Aller au contenu

Photo

Is Mass Effect considered art?


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
184 réponses à ce sujet

#101
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 648 messages

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

EA interference would be "internal pressures" wouldn't it?  Since Bioware is owned by EA.  Budget reallocation (to a multiplayer mode for instance) would definitely hinder what Bioware can afford to do with its singleplayer campaign.


MP isn't a great example there. The ME3 MP model looks like it was self-funding -- if anything, it probably subsidized SP a little -- and Bio's historically been very pro-MP. Longtime fans will remember that they amost wrecked NWN with their obsessive focus on MP.

Modifié par AlanC9, 02 septembre 2013 - 11:04 .


#102
Reorte

Reorte
  • Members
  • 6 595 messages

Thore2k10 wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Thore2k10 wrote...

Sad piano music paired together with three different colors is not art.

All sorts of things can be art. If a film, play, or novel are art then so is a story-driven game. That doesn't make it good or bad in itself - there's good art and bad art after all.


Up to the ending im with you and i think its art! The last 10 minutes are not imho. Those minutes are just there, and have nothing to do with this over 100+ hours of story driven game, except the looks of certain people and  the designs of some spaceships.

To me this game is without an ending. I never felt like there was any conclusion to said 100+ hours, which happened logically from the events before...

If that's what you think about the ending (and I happen to agree with you but that's beside the point) it doesn't stop it from being art, it just makes it bad art. If Leonardo da Vinci had decided to finish off the Mona Lisa with a scribbled on beard, moustache, and glasses it would still be a work of art but nowhere near the one it's usually regarded as. Making a mess of an artwork turns it into bad art, not no art.

#103
ruggly

ruggly
  • Members
  • 7 561 messages
Sure, I guess it's art. Whether or not the viewer appreciates it is a different question. A lot of it after my second run came off as the postmodern crap I see at the Walker in Minneapolis (namely, and yes I'm going there, the ending), which is unfortunate, because there was a lot of good bits as well.

#104
Ninja Stan

Ninja Stan
  • Members
  • 5 238 messages

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

EA interference would be "internal pressures" wouldn't it?  Since Bioware is owned by EA.  Budget reallocation (to a multiplayer mode for instance) would definitely hinder what Bioware can afford to do with its singleplayer campaign.

I'd consider it external interference because EA is not a part of the development team, nor are they actively creating content for the game.

I would say though, that Ray Muzyka referring to "artistic integrity" when addressing the criticism of the ending itself was indeed shielding against gamer criticism. 

I disagree. Ray's blog post didn't tell people to stop criticizing, nor did it say that any criticisms of the game were wrong. Instead, he focused on his support for the development team at a time when lots of different groups were talking about how bad the game was or how the developers needed to be fired.

Same thing goes with terms like "vocal minority" to describe/marginalize the vast majority of feedback from virtually all online websites where gamers stated their opinions (non-press).  The "majority" of gamers that were "vocal" and on the web had a negative reaction to ME3's ending.  Likewise, the vast majority of gamers thought Mass Effect 3 was excellent up to that point.

Again, I disagree. Just because those online could easily band together and create a larger voice, they did not necessarily constitute a majority of players, nor did they necessarily speak for a majority of players. From my experience, the "vocal minority" argument was used to address those stating categorically that "a majority," "most fans," or "everyone" hated the endings (or, really, expressed any other opinion about the game) or wanted this or preferred that, so BioWare just has to change the game or correct their mistake or acknowledge the gamers are right. No one can really make that claim except BioWare, and they had gameplay data to back up their statements.

Even in your post, your "majority" is a subset of a vast minority of players (ie. those who complained online and were "vocal"). This is why most any "majority" claimed by those making a complaint can be considered a "minority" of the total number of players. That doesn't mean the complaints are wrong or not important. It means that they have to be taken in certain context, which includes the number of people making those complaints, because lots of people are saying a lot of different things about the game. (And contrary to popular online belief, repeating an argument louder and more frequently does not magically make it more important, true, or valid.)

That's not to bash Bioware at all, but if talking about how proud someone is of the hard work a team did (and the artistic vision they're sticking to) when that person's supposed to be addressing the negative backlash is a shield in my book...

... or just really bad timing. 

