The Big Picture: Mutants and Masses

The Escapist Portal > The Escapist Forums > Featured Content

The Big Picture: Mutants and Masses Pages PREV 1 . . . 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 NEXT Thread Index Search Forums Posting Guidelines Contact Moderators
mfeff	526 POSTED: 28 Mar 2012 22:42
	LEAKED! The REAL ENDING! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVZUVeMtYXc :D

Hatchetman	527 POSTED: 28 Mar 2012 22:52
	MovieBob: Mutants and Masses EDIT: Before you go crying about how you're sick of people complaining, I think I should point you to THIS. Heh. Refuting a video on The Escapist with an Extra Credit video. Well played my friend.

Murmillos	528 POSTED: 28 Mar 2012 23:04
	shoddyworksucks: The product isn't defective. I guess we are going to have to strongly disagree on what makes a game defective. I believe, because games are often an interactive medium (strongly so in the case of RPG's and even doubly so for the ME series), anything that changes the story enough that players no longer enjoy the story, it means the product is defective. Most of the time, we have to accept it because as noted, the developer went in a direction that we didn't agree with - which is fine as normally, as there are no promises. The problem with ME3, which makes the "game is defective" argument, is that just weeks before being released, well after they game was locked and being printed before being shipped to the stores, key higher-ups within the development team and publisher made very very VERY specific statements about a key part of the game, notably the ending. We aren't saying the product is defective because we don't like the ending, we are saying the product is defective because they told us the ending was not going to be exactly the ending(s) we got. That's how ME3 is a defective product. Take anything else is life; food, entertainment, buying a car, what ever it is, and if that sales person tells you are going to get items A B and C when you buy this product, and after you buy it, you find out that product didn't provide items B and C, regardless on what it is, do we just go home and go "Oh well, they lied to me.. everything just fine... la de da." I'm going to go out on a limb and say Hell No. You are most likely going to go back to that person/company and say, "You promised A, B and C.. and I only got A. Either provide elements B an C, or you will loose all my future business!" A lot of people have enjoyed BioWare games for a long long time, and as such, hate to walk away from a strong and talented team of developers because of some ass-pulling from the game devil, EA. Edit: Also because the ending feels quite contrived, rushed and counter to every single moment & provided decision proceeding it. But that's a matter of (much shared) personal feelings.

FelixG	529 POSTED: 28 Mar 2012 23:24
	QUINTIX: Dansen: That was fucking brilliant, reposting so that more people can see this. Static Jak: That was actually pretty good. FelixG: A guy on YouTube, who is saying he is smug, a guy on the Escapist, that lives at home with his parents FedericoV: Moviebob is not only a soldout like all the bloggers who get paid to write serious shit about games and stuff. Unlike some gaming websites, like say Gamespot, the Escapist has a firewall between advertisers and their staff. So does Screw Attack. So does Destructoid. Content creators are free to "bite the hand that feeds" and regularly do. There is nothing special about early screenings or early review copies. Neither is there anything special about "blackout dates"... hardware vendors like AMD and nVidia always do that. It's not censorship. Mr. Infestig8ve Gurbulism is little more than a troofer with a hardon for Jim Sterling, someone who regularly proves his "the reviewers and commentarors are all bought out by the conniving publishers!" theory absolutely false. An earlier poster said it far better than I can: Revolutionaryloser: Yeah. This guy really knows what he is talking about. He says it straight. Like when he told Jennifer Hepler she was a fat cow who had to lay off the cakes and stop writing yaoi fanfiction. That taught the bitch. This is one really mature and intelligent individual and we could really gain from listening to his wise opinions. All is well ^.^ And just because he said something stupid and inflammatory in another video doesn't make this one any less valid.

albinoterrorist	530 POSTED: 28 Mar 2012 23:42
	uanime5: You can write fanfic of Star Wars or make a story with a similar premise that ends the way you want it to. Macbeth is the victor mid-performance, that's why he becomes king (he only loses at the end). There's no law preventing you from making a version of Macbeth in which Macbeth defeats Duncan and remains the King of Scotland. You can sculpt anything you want, so feel free to make David without a wang or a fig leaf that can't be removed. You can make fanfic or mods to rewrite Mass Effect. In conclusion you can rewrite anything you want if you don't like it. Though you may need to change some names if you don't want to be sued for plagiarisation. Yes. But all those examples are done BY THE FANS, of their own sweat and toil. Creating your own canon is entirely different to MAKING the producers rewrite theirs.

