184 réponses à ce sujet

[MassivelyEffective0730]

All art is subjective. Some parts of Mass Effect are art, some parts are complete shite. That's my perspective.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 02 septembre 2013 - 06:10 .

[NeonFlux117]

StreetMagic wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

Oh yeah it's art. It's meta art, in that it reminds the player ( who is commander shepard in this game) that it's a fictional universe all the while using 4th wall breaks, meta, and symbolism to reveal it's real narrative. Which is meta. And the illusion of control and free will.

this was the 'high concept' stuff Casey Hudson talked about. And it went mostly over the player base's heads. But it's there. And it's brilliant.

Yes, it's art.

I think they lost track of the high concept bits when they changed lead writers and main plot ideas midway through. They touched on some of the important themes, but not all of them.

Not really. The fact that there was such an outrage and 'chaos' over the ME3 endings, is yet again a 4th wall break in this meta artistical product. Why be upset when it was meant to be played this way- as shown in the refuse option. After all "you are shapard" And only your decesions will be remember, blah, blah blah. But they don't. This is an illusion. And BioWare makes sure you know it is. And who are you in the Mass Effect series. 

Meta at it's finest. 

[NeonFlux117]

StreetMagic wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

Oh yeah it's art. It's meta art, in that it reminds the player ( who is commander shepard in this game) that it's a fictional universe all the while using 4th wall breaks, meta, and symbolism to reveal it's real narrative. Which is meta. And the illusion of control and free will.

this was the 'high concept' stuff Casey Hudson talked about. And it went mostly over the player base's heads. But it's there. And it's brilliant.

Yes, it's art.

I think they lost track of the high concept bits when they changed lead writers and main plot ideas midway through. They touched on some of the important themes, but not all of them.

Not really. The fact that there was such an outrage and 'chaos' over the ME3 endings, is yet again a 4th wall break in this meta artistical product. Why be upset when it was meant to be played this way- as shown in the refuse option. After all "you are shapard" And only your decesions will be remember, blah, blah blah. But they don't. This is an illusion. And BioWare makes sure you know it is. And who are you in the Mass Effect series. 

Meta at it's finest. 

I didn't say anything about the ending. I'm talking more about continuity between 2 and 3.

ha, so am I. Not just about 2 and 3, but what about ME1 and ME2. Tell me, why do you think there were major gameplay mechanic changes from ME1 to ME2? 

[NeonFlux117]

StreetMagic wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

ha, so am I. Not just about 2 and 3, but what about ME1 and ME2. Tell me, why do you think there were major gameplay mechanic changes from ME1 to ME2? 

I don't know, dude. This whole meta thing you're heading into sounds like the **** I used to think when I dropped too much acid.

...Deep thoughts, by Jack Handy....


Yeah, anyways, I'm just saying the vision of the series changed a bit when Drew left.

I agree about how the departure of Karpyshyn impacted the narrative of ME3- the meat and potatoes stuff so to speak. But Mass Effect is a series of scif that is themed in a meta artistical view about illusion of control, player agency and 'endings'. They do this through 4th wall breaks, symbolism and mechanics, and lore breakage. They do this to remind the player ( who is shepard) that this is a fictional universe. This is all done through this said narrative devices to real the hidden meaning and narrative of the series. 

Meta critiquing meta while being meta to show a hidden narrative. 

LIke Hudson said- "high concept". And it is. 

And with that this Platforms battery is running low and must recharge. Estimate charge time 6-8 hours. 

But I wonder, do Electronic Shepards dream while they sleep?

Modifié par NeonFlux117, 02 septembre 2013 - 06:49 .

[NeonFlux117]

StreetMagic wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

ha, so am I. Not just about 2 and 3, but what about ME1 and ME2. Tell me, why do you think there were major gameplay mechanic changes from ME1 to ME2? 

I don't know, dude. This whole meta thing you're heading into sounds like the **** I used to think when I dropped too much acid.

...Deep thoughts, by Jack Handy....


Yeah, anyways, I'm just saying the vision of the series changed a bit when Drew left.

