaming's had to offer.  The endings smashed the idea of art into the dust.  As the one point where debate about art was the heaviest, the ending to ME3 is the least artistic thing about the games-yet it is clear it is something BW may have sort of considered art.  Originally they wanted ME3 to be more Star Wars-like, and to be a blockbuster in that vein, but I think they got worried about it ending simply with some "heroes save the day" type ending and they created an open-ended, speculation ending.  They then decided it fit their artistic vision though many thought they were blind (I still do).

In fact, a new category for gaming has been created because there are games out there that are more like fluid paintings, art in motion.

Computer graphics can be artistic and quite beautiful, but in a game with a story it takes more than good looks to be considered art.  And it takes more than saying something is art or implying it's intellectual (speculation mode)-art kind of speaks for itself.  Just like some movies can look really good, have a great cast, and then stink up the place with a bad story/script, and then end up not being considered artistic or big money makers.

A funny note-in the midst of the debate over the endings of ME3, one of the major US art museums (I think in New York but I could be wrong) had a video exhibit discussing this very thing as to whether video games were art.  And ME3 was being included in the exhibit that was asking the question (they didn't say ME3 or any video game was art).

True
It acully feels like they were going for a star wars ending

Modifié par Troxa, 21 mars 2013 - 06:55 .

[Wayning_Star]

10110001110100 wrote...

 I think you're missing the point. The question is not “Is such-and-such art?” but rather “has 'art' become a dirty word?" in the way an over-enthusiastic military can give a new meaning to 'liberate' or how 'justice' can leave a bitter taste in the mouths of any who have suffered at the hands of a corrupt or prejudiced servant of that justice. Shakespeare illustrates this phenomenon in Antony's speech from Julius Caesar
“Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.The evil that men do lives after them;The good is oft interred with their bones;So let it be with Caesar. The noble BrutusHath told you Caesar was ambitious:If it were so, it was a grievous fault;And grievously hath Caesar answer'd it.Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest, —For Brutus is an [color=rgb(255,0,0)">honorable man]honorable men[/color], —Come I to speak in Caesar's funeral.He was my friend, faithful and just to me:But Brutus says he was ambitious;And Brutus is an honorable man.”

..and so on. The repetition of 'honorable man' in the given context gives it the subtext "MURDERING BASTARD".

With this in mind, the question now is will the words 'art' or 'integrity' retain their previous meanings when used by developers (or publishers) in the future, or will they carry the stain of transparent excuses for incomplete work and pressure from above to maximise profit that some would argue has indelibly covered EA and Bioware's reaction to ME3's reception.

and/or users missing the point of the exercise.. in gaming'n stuff.

It's really just about ego, fan pressure to accomplish some 'mission' to uphold their favorite 'artsy' canon. The transitional is lost on too many, as the interactive reality is basis for operability across a wide spectrum of users or so call 'fan base'. Many comments are just a 'show of hands' and the continuation of just another part of the game(s) through interaction in real time. Mostly meta game stuff, outside the 'frame' of reference and that actual 'work of art'.

[Dr_Extrem]

JamesFaith wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

the critics did not demand that the writers change their work - but they certainly hoped for it. criticism is not a bad thing and every artist should be thankful if he gets criticies in a constructive way.

the problem is, that the writers of mass effect behave, like their art is not to be criticised at all.

I have to disagree with this.

Critics don't hope for changes in authors works. They hoped for changes in next work from author or for a new version (f.e. in drama), but not in current judged work. Only a special group of critics - testers - doing this.

And that was problem with critism of ME3 - fans demanded changes of current game when BW wanted use feedback for their next work which is normal reaction on critism.

  

i would agree, if we were discussing a book or movie ... but this is a computer game, where the content can easily be changed with addons, dlcs and patches. this medium is the most flexible and less static.

So double standard critics for videogames and other forms of art?

Book can be reprinted in new version. Painting can be alterned. Movie can be take away from cinemas and altered by new scenes. Sculpture can be change at some limit.

This isn't about technical difficultness, this is about "moral rights" of artist.

its not a double standard .. the critics (constructive) never demanded that the endings have to be changed - only that they should be altered. this would have been possible, because the content can be altered afterwards (ec) - a movie or book cant be altered in an easy way.

the artist has the last word on this - that is true and the good right of the artists - but that does not make their work better.