And in my book, talking about how proud someone is of the hard work a team did is just that--talking about how proud someone is of the hard work a team did. Ray Muzyka is not obligated to quell the flames of the internet's opinions, nor does every individual negative comment require or deserve rebuttal or acknowledgement (see again my comment about "vocal minority," above). But if you wish to believe otherwise, that's your prerogative.

#105
NeonFlux117

NeonFlux117
  • Members
  • 3 627 messages
It's art. And very good art too.

But about the endings. The 'vocal minority' was not a minority. Most gamers that I know did not like or understand the endings of ME3 at launch. The reaction to this, made BioWare make an Extended cut to give players more closure and explain the endings. So if it really was a 'vocal minority', lol. that was upset about the launch endings then BioWare probably wouldn't have made the EC. It was a very large majority.

The game launched very hastly and was rushed by EA. The endings reflected this. EA needed a bump in their Q1 2012 stats so the released Mass Effect 3 knowing it would sell well. The devs tried and tried as hard as the could- I do not doubt this. But they kinda ran out of time and the ending was impacted.

But in June of 2012 they were able to make the ending they probably intended for launch. This was the Extended Cut. These things happen, deadlines must be met. Especially when you work for a company that is all about dem Benjamins. And EA is. Big time. They're a corporation, what do you expect, their primary goal is to maximize profit. And BioWare is just another 'tool in the tool shed' so to speak. Not the most productive tool- thats EAsports and Dice, but a very solid tool none the less.

If the game had launched with the extended cut version, I think the outcry and confusion would have been a lot less than it was initially. Now that's not to say the EC- for some people, did enough. I don't think it did at all, but I appreciate the effort by BioWare.

And Mass Effect is still art. Very good art. It's incredibly creative and invokes emotion, at least for me, numerous times during the series. Happy, sad, angry, triumphant all these emotions I've felt during the series. It's very good.

Modifié par NeonFlux117, 03 septembre 2013 - 06:59 .


#106
Eterna

Eterna
  • Members
  • 7 417 messages
^ Since when are you capable of reasonable, well thought out posts?

#107
AlexMBrennan

AlexMBrennan
  • Members
  • 7 002 messages

But in June of 2012 they were able to make the ending they probably intended for launch.

Except that the EC leaves more plotholes which could have been easily fixed if Bioware hadn't be so damn determined to not change the endings (e.g. teleporting squadmates could easily have been fixed by cutting the crash scene entirely which becomes utterly pointless as the Normandy is shown to be fixed immediately anyway)

#108
KaiserShep

KaiserShep
  • Members
  • 23 828 messages
And the crash should have happened to the other ships too if it was going to happen at all, since they were all headed in the same direction.

#109
Xamufam

Xamufam
  • Members
  • 1 238 messages

NeonFlux117 wrote...
But in June of 2012 they were able to make the ending they probably intended for launch.

It wasnt
source leaked script:
pastebin.com/9A1dwb3M

#110
Ksandor

Ksandor
  • Members
  • 420 messages
Release your marketing and sales data "as is" in a transparent way: No one can really make that claim except BioWare, and they had gameplay data to back up their statements.

So everybody can make that claim. Compare the actual sales and profit of ME 2 with ME 3. Also disclose off the record data of the team so we can see how truly they reacted to the game they made and fans who criticized it.

I think you call them minority because you wish them to be so.

World is changing. Good marketing won't sell mediocre products anymore. Do that and of course you only get a fraction of the income you could get. Then you complain costs are high. No sir, your products are not good enough to cover the costs, you don't know budget management and you don't know how to cut corners. It is called competition. Compete... or don't.

Finally, art is value, not enframing nor added value. Even if your marketing campaign was a success that would still not make right what is wrong. "But people are buying!" argument is irrelevant. They can purchase bad art. So what?

On top of that I still think your marketing and PR campaign, and your reputation failed. But you could not understand... You are... embedded to your industry as they say. You are compelled to find excuses. You can't state your real opinion even. You have to be politically correct.

ME3 was good at SOME respects BUT it did not live up to the reputation of ME and ME2. You "knew" what you were doing while designing ME3. You knew you were cutting corners.

So accept it, accept your mistake, accept your artistic failure and MOVE ON... To do better.

Or don't and be satisfied with "industrial standards". Get paid, get a wonderful career and sacrifice your integrity and self respect.

As one of you once said in Twitter and you know who is: "Developers, don't be afraid of cutting corners in game development". Calling my argument subjective won't change anything.

