217 réponses à ce sujet

[Legion of 1337]

FlamingBoy wrote...

remydat wrote...

Yeah I don't know how people interpret artistic integrity as f**k off. If you don't like the artists work then don't consume it. That is your right as a consumer. The artist's right as the artist is decide for himself whether any feedback is worth altering the original intent of the story or not.

If I wrote a story and it is the story I wanted to tell then I am sticking to my story period. You are free to not read it. You are free to tell me it sucks. Hell you are free to tell me I suck. But it is a product for you. You did not invest your blood, sweat, and tears to create it. The game developers did and they have no obligation to cede to your demands nore are they douchebags if they don't. It is their idea and their vision. If you want control over an idea or vision then create your own.

The way artistic integrity was used implied a level of unquestionability. For example

This does not represent bioware but bioware never tried to distance themselves from such a position.

This option of "buy it or don't" instead of the right of protest, to complain, to criticise was belittled during this controversy. It implied that bioware was beyond criticism simply because its there story. It implied that they could had the right not to meet adversting and marketing promises simply because it was "their" story.

A story sold on the marketing fact that it was "our" story. To be belittle for not liking a game was a disgrace by bioware and the gaming media of the highest kind.

Yes, they lied. If that bothers you, don't give them more money. No one is saying you can't criticize - have you seen the amount on this forum? But artistic integrity does in fact mean they can do as they please with their own creation. We need to just sit back, say "that was crap" like we do with any bad ending in any piece of media, and move on. Why do people still dither on about this? Hell, the Crucible is a bigger plot problem than the ending.

[remydat]

chemiclord wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

If you are watching a movie and the power goes out meaning that you didn't get to see the last 20 minutes, then at the very worst any reputable theatre will give you a pass to see another movie which is in effect a sort of refund.

-Polaris

That's not a very accurate analogy, man.  Like... at all.

ME3 is not unplayable.  The product you have can be completed from beginning to end.  That you do not LIKE that content does not mean the game is broken.  

Exactly and the movie theater would laugh at you for watching the whole damn movie and then asking for you money back.  I mean you have to have the elephant balls to pull some sh*t like that.

Once again, rent the damn game if you must play it.  It cost like 9 bucks.  Just because your impatient a** could not wait a few extra weeks to rent instead of buy is not Bioware's fault.

[FlamingBoy]

remydat wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

The way artistic integrity was used implied a level of unquestionability. For example

This does not represent bioware but bioware never tried to distance themselves from such a position.

This option of "buy it or don't" instead of the right of protest, to complain, to criticise was belittled during this controversy. It implied that bioware was beyond criticism simply because its there story. It implied that they could had the right not to meet adversting and marketing promises simply because it was "their" story.

A story sold on the marketing fact that it was "our" story. To be belittle for not liking a game was a disgrace by bioware and the gaming media of the highest kind.

But that is not bioware like you said.  So now you want Bioware to defend you when someone else says something about you.  Give me a break.  I confess, I did not read all the interviews but give me something from Bioware not a third party.

Well it is techniquely first party since they hired an ign imployee. Hence bioware had the choice to distance them selves or agree with the statement. They did nothing, hence they are responsible for the image that was created by remaing silent
Is that fair, no its not. But that is how the game is played.

Also I encourage you to do your own research, it provides a little perspective and I cannot go trapsing around the internet to find every snippet of biowares works. I am not that computer savy.

However her is a extremely biased post a player made a while back deatailing the percieved lies... I agree with some and I disagree with a few but its something to get started on.
http://social.biowar...index/10204263/
also on artistic integrity
http://blog.bioware....012/03/21/4108/

[FlamingBoy]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

remydat wrote...

Yeah I don't know how people interpret artistic integrity as f**k off. If you don't like the artists work then don't consume it. That is your right as a consumer. The artist's right as the artist is decide for himself whether any feedback is worth altering the original intent of the story or not.

If I wrote a story and it is the story I wanted to tell then I am sticking to my story period. You are free to not read it. You are free to tell me it sucks. Hell you are free to tell me I suck. But it is a product for you. You did not invest your blood, sweat, and tears to create it. The game developers did and they have no obligation to cede to your demands nore are they douchebags if they don't. It is their idea and their vision. If you want control over an idea or vision then create your own.