[Auld Wulf]

@OP

It depends upon your intellectual intelligence, your emotional intelligence, and your ability to appreciate anything within the scope of a video game beyond "thing go boom."

That's actually the way it's always been. People hate Proteus and To the Moon, too. Big surprise.

Modifié par Auld Wulf, 21 mars 2013 - 06:52 .

[Wayning_Star]

Troxa wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Say if I were to compliment mass effect as a good work of art, would that be too taboo? If I said I enjoyed the sounds and musics of mass effect, the rich visuals mass effect has, or the well written portions of it, would that be crossing the forbidden line within the internet on how you can compliment a game?

Has ME3 made the word "art" akin to a black spot on any and all video games now?

Well, it's not wrong to discuss games as art at all but in so doing you must be prepared for strong disagreement and to have your opinion challenged, just as I must in answering you.

ME as a whole had the potential to be real "written" art.  The visuals, well I can't say they achieved that-I've seen some amazing visuals in other less "artistic" leaning video games, including Uncharted games and Killzone 2 and 3, even CoD games had some even more amazing visuals than ME(3).

As a derivative product, I'd also challenge the concept of it being art and not just that ideas were derived from other subjects.  ME3 specifically took (at the end) whole pieces of other products out of context and then dumped them into the story largely unchanged.  You can borrow ideas from others, you can borrow pieces of content from others, but in order to create true art, you must make it your own-adapt it to fit your creation.

ME was art-the greatest art within it was in the writing of the characters and their interaction, the emotions we ended up feeling about pixels on a screen.  That's art at its best.  As flawed as many things were some of the stories within the games and the characters themselves were the best gaming's had to offer.  The endings smashed the idea of art into the dust.  As the one point where debate about art was the heaviest, the ending to ME3 is the least artistic thing about the games-yet it is clear it is something BW may have sort of considered art.  Originally they wanted ME3 to be more Star Wars-like, and to be a blockbuster in that vein, but I think they got worried about it ending simply with some "heroes save the day" type ending and they created an open-ended, speculation ending.  They then decided it fit their artistic vision though many thought they were blind (I still do).

In fact, a new category for gaming has been created because there are games out there that are more like fluid paintings, art in motion.

Computer graphics can be artistic and quite beautiful, but in a game with a story it takes more than good looks to be considered art.  And it takes more than saying something is art or implying it's intellectual (speculation mode)-art kind of speaks for itself.  Just like some movies can look really good, have a great cast, and then stink up the place with a bad story/script, and then end up not being considered artistic or big money makers.

A funny note-in the midst of the debate over the endings of ME3, one of the major US art museums (I think in New York but I could be wrong) had a video exhibit discussing this very thing as to whether video games were art.  And ME3 was being included in the exhibit that was asking the question (they didn't say ME3 or any video game was art).

True

3d would argue with a rock..lol

[Wayning_Star]

Auld Wulf wrote...

@OP

It depends upon your intellectual intelligence, your emotional intelligence, and your ability to appreciate anything within the scope of a video game beyond "thing go boom."

That's actually the way it's always been. People hate Proteus and To the Moon, too. Big surprise.

some metaphorical pills are just toooo bitter..lol

[Wayning_Star]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

the critics did not demand that the writers change their work - but they certainly hoped for it. criticism is not a bad thing and every artist should be thankful if he gets criticies in a constructive way.

the problem is, that the writers of mass effect behave, like their art is not to be criticised at all.

I have to disagree with this.

Critics don't hope for changes in authors works. They hoped for changes in next work from author or for a new version (f.e. in drama), but not in current judged work. Only a special group of critics - testers - doing this.

And that was problem with critism of ME3 - fans demanded changes of current game when BW wanted use feedback for their next work which is normal reaction on critism.

  

i would agree, if we were discussing a book or movie ... but this is a computer game, where the content can easily be changed with addons, dlcs and patches. this medium is the most flexible and less static.

So double standard critics for videogames and other forms of art?

Book can be reprinted in new version. Painting can be alterned. Movie can be take away from cinemas and altered by new scenes. Sculpture can be change at some limit.

