Damn iakus, that's one of your greatest posts imo...
Blog Post: The Mass Effect 3 controversy. One Year Later.
Débuté par
MrDavid
, mars 28 2013 07:40
Retour en haut
#102
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 05:25
Red Panda
-
- Members
- 6 935 messages
Uncle Jo wrote...
Claiming to be an artist doesn't make you one.
.
Actually it does. Most artists are vagabonds. However, I'm not sure how this relates to the main argument.
#103
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 05:26
TiaraBlade
-
- Members
- 331 messages
I am sick and tired of apologists like the OP.
1. Art, like anything, is a product. Indeed, most great artists worked on commission and you had better believe that they sought to please their patrons!
2. We are the patrons of Bioware and their games. Sure, they can make any game they want BUT if the patrons are not happy with it, we will not support it and then Bioware and its incredible designers are out of work artists. That doesn't work for anyone, now does it?
3. There was no artistic vision in how the game ended. Let's be honest here: the ending changed at the last minute because of the leaked documents and this is how they ended. Furthermore, most art has a theme that stays consistent, only deviating with very, very good reason if it is to stay true to itself and to the patron. In Mass Effect, its themes include choice, the power to overcome great odds, and that we can all come together for the greater good.
The ending undercut all of that, using fallacious logic of an out of left field Star Child to justify it. Then we cut to the Normandy crash landing on a jungle planet. What kind of ending is that? Or vision? Certainly it does not reflect any type of satisfaction. If it's some sort of Adam and Eve ending, there is not enough genetic diversity to start a new society and any planet that sustains humans will be a death sentence to Tali and Garrus.
As for what a video game can do, it does has its limits based on its format. So do books and movies and they do different things well. A book is great for getting inside a characters head. A movie can create a visual scene that no amount of words can convey with as much life, certainly not in a compact manner. As for games, they provide a visceral feel and sense of ownership.
All formats can tell interesting stories and even have twist endings. However, a twist ending that is depressing for a two hour movie is not going to work with most games due to different investments of money, time, and effort. A two hour European movie where everything sucks hints that the ending may not be a happy one and you expect that as a possibility. Even if you don't like it, well you won't go do another movie like tha agin and only wasted two hours and ten dollars.
By contrast, people over the course of 6 years, 3 games, and 200+ dollars helped craft a story, one where they were told their choices matter only to have Bioware tell them in the end that their choices didn't matter, our "vision" overrides what you want, what you should have earned through gameplay, and it even undercut everything about the games leading up. That is not a vision, certainly not one that we would have invested so much time, energy, and money in.
People will die, friends will be lost, and Shepherd may even have to make the ultimate sacrifice but it has to be based in a manner consistent with the game: your choices, your efforts, and the Hero's Journey that we have taken with Shepherd across this epic adventure that should not be treated like a depressing European movie where the world controls you and you can not affect it, thus giving you an expected downer ending.
This is why people were so upset; not because we are too stupid or lazy to understand the ending (but of course the OP and other apologists are brilliant and thus do understand the hidden wisdom) but because Bioware undercut everything we invested into the games and undercut their own themes to do it!
As a result, we as patrons let it be known that we would not support Bioware; their products would not satisfy us as consumers and we were not going to support them, "just for the art." Bioware, artist that they are, are also producers who must satisfy the consumer base or they will not have the resources to create new games.
If they want to take chances with a vision, they must accept the risk and consequences. Perhaps creating a smaller game with a new IP rather than an existing one where so many invested so much.
Fortunately, sanity was seen and Bioware worked hard both through the extended cut and the Citadel DLC. I still don't see why they refused to give in to have a Victory Scenario but I guess that's pride. It will be interesting to see how DA3 and ME4 sell after this. Hopefully well IMHO but I also hope that Bioware "gets it" now and understands that experimentation is good but it must be rational and consistent with the product you put out.
1. Art, like anything, is a product. Indeed, most great artists worked on commission and you had better believe that they sought to please their patrons!
2. We are the patrons of Bioware and their games. Sure, they can make any game they want BUT if the patrons are not happy with it, we will not support it and then Bioware and its incredible designers are out of work artists. That doesn't work for anyone, now does it?