The way artistic integrity was used implied a level of unquestionability. For example

This does not represent bioware but bioware never tried to distance themselves from such a position.

This option of "buy it or don't" instead of the right of protest, to complain, to criticise was belittled during this controversy. It implied that bioware was beyond criticism simply because its there story. It implied that they could had the right not to meet adversting and marketing promises simply because it was "their" story.

A story sold on the marketing fact that it was "our" story. To be belittle for not liking a game was a disgrace by bioware and the gaming media of the highest kind.

Yes, they lied. If that bothers you, don't give them more money. No one is saying you can't criticize - have you seen the amount on this forum? But artistic integrity does in fact mean they can do as they please with their own creation. We need to just sit back, say "that was crap" like we do with any bad ending in any piece of media, and move on. Why do people still dither on about this? Hell, the Crucible is a bigger plot problem than the ending.

If you lie about a marketing product, they actually do not have the right to release it according to their vision because they sold it on false perceptions.
That is how it works.

[rapscallioness]

The Starkid is still in the story cuz its part of the story. I'm still pissed w/the Leviathans. This all started w/them worrying abt their tributes.

And the Catalyst should have just let "nature" take its course. If the synthetics rise up and defeat all organics...then they win. Hooray. Alternatively, if the organics defeat them, then they win. That's the way it usually works. For better, or worse.

I don't see the synthetics wiping out all organics, though. We're a bit like cockroaches. But Leviathan just had to meddle. For selfish reasons no less. And then they just hid for billions? of years.

Forget the Starkid. I blame the Leviathans for all this. They don't even wanna take responsibility for their fubar. "No. No. Everything is at it should be...lalala. We don't hear you."

[remydat]

FlamingBoy wrote...

Well it is techniquely first party since they hired an ign imployee. Hence bioware had the choice to distance them selves or agree with the statement. They did nothing, hence they are responsible for the image that was created by remaing silent
Is that fair, no its not. But that is how the game is played.

Also I encourage you to do your own research, it provides a little perspective and I cannot go trapsing around the internet to find every snippet of biowares works. I am not that computer savy.

However her is a extremely biased post a player made a while back deatailing the percieved lies... I agree with some and I disagree with a few but its something to get started on.
http://social.biowar...index/10204263/
also on artistic integrity
http://blog.bioware....012/03/21/4108/

They hired him to make that response?  Where is that stated.

And they hyped their game.  What do you actually consider to be a lie?  I see a lot of statements that could be interpreted any number of ways and most likely people expected more when the statement is open to interpretation. 

[remydat]

FlamingBoy wrote...

If you lie about a marketing product, they actually do not have the right to release it according to their vision because they sold it on false perceptions.
That is how it works.

It is not a lie if it was true when you said it.  Things change.  If Mac Walters gives an interview 7 months before the game is out based on the plan at that time and then Casey Hudson tells him to scrap something, he did not lie.  He is not psychic and can't predict that a few months after he says something Casey Hudson is going to tell him to scrap that idea.

Modifié par remydat, 18 juin 2013 - 05:29 .

[AlanC9]

rapscallioness wrote...


And the Catalyst should have just let "nature" take its course. If the synthetics rise up and defeat all organics...then they win. Hooray. Alternatively, if the organics defeat them, then they win. That's the way it usually works. For better, or worse.

Unfortunately, he wasn't programmed to do that......

[IanPolaris]

remydat wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

If you are watching a movie and the power goes out meaning that you didn't get to see the last 20 minutes, then at the very worst any reputable theatre will give you a pass to see another movie which is in effect a sort of refund.

-Polaris

This is a terrible example.  The power did not go out.  Your game disc was not defective.  You played the last 20 minutes and did not like it.  Tough sh*t.  If you go to the movie theater and you don't like the last 20 minutes of the latest Star Wars film disaster, you don't get your money back.

Try a more relevant comparison because this one stinks dude.

I think it's valid.  Consider the popularity of MEHEM which does really nothing more than remove the star-brat.  It improves the game dramatically.  Thus a case could be made that ME3 out of the box with the original endings was in fact a flawed product.  At some level Bioware must have agreed (although they will never admit this) because they charged nothing for the extended cut.  The fact that bioware threw their entire DLC production cycle out of what to produce a free DLC tells me that at some level Bioware does recognize the moral (if not strictly legal) validity of my basic logic.