This isn't about technical difficultness, this is about "moral rights" of artist.

its not a double standard .. the critics (constructive) never demanded that the endings have to be changed - only that they should be altered. this would have been possible, because the content can be altered afterwards (ec) - a movie or book cant be altered in an easy way.

the artist has the last word on this - that is true and the good right of the artists - but that does not make their work better.

""never demanded that the endings have to be changed - only that they should be altered. this would have been possible""

altered is not changed? Then synthesis is canon?!?

now we're gettin somewhere

[Zagardal]

www.youtube.com/watch

[LPPrince]

"Art"? Not so much.

"Artistic Integrity"? Very much.

[Dr_Extrem]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

the critics did not demand that the writers change their work - but they certainly hoped for it. criticism is not a bad thing and every artist should be thankful if he gets criticies in a constructive way.

the problem is, that the writers of mass effect behave, like their art is not to be criticised at all.

I have to disagree with this.

Critics don't hope for changes in authors works. They hoped for changes in next work from author or for a new version (f.e. in drama), but not in current judged work. Only a special group of critics - testers - doing this.

And that was problem with critism of ME3 - fans demanded changes of current game when BW wanted use feedback for their next work which is normal reaction on critism.

  

i would agree, if we were discussing a book or movie ... but this is a computer game, where the content can easily be changed with addons, dlcs and patches. this medium is the most flexible and less static.

So double standard critics for videogames and other forms of art?

Book can be reprinted in new version. Painting can be alterned. Movie can be take away from cinemas and altered by new scenes. Sculpture can be change at some limit.

This isn't about technical difficultness, this is about "moral rights" of artist.

its not a double standard .. the critics (constructive) never demanded that the endings have to be changed - only that they should be altered. this would have been possible, because the content can be altered afterwards (ec) - a movie or book cant be altered in an easy way.

the artist has the last word on this - that is true and the good right of the artists - but that does not make their work better.

""never demanded that the endings have to be changed - only that they should be altered. this would have been possible""

altered is not changed? Then synthesis is canon?!?

now we're gettin somewhere

should =/= have to

should = it would be better if (recommendation)
have to = it has to be done (demand)

learn the difference.

Modifié par Dr_Extrem, 21 mars 2013 - 07:03 .

[Xamufam]

Zagardal wrote...

www.youtube.com/watch

www.youtube.com/watch

[Bizantura]

For me art is meddling in your affairs thru the unconsious. There are geniuses working in the advertising whose work are real works of art. How uplifting that is well I leave that up to the individual to decide.

[alsonamedbort]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

should =/= have to

should = it would be better if (recommendation)
have to = it has to be done (demand)

learn the difference.

"You don't have to change the endings, but you should change them or the series will never be good."

Technically a difference, but practically speaking there's no difference at all.

[dreamgazer]

LPPrince wrote...

"Art"? Not so much.

"Artistic Integrity"? Very much.

Think about how different this conversation would look if they simply stated "creative integrity" (more in line with what they intended), instead of artistic.

[JamesFaith]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

So double standard critics for videogames and other forms of art?

Book can be reprinted in new version. Painting can be alterned. Movie can be take away from cinemas and altered by new scenes. Sculpture can be change at some limit.

This isn't about technical difficultness, this is about "moral rights" of artist.

its not a double standard .. the critics (constructive) never demanded that the endings have to be changed - only that they should be altered. this would have been possible, because the content can be altered afterwards (ec) - a movie or book cant be altered in an easy way.

the artist has the last word on this - that is true and the good right of the artists - but that does not make their work better.

No, even such demand shouldn't be part of good critics.

Critic is observer - he point out weaknesses and strongpoints of current piece of art - but he is never active part of creative process. Only active role of critism in creative process is between finishing of work and its releasing. Then it is only artist who can change it, or someone who have some additional right on it, for example based on contract with artist.

And alterned is just weaker synonymum of changed.

 BTW: reprint of altered short story in magasines would be surely less difficult and cheaper then alternation of videogame, so your point about flexible form of videogames isn't too valid here.

[Dr_Extrem]

JamesFaith wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

So double standard critics for videogames and other forms of art?

Book can be reprinted in new version. Painting can be alterned. Movie can be take away from cinemas and altered by new scenes. Sculpture can be change at some limit.