3. There was no artistic vision in how the game ended. Let's be honest here: the ending changed at the last minute because of the leaked documents and this is how they ended. Furthermore, most art has a theme that stays consistent, only deviating with very, very good reason if it is to stay true to itself and to the patron. In Mass Effect, its themes include choice, the power to overcome great odds, and that we can all come together for the greater good.
The ending undercut all of that, using fallacious logic of an out of left field Star Child to justify it. Then we cut to the Normandy crash landing on a jungle planet. What kind of ending is that? Or vision? Certainly it does not reflect any type of satisfaction. If it's some sort of Adam and Eve ending, there is not enough genetic diversity to start a new society and any planet that sustains humans will be a death sentence to Tali and Garrus.
As for what a video game can do, it does has its limits based on its format. So do books and movies and they do different things well. A book is great for getting inside a characters head. A movie can create a visual scene that no amount of words can convey with as much life, certainly not in a compact manner. As for games, they provide a visceral feel and sense of ownership.
All formats can tell interesting stories and even have twist endings. However, a twist ending that is depressing for a two hour movie is not going to work with most games due to different investments of money, time, and effort. A two hour European movie where everything sucks hints that the ending may not be a happy one and you expect that as a possibility. Even if you don't like it, well you won't go do another movie like tha agin and only wasted two hours and ten dollars.
By contrast, people over the course of 6 years, 3 games, and 200+ dollars helped craft a story, one where they were told their choices matter only to have Bioware tell them in the end that their choices didn't matter, our "vision" overrides what you want, what you should have earned through gameplay, and it even undercut everything about the games leading up. That is not a vision, certainly not one that we would have invested so much time, energy, and money in.
People will die, friends will be lost, and Shepherd may even have to make the ultimate sacrifice but it has to be based in a manner consistent with the game: your choices, your efforts, and the Hero's Journey that we have taken with Shepherd across this epic adventure that should not be treated like a depressing European movie where the world controls you and you can not affect it, thus giving you an expected downer ending.
This is why people were so upset; not because we are too stupid or lazy to understand the ending (but of course the OP and other apologists are brilliant and thus do understand the hidden wisdom) but because Bioware undercut everything we invested into the games and undercut their own themes to do it!
As a result, we as patrons let it be known that we would not support Bioware; their products would not satisfy us as consumers and we were not going to support them, "just for the art." Bioware, artist that they are, are also producers who must satisfy the consumer base or they will not have the resources to create new games.
If they want to take chances with a vision, they must accept the risk and consequences. Perhaps creating a smaller game with a new IP rather than an existing one where so many invested so much.
Fortunately, sanity was seen and Bioware worked hard both through the extended cut and the Citadel DLC. I still don't see why they refused to give in to have a Victory Scenario but I guess that's pride. It will be interesting to see how DA3 and ME4 sell after this. Hopefully well IMHO but I also hope that Bioware "gets it" now and understands that experimentation is good but it must be rational and consistent with the product you put out.
#104
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 05:33
Giga Drill BREAKER
-
- Members
- 7 005 messages
I dunno about anyone else but when I buy a videogame, I buy a product and when the product doesn't match with the promises that was made before the release of that product, and said promises are the reason I bought the game, I feel I have a right to complain.
Modifié par DinoSteve, 29 mars 2013 - 05:34 .
#105
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 05:44
dreamgazer
-
- Members
- 15 742 messages
DinoSteve wrote...
I dunno about anyone else but when I buy a videogame, I buy a product and when the product doesn't match with the promises that was made before the release of that product, and said promises are the reason I bought the game, I feel I have a right to complain.
And what "promises" weren't objectively fulfilled, from a product point of view?
#106
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 06:29
milkytoast
-
- Members
- 60 messages
Honestly I think the ending would have been alright, if it was not the last game in the Trilogy. It was just an awful way to end a trilogy. I think if the ending was actually supposed to be IT then it is kinda clever, but I highly doubt that they put that much thought into it.
#107
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 06:42
SpamBot2000
-
- Members
- 4 463 messages
As Jade pointed out, the question of authorship is particularly complex in cases like Mass Effect. Mac Walters was a minor writer on ME1. Drew Karpyshyn, on the other hand, was a major one. Yet the ending that defines what the story was about is all Walters and no Karpyshyn. Now, if I were to doodle a moustache on the Mona Lisa, that would significantly alter whatever the meaning of the painting is. Yet I would insist on my Artistic Integrity in doing so, and I expect BW apologists would leap to my defense against any unenlightened accusations of me defacing a priceless masterpiece.