-Polaris

[Nightwriter]

The Starsquirt practically represents BioWare's will at this point. It's the embodiment of the ending, of everything fans hated about it and everything BioWare didn't think was wrong with it.

[IanPolaris]

Nightwriter wrote...

The Starsquirt practically represents BioWare's will at this point. It's the embodiment of the ending, of everything fans hated about it and everything BioWare didn't think was wrong with it.

I agree.  Bioware has to keep starbrat in or admit that their critics were right (which they will never do).

-Polaris

[David7204]

That is utterly stupid nonsense.

Despite what you seem to think, DLC is not a magical paintbrush used to fix any all and mistakes a developer makes with a story.

You have got to be incredibly foolish if you can't grasp that there would be very significant consequences for making such a huge change.

Modifié par David7204, 18 juin 2013 - 06:52 .

[Ninja Stan]

Let's please tone down the hostility and try to stay on-topic. Keep the discussion civil. We can disagree with each other without resorting to childish behaviour. Thank you.

[Wolfva2]

FlamingBoy wrote...
If you lie about a marketing product, they actually do not have the right to release it according to their vision because they sold it on false perceptions.
That is how it works.

The proper solution to this is to file a legal complaint for fraudelent business practices.  You then sue the company for mega-money and retire on the private island you bought with the proceeds (that is, if you're the lawyer; if you're the complainant you get the pittance left after lawyer fees and use it to buy another game from the now bankrupt company that you'll just kvetch about.....).

Or, you sob online, rending your clothes and gnashing your teeth about how you've been....been... cheated!  They...they LIEEED TO MEEEEE! <sob>  <wail>  By all the gods in heavens how...how could this have haaaaapennnnned!  FIE UPON THEEE!  FIEEEEE!!!! FIEEEE!  <sob>  Alas poor internet, come and succor me to thy breast for the ignobility which this that company has thus heaped upon my soul with their foul and devious chicanary casting me deep unto the well of despair and depression for the lowest of blows to this mine high expectations of a game worthy of so much more but not having been tailored specifically for me hath fallen far short of the mark as an arrow shot into the sun against the breeze on this cold day in York when the towers did fall!!!!*


*sarcastic rendering of the high drama some people are treating a FREAKING GAME.  Knew I studed Shakespeare for a reason....**

** Ninjastan; laugh!  It's supposed to be funny!  Not antagonistic!  Honest!

Modifié par Wolfva2, 18 juin 2013 - 08:46 .

[Clayless]

IanPolaris wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

The Starsquirt practically represents BioWare's will at this point. It's the embodiment of the ending, of everything fans hated about it and everything BioWare didn't think was wrong with it.

I agree.  Bioware has to keep starbrat in or admit that their critics were right (which they will never do).

-Polaris

No they aren't.

The level of delusion people go to to justify their opinion is insane.

[FlamingBoy]

remydat wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

Well it is techniquely first party since they hired an ign imployee. Hence bioware had the choice to distance them selves or agree with the statement. They did nothing, hence they are responsible for the image that was created by remaing silent
Is that fair, no its not. But that is how the game is played.

Also I encourage you to do your own research, it provides a little perspective and I cannot go trapsing around the internet to find every snippet of biowares works. I am not that computer savy.

However her is a extremely biased post a player made a while back deatailing the percieved lies... I agree with some and I disagree with a few but its something to get started on.
http://social.biowar...index/10204263/
also on artistic integrity
http://blog.bioware....012/03/21/4108/

They hired him to make that response?  Where is that stated.

And they hyped their game.  What do you actually consider to be a lie?  I see a lot of statements that could be interpreted any number of ways and most likely people expected more when the statement is open to interpretation. 

I apologize I was not clear. He was not directly hired but a colleague (hence an IGN representative) was, its called a conflict of interest.. Is there a conspiracy, no I don't think so. But it was shady as all hell.

Yes many statements can be interpreted many ways. But if you choose to read every statement in biowares favor then its not really a debate worth having.

[chemiclord]

FlamingBoy wrote...
Yes many statements can be interpreted many ways. But if you choose to read every statement in biowares favor then its not really a debate worth having.

And if you choose to twist every statement into an insult to their fans or a slap to the face, there's no debate that can happen to begin with.  When you WANT to be pissed off, there's nothing that can be said that will placate you.

[RaenImrahl]

This discussion is out of gas. Locked.