This isn't about technical difficultness, this is about "moral rights" of artist.

its not a double standard .. the critics (constructive) never demanded that the endings have to be changed - only that they should be altered. this would have been possible, because the content can be altered afterwards (ec) - a movie or book cant be altered in an easy way.

the artist has the last word on this - that is true and the good right of the artists - but that does not make their work better.

No, even such demand shouldn't be part of good critics.

Critic is observer - he point out weaknesses and strongpoints of current piece of art - but he is never active part of creative process. Only active role of critism in creative process is between finishing of work and its releasing. Then it is only artist who can change it, or someone who have some additional right on it, for example based on contract with artist.

And alterned is just weaker synonymum of changed.

 BTW: reprint of altered short story in magasines would be surely less difficult and cheaper then alternation of videogame, so your point about flexible form of videogames isn't too valid here.

the critic should not tell the writer that he should change the work - but the writer should see this by him/herself. mass effect 2 and 3 have issues in their narrative. this was pointed out and criticised by critics. most of the technical critique was valid and should have been taken to heart by the writers and should have been taken care of in the ec.

it was their decision not to do it - their good right. nut was it the best for the gesamtkunstwerk of mass effect?


a short story publicated in a magazines has rarely the scope of a movie, full blown book or video game.

[Wayning_Star]

I'm just glad you picked synthesis.. had me worried for a moment there..

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Say if I were to compliment mass effect as a good work of art, would that be too taboo? If I said I enjoyed the sounds and musics of mass effect, the rich visuals mass effect has, or the well written portions of it, would that be crossing the forbidden line within the internet on how you can compliment a game?

Has ME3 made the word "art" akin to a black spot on any and all video games now?

no .. only in combination with this game


"gesamtkunstwerk" is the word we are looking for.


a game can have good visuals or sound - but that alone does not make it a piece of art.

English being such a vague language once again. "Art" is now being used sarcastically with regard to the Mass Effect 3 ending. I think now people are starting to take a look at video games a bit more closely as well.

What I've been seeing is great visuals and great sound but the same crap being churned out. The same tropes being used over and over again. I'm starting to get tired of gaming. It's become "meh". It's all this macho BS crap. I want story content. I want a plot that makes sense, not a plot that acts as a backdrop to show off the special effects or the gunplay. Create a world I want to explore and tell me a story about it. And make it a good story. Oh, and another thing, if I'm playing the progonist, I'm a woman. If this is a RPG make sure that you include a female protagonist and don't treat her as an afterthought. Equal opportunity, and yes I'll acknowledge men and women are different -- "I had reach, she had flexibility." Garrus said.

If you don't tell me a story, I'll just go straight to a game with multi-player because the single player is a waste of time.

[Dr_Extrem]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Say if I were to compliment mass effect as a good work of art, would that be too taboo? If I said I enjoyed the sounds and musics of mass effect, the rich visuals mass effect has, or the well written portions of it, would that be crossing the forbidden line within the internet on how you can compliment a game?

Has ME3 made the word "art" akin to a black spot on any and all video games now?

no .. only in combination with this game


"gesamtkunstwerk" is the word we are looking for.


a game can have good visuals or sound - but that alone does not make it a piece of art.

English being such a vague language once again. "Art" is now being used sarcastically with regard to the Mass Effect 3 ending. I think now people are starting to take a look at video games a bit more closely as well.

What I've been seeing is great visuals and great sound but the same crap being churned out. The same tropes being used over and over again. I'm starting to get tired of gaming. It's become "meh". It's all this macho BS crap. I want story content. I want a plot that makes sense, not a plot that acts as a backdrop to show off the special effects or the gunplay. Create a world I want to explore and tell me a story about it. And make it a good story. Oh, and another thing, if I'm playing the progonist, I'm a woman. If this is a RPG make sure that you include a female protagonist and don't treat her as an afterthought. Equal opportunity, and yes I'll acknowledge men and women are different -- "I had reach, she had flexibility." Garrus said.

If you don't tell me a story, I'll just go straight to a game with multi-player because the single player is a waste of time.

good thing we have extra words for everything.

[CronoDragoon]

LPPrince wrote...

"Art"? Not so much.

"Artistic Integrity"? Very much.

Agreed. Deservedly so, in my opinion.