I agree about how the departure of Karpyshyn impaceted the narrative of ME3- the meat and potatoes stuff so to speak. But Mass Effect is a series of scif that is themed in a meta artistical view about illusion of control, player agency and 'endings'. They do this through 4th wall breaks, symbolism and mechanics, and lore breakage. They do this to remind the player ( who is shepard) that this is a fictional universe. This is all done through this said narrative devices to real the hidden meaning and narrative of the series. 

Meta critiquing meta while being meta to show a hidden narrative. 

LIke Hudson said- "high concept". And it is. 

I don't think they pulled it off well, in that case. Kojima does it better.

maybe, maybe not. We won't know tell the next Mass Effect game. Then we will know for sure. And with that this platform must recharge it's AI blue box, estimate charge time 6-8 hours. 



Double post. dafuq. 

It's late. I'm tired. 


Have fun debating the art of Mass Effect, it's more of a social artistic thesis, but yes it's art. 

Modifié par NeonFlux117, 02 septembre 2013 - 06:55 .

[AlexMBrennan]

Many fans of the Mass Effect franchise felt slighted by it’s less than happy ending.

Careful now - you don't have any case complaining about the ending being unhappy; if you want to be taken seriously you have to stick to complaining about objectively bad parts (numerous plotholes, introduction of new characters without foreshadowing, etc)

Though BioWare was receptive to the fan campaign to get the ending changed going so far as to release DLC

Are you living in some alternate universe? I don't call the people in charge hiding behind their PR (Merizan, Priestly) being "receptive to the fan campaign".
And in case you missed it, the EC included exactly none of the things Retake ME asked for.

The argument made by BioWare for Artistic Integrity poses an interesting question, can video games be considered art?

No it doesn't - Bioware mere invoked "artistic integrity" to draw attention away from the problem that the piece of art they created had serious issues and doesn't match what they described in interviews ("reapers can win", "there won't be a reaper off switch", etc).

The fact that we are having this discussion proves that this PR ruse worked.

Yes, games can be art but art can be bad (e.g. Bdaly splelld noevls, Twilight, etc) and can be not as described (if I commission a realistic portrait but get an impressionist still life then I have cause to be upset)

[Fixers0]

lol, no.

[Wolfva2]

NeonFlux117 wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

Oh yeah it's art. It's meta art, in that it reminds the player ( who is commander shepard in this game) that it's a fictional universe all the while using 4th wall breaks, meta, and symbolism to reveal it's real narrative. Which is meta. And the illusion of control and free will.

this was the 'high concept' stuff Casey Hudson talked about. And it went mostly over the player base's heads. But it's there. And it's brilliant.

Yes, it's art.

I think they lost track of the high concept bits when they changed lead writers and main plot ideas midway through. They touched on some of the important themes, but not all of them.

Not really. The fact that there was such an outrage and 'chaos' over the ME3 endings, is yet again a 4th wall break in this meta artistical product. Why be upset when it was meant to be played this way- as shown in the refuse option. After all "you are shapard" And only your decesions will be remember, blah, blah blah. But they don't. This is an illusion. And BioWare makes sure you know it is. And who are you in the Mass Effect series. 

Meta at it's finest. 

It's not breaking the 4th wall.  That would involve the characters realizing that they were characters.  Not the viewer/gamer...who hopefully already KNOWS they're characters.  EX:  Bugs Bunny looking out at the viewer and saying, "Ain't I a stinkah?".  That's breaking the 4th wall; he is addressing the audience.  At no time does anyone or anything in the ME universe speak to the audience.  It's also not an example of 'meta' at it's finest, worst, or anything else. 

[Dieb]

Every video game is art. It doesn't have anything to do with under-saturated color palettes, intellectually challenging plot and/or sophisticated language. Nor is it in anyway related to its quality, perceived or factual - whatever the latter is, by the way.

The fact that BioWare made too many last-minute changes contradicting their previous statements has nothing to do with the fact that, whatever they deliver, it's going to be a work of art.

[Podge 90]

McFlurry598 wrote...

 Artistic Integrity has become a hot topic since the ending of Mass Effect 3. Many fans of the Mass Effect franchise felt slighted by it’s less than happy ending. Though BioWare was receptive to the fan campaign to get the ending changed going so far as to release DLC which modified and extended the multiple ending options, they stuck to their guns. The argument made by BioWare for Artistic Integrity poses an interesting question, can video games be considered art?