#111
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 648 messages

Troxa wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...
But in June of 2012 they were able to make the ending they probably intended for launch.

It wasnt
source leaked script:
pastebin.com/9A1dwb3M


"Shepard must now make his final decision - to control the Reapers, to destroy the Reapers, or if they had a perfect game to become one with the Reapers."

What's the difference?

#112
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 648 messages

Ksandor wrote...
ME3 was good at SOME respects BUT it did not live up to the reputation of ME and ME2. You "knew" what you were doing while designing ME3. You knew you were cutting corners.


Which corners is it that ME3 is supposed to have cut, exactly?

#113
Xamufam

Xamufam
  • Members
  • 1 238 messages

AlanC9 wrote...

Troxa wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...
But in June of 2012 they were able to make the ending they probably intended for launch.

It wasnt
source leaked script:
pastebin.com/9A1dwb3M


"Shepard must now make his final decision - to control the Reapers, to destroy the Reapers, or if they had a perfect game to become one with the Reapers."

What's the difference?

No synthesis
Read the entire thing
still i think even the leaked script was rewritten before it got leaked

Modifié par Troxa, 03 septembre 2013 - 08:30 .


#114
Ksandor

Ksandor
  • Members
  • 420 messages

AlanC9 wrote...

Ksandor wrote...
ME3 was good at SOME respects BUT it did not live up to the reputation of ME and ME2. You "knew" what you were doing while designing ME3. You knew you were cutting corners.


Which corners is it that ME3 is supposed to have cut, exactly?


Ending was contrived, unambigous, forced and rushed. A final battle premise was not there. Really there are tons of threads here detailing this and how it could be both different and similar to ME2 and ME1. World building, new lore, more relevant characters and stories come to mind. There was a even a YouTube video comparing ME and Star Trek, how the endings should be ect. If you are still asking this it is either sarcasm... or what? You did not understand what ME's premise is or you did not grasp the situation? Or you think ME3 just fine?

Anyway since you are asking: I do not want them cut any corners. That's the straight answer. And if you do, you do NOT cut the endings. Never!

On a side note... Stating the obvious: EA rushed Bioware. They could not do any better and like KOTOR 2 they cut the ending. However you can't do that. If you do... It is a big mess. And then EA started to look new insvestors to invest in them or acquire the company. So again: You do not rush the game for it won't help you fill the Q2 results, it will make it worse. Short AND long term. This is for you marketing guys: If you sold so well then why the financial crisis hımm?

And then blaming Crysis 3 for EA's low sales like a developer has an obligation to save a company's quota. Lol! There is Android Ouya, there is internet, F2P. You have failed, they will find another way.

As for fanboys (fanatic boys) can't answer them. There is no reasoning with them.

#115
Dieb

Dieb
  • Members
  • 4 631 messages
So it's about "Is art enough to justify the ending" now? This started out as a really interesting thread.

Mass Effect became art for me when I first stepped on the Citadel. In freaking awe; about freaking everything around me. Or when stood next to the Mako, just watching the meteor shower in the sky of an uncharted world. For more than just a few seconds, that is. Or how I outright hated Ashley and how I suddenly didn't anymore when she revealed she's a closet poetry enthusiast. How passionately I defended Tali on the Rayya, how I looked at the Illium skyline again for five full minutes straight. How I was looking forward to have a philosophical duel with Thane after every mission. How the fictional character Anderson cheered me as person up, after feeling really saddened and angry by the loss of the Asari homeworld. How I desperately looked around to see if my squadmates made it to the conduit alive, how happy I was to see them exit the Normandy safely because of my sacrifice.

Don't know how to put it any different. Don't know how people can hate the game so much. I'd wager none of us did the first time around, though.

Modifié par Baelrahn, 03 septembre 2013 - 11:11 .


#116
Podge 90

Podge 90
  • Members
  • 318 messages

HYR 2.0 wrote...

No, I'm saying fans that mock ME3 with the general buzzword "artistic integrity" are stupid.


It's not as prevalent now as it was before, but it's there.

I think, in fact I'm pretty sure, that you're trying to make a point but haven't quite formulated it properly or thought it through, as I don't think you understand where the phrase originated from, and why, nor how it was rather splendidly twisted back.

#117
caradoc2000

caradoc2000
  • Members
  • 7 550 messages
Why would a happy ending (or lack thereof) affect whether or not games are considered art?