Chemiclord has repeatedly stated that while he personally shares the view that the ME3 ending is a mess, he nevertheless respects the right of the artist to inflict that mess on his work. But the "author" of the work is nowhere near identical to the "author" of the ending. It is just a matter of corporate hierarchy who gets to imprint the overarching meaning to the whole of the work. This is a capitalist claim, not an artistic one. We should be extremely wary of attributing the dignity of artistic creation to a corporate body. Because art is what humans do.
As for hiding behind the "Artistic Integrity" excuse, that is exactly what BioWare as an organization tried to do. The founder of BW said it himself. Lawyering for BW won't change this. Chemiclord himself has frequently pled Artistic Integrity on behalf of BW on numerous occasions. Saying "It's our story, and we couldn't tell it in any other way" is an appeal to "artistic integrity". If not, what is it?
Clearly it is an attempt to leverage the social prestige of "art" against people who recognize a shoddy cop-out when they see one. But BW can hardly be said to create their works with the kind of integrity (yes) that implies, when the whole production is subject to the whims of the parent corporation, to begin with. Is nickel and diming you for Supah Spectre Packs art, of all things? Is cutting out pages from a book and selling them separately for inflated prices the sign of a real serious novelist? And so on and so forth.
Chemiclord has repeatedly stated that while he personally shares the view that the ME3 ending is a mess, he nevertheless respects the right of the artist to inflict that mess on his work. But the "author" of the work is nowhere near identical to the "author" of the ending. It is just a matter of corporate hierarchy who gets to imprint the overarching meaning to the whole of the work. This is a capitalist claim, not an artistic one. We should be extremely wary of attributing the dignity of artistic creation to a corporate body. Because art is what humans do.
As for hiding behind the "Artistic Integrity" excuse, that is exactly what BioWare as an organization tried to do. The founder of BW said it himself. Lawyering for BW won't change this. Chemiclord himself has frequently pled Artistic Integrity on behalf of BW on numerous occasions. Saying "It's our story, and we couldn't tell it in any other way" is an appeal to "artistic integrity". If not, what is it?
Clearly it is an attempt to leverage the social prestige of "art" against people who recognize a shoddy cop-out when they see one. But BW can hardly be said to create their works with the kind of integrity (yes) that implies, when the whole production is subject to the whims of the parent corporation, to begin with. Is nickel and diming you for Supah Spectre Packs art, of all things? Is cutting out pages from a book and selling them separately for inflated prices the sign of a real serious novelist? And so on and so forth.
Modifié par SpamBot2000, 29 mars 2013 - 06:44 .
#108
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 06:42
Jadebaby
-
- Members
- 13 229 messages
dreamgazer wrote...
DinoSteve wrote...
I dunno about anyone else but when I buy a videogame, I buy a product and when the product doesn't match with the promises that was made before the release of that product, and said promises are the reason I bought the game, I feel I have a right to complain.
And what "promises" weren't objectively fulfilled, from a product point of view?
Rachni involvement.
#109
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 06:51
IanPolaris
-
- Members
- 9 650 messages
Jadebaby wrote...
dreamgazer wrote...
DinoSteve wrote...
I dunno about anyone else but when I buy a videogame, I buy a product and when the product doesn't match with the promises that was made before the release of that product, and said promises are the reason I bought the game, I feel I have a right to complain.
And what "promises" weren't objectively fulfilled, from a product point of view?
Rachni involvement.
No "A,B, or C endings"
"You do not need to use multiplayer in order to get all the possible endings. It is merely another way to play." This has been proven to have been a LIE out of Bioware (Chris Priestly's) own lips.
-Polaris
#110
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 07:01
IllusiveManJr
-
- Members
- 12 265 messages
People will move on once the next Mass Effect installment comes out and them they'll complain about that one.
#111
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 07:12
Xamufam
-
- Members
- 1 238 messages
Troxa wrote...