Merriam Webster defines art as “the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects; also : works so produced”. This can certainly be applied to video games as the gaming industry thrives on technological skill and creativity. If the goal of art is to make the viewer or reader feel something, good or bad, then the anger of fans post-Mass Effect would indicate that video games are steadily forging a place in the art world.

That is not a falsifiable point.  "It's not art because the ending was horribly constructed and executed" - "so it made you angry, therefore it is art".  If it has no merit, it can't be art.


Saying that, I suppose you could consider it art. I certainly did the first time I visited the moon on ME1 and turned around and looked back upon Earth.  I literally just stared for about 5 minutes at that single sight, with the realisation that I had probably just found my perfect game.

But then that consideration goes straight out the airlock when Ashley's eyes roll up into her head, or Shepard tries to smile, or female characters' breasts enlarge and droop with every game, or every camera shot that comes from below and behind Miranda's backside (is there a pun there?), or with the appearance of Day One DLC.  Mass Effect exists to make money.  If it didn't, it wouldn't exist.  And don't give me the "but commercial art" line.  That's like calling a bin man a Public Refuse and Recycling Collection Officer.

If you say the ending is artistic, then it is like Damien Hirst; creating intentionally awful pieces of work, and seeing how much money suckers will throw at you.

[Applepie_Svk]

Baelrahn wrote...

Every video game is art. 

No it isn´t, by this logic would be art also Fifa or NHL, NFS... games are just an interactive medium of compromise betwen the developers and artists which purpose is financial gain, if something has recieved music or nice picture on case it ultimately doesn´t mean that is art, then we could say that everything is art... like this reality show is an art because they used music, or this wrap with potatoes is an art because someone put a picture of potatoes on it.., 

Also even so, you can´t hide your own incompetence (meant Hudson and Walters) behind a conclussion that this game is art and so on you can´t criticize it because it´s a decision of its makers or you can´t criticize it because it´s from now decision of artists, as a buyer you are entitled to complain about bad product as much as you can from the other hand support it. 

Developers are making games for money, they are providing products and service, so they have to face to wrath of their customers if their product is bad, I bet that if EA gave us an opportunity of return a game via Origin (now it should be possibile to refund game without any problem to 24 hours) year ago lot of people would just send it back and bought rather something different from Origin store or nothing at all.

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 02 septembre 2013 - 10:03 .

[FlamingBoy]

The issue wasn't so much if mass effect was "art" it was more it being a defense against all criticisms. "this is the game they wanted to make" or something along a similar vein without regards to what was actually hyped and promised through implication in the marketing campaign.

The term "art" was bastardized to a thing that in which is beyond criticism and change instead of an actual thing that was produced by culture.

They had no interest in making art for the sake of art but they used the term in order to deflect criticism somehow under the absurd idea that this would diffuse the situation. People picked up on the change in direction in mass effect and to say that its "Art" as if it was always intended is just a attempted hoodwink over an intelligent audience and they were caught doing it.

Is mass effect 3 art? It is no longer relevant.

Modifié par FlamingBoy, 02 septembre 2013 - 10:08 .

[Dieb]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Baelrahn wrote...

Every video game is art. 

[...] then we could say that everything is art... like this reality show is an art because they used music, or this wrap with potatoes is an art because someone put a picture of potatoes on it.. [...]

Yep, we could really say that.

It's easy to define what art is, but it is impossible to define what's art. Art is about expression. Anything you express can and will be art, if you want it to. Anything besides that - and I mean anything, including whether it's primarily meant to make profit or not - is completely unrelated to this. You can snap a screenshot from your post declaring Mass Effect is not art, print it and sell it as art. And for all intents and purposes, it would be. There were painters who portrayed important people ever since, and if you found some of those today, you can bet your behind it's going to be considered art, no question. That was pure contract work at the time though, only meant to bring them money to pay their bills - okay, one might interject here that those people were beheaded if their product failed to meet the fanbase's expectations, but...

The art-world and all of our cultures in general have been fighting over the vagueness of art for millenia, and I don't expect it to end in a video game discussion board

All I'm saying is, none of your or anyone's criticism is thus nullified. Except the one about it not being art.