Dr. Dan Challis	531 POSTED: 28 Mar 2012 23:42
	Murmillos: I guess we are going to have to strongly disagree on what makes a game defective. I believe, because games are often an interactive medium (strongly so in the case of RPG's and even doubly so for the ME series), anything that changes the story enough that players no longer enjoy the story, it means the product is defective. ... We aren't saying the product is defective because we don't like the ending, we are saying the product is defective because they told us the ending was not going to be exactly the ending(s) we got. That's how ME3 is a defective product. I hope you can see the contradiction between those two points. You can define "defective" any way you choose, I guess, so long as you recognize that your definition has little to no relation to the legal one. You certainly have the right to feel that that product was defective and that you got ripped off, but you have no legal recourse from a product liability standpoint. "Fitness for use" is the legal measure by which a product is deemed defective, not relative enjoyment. If the game is playable from beginning to end, then it is fit for use. End of story. Even if, through some bizarre legal maneuvering, Mass Effect 3 was decided in a court of law to be legally defective, the decision would likely entitle complainants to a refund of the purchase price and no more than that.

QUINTIX	532 POSTED: 28 Mar 2012 23:50
	FelixG: Is there a reason you changed my words from that I thought that that was a good video? [Answers his own question with an assumption] I was quoting mfeff My appologies. Editing embeded quotes here is a bit of a pain. I must also further confess I was skimming. Here is what mfeff has to say: mfeff: "Smugness" sounds a touch ad hominem... Who is saying that? A guy on YouTube, who is saying he is smug, a guy on the Escapist, that lives at home with his parents? I mean, why even play that game? I think we all have a lot of respect for you Bob, it is why we support your work. Be above the argument man. I'll fix it. Edit: A qutation mark was missing in the post number, so it attributed mfeff's quote to you and didn't show your quote at all. I still misquoted you. Again my appologies. It should be fixed now. Further edit: Just to poke fun ;)

tobimaro	533 POSTED: 28 Mar 2012 23:59
	And I was so looking forward to the DVD release of "Salute Your Shorts", with Michael Bay's commentary about why the series was the high-water mark of Canada's dominance of children's TV production. Oh well. Now he gets to wreck the Turtles. Not that I cared for them anyways. I stopped watching them when they made the first bad TV series.

FelixG	534 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 00:15
	QUINTIX: FelixG: Is there a reason you changed my words from that I thought that that was a good video? [Answers his own question with an assumption] I was quoting mfeff My appologies. Editing embeded quotes here is a bit of a pain. I must also further confess I was skimming. Here is what mfeff has to say: mfeff: "Smugness" sounds a touch ad hominem... Who is saying that? A guy on YouTube, who is saying he is smug, a guy on the Escapist, that lives at home with his parents? I mean, why even play that game? I think we all have a lot of respect for you Bob, it is why we support your work. Be above the argument man. I'll fix it. Edit: A qutation mark was missing in the post number, so it attributed mfeff's quote to you and didn't show your quote at all. I still misquoted you. Again my appologies. It should be fixed now. Further edit: Just to poke fun ;) Ok no worries, I will edit mine as well! ^.^

Murmillos	535 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 00:27
	Dr. Dan Challis: I hope you can see the contradiction between those two points. You can define "defective" any way you choose, I guess, so long as you recognize that your definition has little to no relation to the legal one. You certainly have the right to feel that that product was defective and that you got ripped off, but you have no legal recourse from a product liability standpoint. "Fitness for use" is the legal measure by which a product is deemed defective, not relative enjoyment. If the game is playable from beginning to end, then it is fit for use. End of story. Even if, through some bizarre legal maneuvering, Mass Effect 3 was decided in a court of law to be legally defective, the decision would likely entitle complainants to a refund of the purchase price and no more than that. Yes, I did recognizance that contradiction, which is way I clearly stated normally no one can do anything about it because no promises about said ending were made. I'm guessing "fitness for use" is a UK term. I listen to TotalBiscuit and I've heard that saying pop up here and there. Yes, the game is "fitness for use", but in the US, we have something called anti deceptive marketing. If you promise that your product is going have specific features, but then doesn't come with those features, despite the rest of the product being "fitness for use", it still don't come with the features as promised. That's deceptive marketing. Games have always toed the fine-line, but this is the first game that blatantly crossed it and with a fan base willing to call them out on it. I mean, a car that starts, drives with all 4 wheels and brakes as required is "fitness for use", I mean, who cares that you were promised A/C, power windows and GPS navigation. There is a clear difference between "future feature speak" which is spoken during game development [and those features can be cut any time before the game is shipped with no legal recourse; at worst they only have to contend with a angry fan base for over promising features] and stating specific features are in the game after the game has gone gold, when they know full aware that those features are NOT in the game.