It's not art, secondary belief is broken it Was written by J.R.R. Tolkien. there isnt any narrative coherance at the end, in storytelling it's needed to be considered art
And Mass Effect relies too much on contrivances to be artSecondary belief:
Inside it, what [the author] relates is 'true:' it accords with
the laws of that world. You therefore believe it, while you are, as it
were, inside. The moment disbelief arises, the spell is broken; the
magic, or rather art, has failed. You are then out in the Primary World
again, looking at the little abortive Secondary World from the
outside.-Tolkien
Games are NOT art, they are PRODUCT that INCLUDES art. Just like a car, a
house, furniture, and almost every other product you pay money for and
then get annoyed with if it turns out to be less than you expected.
There are artistic elements involved to be sure, but in the end, they
are only product.
The only reason anyone ever stuck by the games are art silliness is in a desperate attempt to give them some respectability.
It failed.
Not to mention that any claims to artistic integrity in ME3 were
compromised the second they made a single decision based on the
directives of the corporate masters. Like Multi-player, getting it out
by a certain date, including or not including material because it would
alienate/ reach out to certain communities, etc., etc. Decisions that
are made not out of artistic choice, but to sell a product.
#112
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 07:18
sveners
-
- Members
- 320 messages
I am curious. Were the ME forums ever this vitriolic? Were ME2s? Jade Empire? Kotor?
What about DA:O?
I've heard DA2 got plenty negative posts, but despite enjoying it, I do recognize that it was a far cry from Origins.
There will always be people who are critical, but has there ever been this level of discontent? More than a year after release?
I'm sure people will complain about the next installment of ME, but the amount of complaints would depend on the quality of the product?
What about DA:O?
I've heard DA2 got plenty negative posts, but despite enjoying it, I do recognize that it was a far cry from Origins.
There will always be people who are critical, but has there ever been this level of discontent? More than a year after release?
I'm sure people will complain about the next installment of ME, but the amount of complaints would depend on the quality of the product?
#113
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 07:21
AlanC9
-
- Members
- 35 648 messages
SpamBot2000 wrote...
As Jade pointed out, the question of authorship is particularly complex in cases like Mass Effect. Mac Walters was a minor writer on ME1. Drew Karpyshyn, on the other hand, was a major one. Yet the ending that defines what the story was about is all Walters and no Karpyshyn. Now, if I were to doodle a moustache on the Mona Lisa, that would significantly alter whatever the meaning of the painting is. Yet I would insist on my Artistic Integrity in doing so, and I expect BW apologists would leap to my defense against any unenlightened accusations of me defacing a priceless masterpiece.
This would be a much better analogy if Drew Karpyshyn had actually had an ending in mind.
Clearly it is an attempt to leverage the social prestige of "art" against people who recognize a shoddy cop-out when they see one. But BW can hardly be said to create their works with the kind of integrity (yes) that implies, when the whole production is subject to the whims of the parent corporation, to begin with. Is nickel and diming you for Supah Spectre Packs art, of all things? Is cutting out pages from a book and selling them separately for inflated prices the sign of a real serious novelist? And so on and so forth.
And yet, EA saw fit to leave the ending the way it was. It isn't artistic integrity, right? So why didn't Bio redo the ending, whether on their own or because EA forced them to? No money in it? Works for me, but then there weren't all that many of you folks out there, or there would have been money in it.
Modifié par AlanC9, 29 mars 2013 - 07:22 .
#114
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 07:24
AlanC9
-
- Members
- 35 648 messages
sveners wrote...
I am curious. Were the ME forums ever this vitriolic? Were ME2s? Jade Empire? Kotor?
ME2's boards were pretty awful, actually. JE and KotOR's weren't. But the NWN1 board was almost as bad as this one.
Modifié par AlanC9, 29 mars 2013 - 07:24 .
#115
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 07:27
AlanC9
-
- Members
- 35 648 messages
Jadebaby wrote...
dreamgazer wrote...
And what "promises" weren't objectively fulfilled, from a product point of view?
Rachni involvement.
I remember fighting lots of altered rachni. They're one of the major Reaper enemy types.
IIRC the quote was that the rachni were important, not that Shepard's decision about the rachni was important.
#116
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 07:30
IntelligentME3Fanboy
-
- Members
- 1 983 messages
let's keep it a secret.We all know that the ending controversy was mainly because of the lack of a happy ending
#117
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 07:32
Xamufam
-
- Members
- 1 238 messages
No, you can't compare the two one storytelling narrative coheranse to be art.spirosz wrote...