Modifié par Baelrahn, 02 septembre 2013 - 10:23 .

[JamesFaith]

Is ME art? Yes.
Are all videogames art? No.

I think that main difference is how much is added to pure games mechanics. FIFA or NFS are just game mechanics + graphic. But when story, creative graphic solutions and such are included, videogame become art.

It is same case like all new art-forms based on modern technologies like photography or movie. You can use this technology both "purely technical" or creative. Subjective quality of product has nothing to do with this because art can be great, non interesting or bad, but it is still art.

[ioannisdenton]

of course it is art. It strays from the standard videogames formula by making you care for it. Other games do it too. Keep in mind that games like this are rare. Games like Mass effect is the reason i am still a gamer at my 30's.

[Podge 90]

FlamingBoy wrote...

The issue wasn't so much if mass effect was "art" it was more it being a defense against all criticisms. "this is the game they wanted to make" or something along a similar vein without regards to what was actually hyped and promised through implication in the marketing campaign.

The term "art" was bastardized to a thing that in which is beyond criticism and change instead of an actual thing that was produced by culture.

They had no interest in making art for the sake of art but they used the term in order to deflect criticism somehow under the absurd idea that this would diffuse the situation. People picked up on the change in direction in mass effect and to say that its "Art" as if it was always intended is just a attempted hoodwink over an intelligent audience and they were caught doing it.

Is mass effect 3 art? It is no longer relevant.

+eleventy

[jtav]

It's as much art as your average popcorn flick. It engages some ideas, but in a rather shallow way.

[Linkenski]

Bioware and all gaming journalists used art as an excuse that Mass Effect 3's ending was fine. The problem about the whole art thing is that it's often seen in movies that artistic themes or just artistic aesthetics is used to make the fiction deeper, but in some cases as in ME3 it's like they totally get the "art" thing right but completely forget to give it a real-world explanation and that's where it doesn't work. ME3's ending is a real hipster ending. It distracts some by making them think that, because the music is great and because it looks artistic it's a good ending.

Logically it doesn't even fit in the game, and there is the issue of the 180 on the main theme which definitely wasn't established as "synthetics vs. organics" before the last 10 seconds.

The whole "video games medium as an art-form" debate is just laughable imo. People are completely missing the point about the whole "you don't make an author change his work of art". Look IGN, Gametrailers and other video game "authorities" if a piece of art sucks, it sucks? Why would you object to people wanting to change it so it doesn't suck anymore? The only reason the whole vg-journalism fraction didn't want them to change their ending is because of two reasons:

1. some of them are stupid (the majority of them consider Gone Home to have a deep story, lawl)
2. they keep kissing ass on EA, especially gameinformer? Ever wonder why they gave ME3 GOTY? Methinks it's because they wanted to stay exclusive to EA previews, like their month of DA:I coverage which was pretty lame, because the build it showed was months old right before we got the awesome PAX '13 footage.

[McFlurry598]

 So from reading the responses, the majority of you think it is. So, how about putting it this way? Video games can be art. Or how about using the death of Cortana in Halo 4?

The death of Cortana at the end of Halo 4 did more than elicit an emotional reaction in fans, it performed an essential artistic function, it inspired conversation and more than that, caused fans to ask questions. Her loss caused the player to question the mortality and humanity of Master Chief. Viewing Master Chief’s grief at Cortana’s loss firsthand reminds the gamer that despite all his skills and training, he is not infallible and he will not always save the day.

Creating a convoluted storyline about the Master Chief rescuing Cortana or a duplicate of Cortana being found would devalue Cortana’s death and negate all that it accomplished. Gamers would again be lulled into a false sense of security and forget that Master Chief is more than an elite killing machine.


Bioware could have possibly wanted to put it this way. 

Modifié par McFlurry598, 02 septembre 2013 - 11:23 .

[jtav]

I objected to them changing it for two reasons.

1. I believe once a work is out there, it's out there, barring patches/line edits.
2. Many of the complaints seemed like a fig leaf for the real problem: the ending was unhappy. Citadel has many of the same technical problems, but people loved it because it made them feel good. ME2 has bigger plotholes but you saw only mild derision.