LadyDeadly	536 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 00:28
	I don't know how to feel about the ninja turtles movie. Man i remember the live action show , that was pretty boss , i loved watching it. But im pretty sure i wont feel that same way about this movie. And also a side note. I wish the whole mass effect 3 ending thing would blow over already. Yes we got no closure, yes i personally think it was pretty bad but i think i can deal with that and move on. I hope bioware gives us some closure but i really think its time to move on to something else. Like Bioshock Infinite. that looks cool.

shoddyworksucks	537 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 01:48
	Murmillos: Dr. Dan Challis: I hope you can see the contradiction between those two points. You can define "defective" any way you choose, I guess, so long as you recognize that your definition has little to no relation to the legal one. You certainly have the right to feel that that product was defective and that you got ripped off, but you have no legal recourse from a product liability standpoint. "Fitness for use" is the legal measure by which a product is deemed defective, not relative enjoyment. If the game is playable from beginning to end, then it is fit for use. End of story. Even if, through some bizarre legal maneuvering, Mass Effect 3 was decided in a court of law to be legally defective, the decision would likely entitle complainants to a refund of the purchase price and no more than that. Yes, I did recognizance that contradiction, which is way I clearly stated normally no one can do anything about it because no promises about said ending were made. I'm guessing "fitness for use" is a UK term. I listen to TotalBiscuit and I've heard that saying pop up here and there. Yes, the game is "fitness for use", but in the US, we have something called anti deceptive marketing. If you promise that your product is going have specific features, but then doesn't come with those features, despite the rest of the product being "fitness for use", it still don't come with the features as promised. That's deceptive marketing. Games have always toed the fine-line, but this is the first game that blatantly crossed it and with a fan base willing to call them out on it. I mean, a car that starts, drives with all 4 wheels and brakes as required is "fitness for use", I mean, who cares that you were promised A/C, power windows and GPS navigation. There is a clear difference between "future feature speak" which is spoken during game development [and those features can be cut any time before the game is shipped with no legal recourse; at worst they only have to contend with a angry fan base for over promising features] and stating specific features are in the game after the game has gone gold, when they know full aware that those features are NOT in the game. There's a difference, also. False advertising laws are designed to protect consumer choice. False advertising occurs when a company willfully misrepresents their product to attempt to alter consumer decisions. So, one: BioWare would had to have willfully and knowingly deceived consumers to get them to purchase their game (unlikely, since their reputation had already taken a beating after "Dragon Age 2", a truly terrible game, and the company would want to avoid further embarrassment); two: there would have to be consumers of ME3 who would not have purchased the game if they hadn't read the oft ballyhooed interviews (also unlikely, since ME was already a popular franchise and consumers would have bought the final game of the trilogy anyway). So, are the Retake ME people saying that if BioWare hadn't made any comments about the ending of the game, they wouldn't have purchased it? I doubt that.

willbailes	538 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 03:03
	Okay, first the half-hearted hunger games review and now the disapproval of the consumer's role in a development and critique of a product? Bob, I'm really starting to question your credibility, and more importantly your ability to see things like we young geeks do. In other words... You better check yo'self before you wreck yo'self.