Troxa wrote...
Not in storytelling
Is a painting not telling a story in itself? Is music not telling a story? Is any form of creative freedom not in relation to expressing one's self and their experiences through a form that allows them to tell their story?
Fun fact btw, a teacher at a university who teaches about writing in
videos games used ME3 as an example of how NOT to do a video game. What
they did with the Catalyst goes even against the teachings of Plato!
You can't call it art when there is no narrative coheranse
Modifié par Troxa, 29 mars 2013 - 07:40 .
#118
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 07:43
Jadebaby
-
- Members
- 13 229 messages
AlanC9 wrote...
Jadebaby wrote...
dreamgazer wrote...
And what "promises" weren't objectively fulfilled, from a product point of view?
Rachni involvement.
I remember fighting lots of altered rachni. They're one of the major Reaper enemy types.
IIRC the quote was that the rachni were important, not that Shepard's decision about the rachni was important.
Important for the ending.... duh...
#119
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 07:44
AlanC9
-
- Members
- 35 648 messages
Troxa wrote...
What they did with the Catalyst goes even against the teachings of Plato!
Plato was wrong about lots of stuff, you know.
Was he even any good as a theorist of drama? I thought Aristotle wat the go-to Greek for that topic.
Modifié par AlanC9, 29 mars 2013 - 07:47 .
#120
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 07:45
AlanC9
-
- Members
- 35 648 messages
Jadebaby wrote...
Important for the ending.... duh...
Did anyone actually say that? I honestly don't recall, but I never follow marketing chatter too closely.
Modifié par AlanC9, 29 mars 2013 - 07:46 .
#121
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 08:00
Jadebaby
-
- Members
- 13 229 messages
Yes, mac Walters said it a week before ME3 came out.
#122
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 08:04
Zeldrik1389
-
- Members
- 595 messages
I remember someone from BioWare claimed that it was Mac and Casey who decide the endings on their own. And those same guys also said most of the "false advertisements", if I recall correctly. It's a surprise that Casey still in charge of the new ME game lol Actually, after all that sh!tstorm, I'm amazed that he was able to keep his job at all xD
#123
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 09:36
Mordak55
-
- Members
- 380 messages
The no A.B.C. endings statement, the Rachni choice from ME1 having "NO" effect on the game, having to play MP to get enough war assets, are things that should not have happened and on top of peoples dislike of the endings was the final straw as it were.
As much as I disliked the ending (pre EC) and thought that it was bad, lazy writing, its was every thing together that fuelled the rage. I put the game away for months before I could even look at it again.
I have since played several games with the EC, and then the DLC as it came out, and I have to say that the endings are still lazy and even more full of holes, and that for me is much worse. Regardless of the theme of the ending, its the terrible implimentation of the ending and the poor poor writing that really gets me, if they wanted to have an "artistic vision" at least put some effort into it, and not just go with some doodle's that they thought of over a late night coffee!!
As much as I disliked the ending (pre EC) and thought that it was bad, lazy writing, its was every thing together that fuelled the rage. I put the game away for months before I could even look at it again.
I have since played several games with the EC, and then the DLC as it came out, and I have to say that the endings are still lazy and even more full of holes, and that for me is much worse. Regardless of the theme of the ending, its the terrible implimentation of the ending and the poor poor writing that really gets me, if they wanted to have an "artistic vision" at least put some effort into it, and not just go with some doodle's that they thought of over a late night coffee!!
#124
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 11:23
Archonsg
-
- Members
- 3 560 messages
TiaraBlade wrote...
I am sick and tired of apologists like the OP.
1. Art, like anything, is a product. Indeed, most great artists worked on commission and you had better believe that they sought to please their patrons!
2. We are the patrons of Bioware and their games. Sure, they can make any game they want BUT if the patrons are not happy with it, we will not support it and then Bioware and its incredible designers are out of work artists. That doesn't work for anyone, now does it?
3. There was no artistic vision in how the game ended. Let's be honest here: the ending changed at the last minute because of the leaked documents and this is how they ended. Furthermore, most art has a theme that stays consistent, only deviating with very, very good reason if it is to stay true to itself and to the patron. In Mass Effect, its themes include choice, the power to overcome great odds, and that we can all come together for the greater good.