#118
DarthLaxian

DarthLaxian
  • Members
  • 2 031 messages

caradoc2000 wrote...

Why would a happy ending (or lack thereof) affect whether or not games are considered art?


because the ending is like the finish of a painting (or a movie - would you like star wars, if the emperor was killed by a pink or ghost ewok that has been killed by an imperial trooper before? or would you like the mona lisa, if the painter screwed her up by painting her with a beard and stupid looking glasses?)

greetings LAX

#119
Bizantura

Bizantura
  • Members
  • 990 messages
Artistic merit : yes
Art : no
Artistic integrity : rubbish alltogether

#120
caradoc2000

caradoc2000
  • Members
  • 7 550 messages

DarthLaxian wrote...

because the ending is like the finish of a painting (or a movie - would you like star wars, if the emperor was killed by a pink or ghost ewok that has been killed by an imperial trooper before? or would you like the mona lisa, if the painter screwed her up by painting her with a beard and stupid looking glasses?)

These like the conept of happy/unhappy are matters of personal opinion. Salvador Dali's paintings make little sense, but they are still considered art.

#121
SilJeff

SilJeff
  • Members
  • 901 messages
Yes, especially the second

#122
SlottsMachine

SlottsMachine
  • Members
  • 5 530 messages

caradoc2000 wrote...

DarthLaxian wrote...

because the ending is like the finish of a painting (or a movie - would you like star wars, if the emperor was killed by a pink or ghost ewok that has been killed by an imperial trooper before? or would you like the mona lisa, if the painter screwed her up by painting her with a beard and stupid looking glasses?)

These like the conept of happy/unhappy are matters of personal opinion. Salvador Dali's paintings make little sense, but they are still considered art.


LOL.

#123
Turbo_J

Turbo_J
  • Members
  • 1 217 messages

Wolfva2 wrote...

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. 


You may want to go back and play the games and pay attention to Shepard's and other NPC's eye contact. There are dozens of instances. Eye contact with the audience is acknowledgment - it doesn't require dialog. One example in particular in the ME3 Prolog actually does have dialog - As Shepard is saying good luck to Anderson, they shift their eye contact to the player... This is not an accident. It's not like an actor accidently looking into the camera - it's a video game character being programmed to do so. These subtle 4th wall breaks are not limited to ME3. We have found them in ME2 and ME1. You may also want to check out the wiki on Metafiction, as the definition is ever fitting to ME3.
 
Metafiction: also known as Romantic irony in the context of Romantic works of literature, uses self-reference to draw attention to itself as a work of art, while exposing the "truth" of a story. "Metafiction" is the literary term describing fictional writing that self-consciously and systematically draws attention to its status as an artifact in posing questions about the relationship between fiction and reality, usually using irony and self-reflection.

The opinion of art is subjective and the definition of art by artists is also subjective. R.R. Martin may be 'correct' in his view of how to pull off fiction - it may be the 'only' legitimate view, but the narrative in Mass Effect is trying to tell you something by jarring you out of suspension of disbelief, not just once or twice, but over and over again across three different story telling mediums; comics, books, games... you are within a work of fiction.

If you ARE Shepard, then Shepard is in a work of fiction.

I personally think the Mass Effect Trilogy is a masterpiece.

Modifié par Turbo_J, 03 septembre 2013 - 09:10 .


#124
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 648 messages

Troxa wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

"Shepard must now make his final decision - to control the Reapers, to destroy the Reapers, or if they had a perfect game to become one with the Reapers."

What's the difference?

No synthesis
Read the entire thing
still i think even the leaked script was rewritten before it got leaked


I read it. What's the difference between synthesis and becomeing one with the Reapers? I can't tell what becoming one with the Reapers is supposed to mean, but it sounds kinda like synthesis to me. What does it sound like to you?

Anyway, it doesn't sound any better than what we got.

#125
JamesFaith

JamesFaith
  • Members
  • 2 301 messages

AlanC9 wrote...

I read it. What's the difference between synthesis and becomeing one with the Reapers? I can't tell what becoming one with the Reapers is supposed to mean, but it sounds kinda like synthesis to me. What does it sound like to you?

Anyway, it doesn't sound any better than what we got.


Reapers already are synthesis of biological and syntetic components, so yes, it sound like Synthesis to me too.