Delicious Soy	539 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 03:40
	I'm really loving this whole poor narrative = faulty product thing. As a million others have said: Subjective complaints about quality does not equate to an objective fault that requires replacement. Nor does consumption of a product equate to creative authority.

dystopiaINC	540 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 04:19
	Wicky_42: I find it amusing that after ragging on Transformers and god knows how many other geek things that were done wrong, Bob defends Bioware when they step wrong. Seems a little ironic/hypocritical. When things are done horribly, are not the fans entitled to complain, or should they just take the blow quietly and be happy for some perverse reason? ragging on it is okay, he never said you could never rag on it, he said demanding that it be changed to suit you is too far. you can complain all you want about transformers, mass effect, TMNT, anything really, but you can't start demanding it be rewritten because it sucks. feed back is important, but the retke mass effect is not just feedback.

themadmaiden	541 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 04:27
	I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with the Mass Effect 3 stuff. Like so many others on here. Yes, they should have the freedom to take risks. But you know what comes with risks? The possibility of failure. And when something fails, it's not unreasonable to try and fix it. It's not unprecedented for games and other mediums to change things after all. See Fallout 3's, DLC ending. And the only way they know they failed is if people/fans voice their displeasure. Which they are doing. Are some people being unreasonable about it? Yes. That doesn't invalidate everyone else's arguments though. Wanting a better ending for Mass Effect 3 is not going to cost game makers the right to make choices or take risks with their work. It's simply looking for the ending we were promised.

I.Muir	542 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 04:40
	Here is a new vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MlatxLP-xs

Dr. Dan Challis	543 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 05:28
	Murmillos: I'm guessing "fitness for use" is a UK term. I listen to TotalBiscuit and I've heard that saying pop up here and there. I don't know who TotalBiscuit is, but he/she sounds very learned and well informed. The legal parlance may vary slightly but the concept of "fitness for use" still underpins product liability law in the US. I think you recognize this, which is why you switched tack from defective products to false advertising. The problem with that has already been addressed by shoddyworksucks, so I'll not belabor the point. Suffice to say that your efforts to shield yourself from disappointment by invoking legal concepts that you clearly don't understand are pretty transparent, even to a layman.

Seanfall	544 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 07:47
	willbailes: Okay, first the half-hearted hunger games review and now the disapproval of the consumer's role in a development and critique of a product? Bob, I'm really starting to question your credibility, and more importantly your ability to see things like we young geeks do. In other words... You better check yo'self before you wreck yo'self. I want to thank you for making me remember that that phrase existed. And yeah...bob is...slipping. To say the least. I mean I wasn't really listening to the TMNT part cause. It's about Micheal Bay's TMNT and I'm at the max level of 'don't give a shit' but it actually sounds like he was...supporting Micheal Bay. And if that's true then hell just froze the fuck over. And I can't even begin to go into how his comments on the ME3 controversy got me. I've lost all respect for him. Not only him but just about every person who's spoken on the topic has been mocking and taking pot shots at well...people like me. Extra Credits didn't take the pot shots but the fact that they still use a lot of the same arguments was upsetting. Really only Shamus, Forbes, and Angry Joe seem to get/share the fan outrage. We got a few in our court. and well Shamus gets why we're upset, I'm not sure on if he supports us but he gets it at least.

Ishigami	545 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 10:51
	Afaik the complaint wasn't filed because the guy didn't like the ending (admitting he probably didn't) the complaint was filed because EA/BioWare outright lied in their marketing campaign about the ending making it false advertising. I think it is absolutely within the consumer right to call them on this.

arigomi	546 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 11:14
	It is foolish to think that legal action is going to solve the situation. Legal action never repairs the relationship between two parties. Is vindication worth contributing to the demise of your once loved developer?

SpiderJerusalem	547 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 11:15
	Yep, Bob, you won't do any of those whiny hissyfit things. Oh wait. Yeah you will. You totally will. Remember Scott Pilgrim? Remember Expendables? You are just as much a little whiny bitch as the people you try to step over with this hack show of your. You are not better than these people, hell, you are worse; you're a fanboy who tries his damned hardes to pretend that you aren't just as bad as the rest of your ilk. Besides, it's even funnier to see you crop up on the Badass Digest website complaining about Michael Bay, like a prissy whiny little fanboy. So, Bob, go to hell. Your big picture is getting lost behind that massive, bloated head of yours. Take a good look in the mirror and accept that fact that no matter how much you're going to be piling on that hypocrisy, you are just as bad as everyone else - you're just going to be whining about crap through different outlets. Now there's a big picture for you.