The ending undercut all of that, using fallacious logic of an out of left field Star Child to justify it. Then we cut to the Normandy crash landing on a jungle planet. What kind of ending is that? Or vision? Certainly it does not reflect any type of satisfaction. If it's some sort of Adam and Eve ending, there is not enough genetic diversity to start a new society and any planet that sustains humans will be a death sentence to Tali and Garrus.
As for what a video game can do, it does has its limits based on its format. So do books and movies and they do different things well. A book is great for getting inside a characters head. A movie can create a visual scene that no amount of words can convey with as much life, certainly not in a compact manner. As for games, they provide a visceral feel and sense of ownership.
All formats can tell interesting stories and even have twist endings. However, a twist ending that is depressing for a two hour movie is not going to work with most games due to different investments of money, time, and effort. A two hour European movie where everything sucks hints that the ending may not be a happy one and you expect that as a possibility. Even if you don't like it, well you won't go do another movie like tha agin and only wasted two hours and ten dollars.
By contrast, people over the course of 6 years, 3 games, and 200+ dollars helped craft a story, one where they were told their choices matter only to have Bioware tell them in the end that their choices didn't matter, our "vision" overrides what you want, what you should have earned through gameplay, and it even undercut everything about the games leading up. That is not a vision, certainly not one that we would have invested so much time, energy, and money in.
People will die, friends will be lost, and Shepherd may even have to make the ultimate sacrifice but it has to be based in a manner consistent with the game: your choices, your efforts, and the Hero's Journey that we have taken with Shepherd across this epic adventure that should not be treated like a depressing European movie where the world controls you and you can not affect it, thus giving you an expected downer ending.
This is why people were so upset; not because we are too stupid or lazy to understand the ending (but of course the OP and other apologists are brilliant and thus do understand the hidden wisdom) but because Bioware undercut everything we invested into the games and undercut their own themes to do it!
As a result, we as patrons let it be known that we would not support Bioware; their products would not satisfy us as consumers and we were not going to support them, "just for the art." Bioware, artist that they are, are also producers who must satisfy the consumer base or they will not have the resources to create new games.
If they want to take chances with a vision, they must accept the risk and consequences. Perhaps creating a smaller game with a new IP rather than an existing one where so many invested so much.
Fortunately, sanity was seen and Bioware worked hard both through the extended cut and the Citadel DLC. I still don't see why they refused to give in to have a Victory Scenario but I guess that's pride. It will be interesting to see how DA3 and ME4 sell after this. Hopefully well IMHO but I also hope that Bioware "gets it" now and understands that experimentation is good but it must be rational and consistent with the product you put out.
Quoted For Truth.
To this day, no matter where I go to online, where RPG fans congregate, there's still a good amount of disappointment and displeasure against ME3's ending. Not the entire game, just the ending.
Check out http://www.kickstart...enera?ref=city' class='bbc_url' title='Lien externe' rel='nofollow external'> Torment : Tides of Numenera , yes its the same people who did Planescape Torment, and look up the $2.85 million mark milestone, its actually says " ... Expensive epilogue. See how your decisions impact the world..."
Other devs in the RPG sphere know, just how important it is for the player to see his or her mark left on the world that they played in.
Bioware fumbled this very badly.
Call it art or whatever you want OP, but it doesn't change the fact that we were served a bowl of crap at the end of what would have been a wonderful meal.
With the EC, that same bowl came back with sugar coating.
#125
Posté 29 mars 2013 - 11:32
Obadiah
-
- Members
- 5 734 messages
Lord.
Ray's statement was:
"Artistic Integrity" wasn't used as a defense of the ending, that's just a description of how they want to go about creating an update to try to satisfy players.
Ray's statement was:
I also believe in and support the artistic choices made by the development team. The team and I have been thinking hard about how to best address the comments on ME3’s endings from players, while still maintaining the artistic integrity of the game.
...
We’re working hard to maintain the right balance between the artistic integrity of the original story while addressing the fan feedback we’ve received.
"Artistic Integrity" wasn't used as a defense of the ending, that's just a description of how they want to go about creating an update to try to satisfy players.
Modifié par Obadiah, 29 mars 2013 - 11:34 .