AcacianLeaves	548 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 11:16
	I love Bob, but this is another case of someone commenting on something that they just don't know or care about at all. Bob has never played a Mass Effect game. He didn't experience the ending. It's not "bad" because it was subjectively disappointing and didn't fit individual expectations - it was bad because it directly contradicted the marketing, hype, and the entire purpose of the series since the first game. Besides that, I would be willing to bet my left arm that this wasn't BioWare's intended ending. In fact, I KNOW it wasn't because EA pulled the writer of ME1/ME2 to work on SW:TOR. EA pushed the deadline, changed the staff, changed the script, and forced a "cliffhanger" in order to sell more DLC. We aren't fighting for "our" ending, we're fighting for the right of the artists to make their own ending without being pushed around by publishers.

sonofliber	549 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 13:28
	leaving this here read it, its quite good its about "art" and whats wrong about the ending http://doycetesterman.com/index.php/2012/03/mass-effect-tolkein-and-your-bullshit-artistic-process/ and this: http://doycetesterman.com/index.php/2012/03/mass-effect-creative-license-and-the-rights-of-the-player-in-a-storygame-me3/

Murmillos	550 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 13:35
	Dr. Dan Challis: I don't know who TotalBiscuit is, but he/she sounds very learned and well informed. The legal parlance may vary slightly but the concept of "fitness for use" still underpins product liability law in the US. I think you recognize this, which is why you switched tack from defective products to false advertising. The problem with that has already been addressed by shoddyworksucks, so I'll not belabor the point. Suffice to say that your efforts to shield yourself from disappointment by invoking legal concepts that you clearly don't understand are pretty transparent, even to a layman. Defective product, incomplete product, not "fitness for use", false advertising... I mean, if you want to counter every single little term and phrased used as not being the most "correct term" in the context of that sentence or idea, then we can continue going back and forth all week long. I feel like I'm talking to a Lawyer here. "BUT HAA HAA! You used this phrasing within that sentence, that means you were at the grass knoll at 9am in the morning wearing a black hoody!! You ARE GUILTY!" I just feel that EA forced BioWare to ship a incomplete product and if any $DLC comes down the road that sells a better ending that fits more to what they said the ending was going to originally be, then yea, nobody will be able to convince me otherwise that EA is openly willing to screw over consumers because they know people will continue to defend them to continue to let them screw them over. Me, I'm done to the point I'm no longer be a pre-order collectors edition buyer (from their own fucking stores to boot). That free money: gone. I can wait until they discount that game to the ground (or borrow from a friend) [personal convictions still prevent me from buying used]. There are other games developers (plenty of them indie) that treat their customers much better and the games are just as fun. I've had been a long time supporter of BioWare, thats why I'm not going to walk away quietly. They got my money, there isn't much that can be done legally as a lot of it would be a large leap in legalize logic (but entertaining the idea is still fun, if knowingly pointless). So yea, here is my voice. Its the only thing I have other then not giving them my money in the future; and fuck anybody who tells me I am not entitled to use my voice to express my displeasure in the matter.

I_am_acting	551 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 13:51
	Moviebob needs to watch these videos before screaming entitlement http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84w6UA2rdGI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gz8_j-ebfaI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBETU-uOGh8&feature=plcp&context=C410f6f2VDvjVQa1PpcFPFxy4aVNbZsiPZOpQdV9oaocTueuKCznM= i especially love how he fails to mention that the ending we got was promised by Casey Hudson to not be the ending we'd get

Dr. Dan Challis	552 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 15:16
	Murmillos: I feel like I'm talking to a Lawyer here. I'm not a lawyer but maybe I sound a bit like one because I've actually taken the time to learn and understand what my rights as a consumer as and are not. If you're going to throw around legal terminology, it would behoove you to do the same. If you want to express your unhappiness with a product and your intention to vote with your wallet by no longer patronising the company that made it, more power to you. I have nothing to say in opposition to that.

Jiachi	553 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 15:16
	A pity about Hunger Games. The books sound alright, but I can't get myself hunkered down to read a full blown series much anymore. As to Mass Effect, I'd be up in arms too if they made a LoTR game trilogy like that. Play your own 'Frodo' with a surviving Fellowship, get a 100% Readiness to take on the Black Gates, and the game cuts to credits after you toss the Ring and Mordor crumbles. Heck, I couldn't even finish the starting area of ME1 after KoToR burnout, and I still feel for these people.

Ashley Blalock	554 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 15:42
	SpiderJerusalem: Yep, Bob, you won't do any of those whiny hissyfit things. Oh wait. Yeah you will. You totally will. Remember Scott Pilgrim? Remember Expendables? You are just as much a little whiny bitch as the people you try to step over with this hack show of your. You are not better than these people, hell, you are worse; you're a fanboy who tries his damned hardes to pretend that you aren't just as bad as the rest of your ilk. Besides, it's even funnier to see you crop up on the Badass Digest website complaining about Michael Bay, like a prissy whiny little fanboy. So, Bob, go to hell. Your big picture is getting lost behind that massive, bloated head of yours. Take a good look in the mirror and accept that fact that no matter how much you're going to be piling on that hypocrisy, you are just as bad as everyone else - you're just going to be whining about crap through different outlets. Now there's a big picture for you. Yea you know it's funny I kind of recall a movie critic somewhere really going after Platinum Dunes and their bad movies. Oh if only there was a link to said critic http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/1680-A-Nightmare-on-Elm-Street Yet now we should totally and completely trust any changes Platinum Dunes wants make to the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles because some fans have called foul before the movies have been made. Yes some times Hollywood does make some good changes but that doesn't mean that fans are always wrong about some changes being really really really bad. Given the track record of the people involved with the production of Teenage Mutant Turtles I'd say they are going to have earn my trust and sell me on the idea that this movie is in the right hands.

Tomster595	555 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 15:44
	Guys, Big Picture is an OPINION show. People need to chill the fuck out. If you don't agree with Bob, that's fine, but I see no reason in getting so angry about it. Sure, maybe the episode is whiny and complainy, but that's sort of the point.

Mangue Surfer	556 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 16:34
	"Teenage Alien Ninja Turtles Teenage Alien Ninja Turtles Teenage Alien Ninja Turtles Heroes in a half-shell Turtle power!" Nah! Not the same.

gbemery	557 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 17:56
	MovieBob: Mutants and Masses MovieBob goes into detail about the difference between artists and fans. Watch Video Bob, please before you put your foot any further in your mouth, understand that there is a difference between demanding a change to something you didn't make than demanding that you get what you paid for with your money which help pay for said products completion. If a movie is advertised as having certain features or what not and people paid to see it yes they are taking a risk overall but they should not be taking a risk on what was already advertised to be produced in certain locations of said product. If you are able to get a full refund then return it and be done, but at last the last I checked you can't return games for full refunds unless they are unopened. So to conclude if someone spent their money on a product that turned out to be riddled with half truths, miss leading advertisement and flat out false advertisement then yes the customer has every right to complain, and if they can't get their money back then they have the right to demand that the product be changed to what they were promised.

mfeff	558 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 18:50
	QUINTIX: FelixG: Is there a reason you changed my words from that I thought that that was a good video? [Answers his own question with an assumption] I was quoting mfeff My appologies. Editing embeded quotes here is a bit of a pain. I must also further confess I was skimming. Here is what mfeff has to say: mfeff: "Smugness" sounds a touch ad hominem... Who is saying that? A guy on YouTube, who is saying he is smug, a guy on the Escapist, that lives at home with his parents? I mean, why even play that game? I think we all have a lot of respect for you Bob, it is why we support your work. Be above the argument man. I'll fix it. Edit: A qutation mark was missing in the post number, so it attributed mfeff's quote to you and didn't show your quote at all. I still misquoted you. Again my appologies. It should be fixed now. Further edit: Just to poke fun ;) Ahh hey, I'm famous! Weee affirmation. I'll explain Mass Effect 3, Very Quickly. Watch the movie "CONTACT" Crucible - Contact Bubble Speculation - Contact "chat with dad - alien - God" Art - Lifting other work, calling it your own, and pumping out PR nonsense. Just go watch Jody Foster in the movie "Contact" then go watch Battle Star Galactica... that's it! Shows over!

Akafrank	559 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 20:19
	The people calling Bioware names and accusing them of wrongdoing are not helping anything. The people calling Bioware fans names and accusing them of wrongdoing are not helping anything. Games happen at the intersection of authorship and experience. Accusing one side or the other of being mad or bad will only extend the fight, keeping games, their authors and their players right where they are.

Grunt_Man11	560 POSTED: 29 Mar 2012 20:32
	thethird0611: Baby Tea: Frank_Sinatra_: Remember: BioWare has stated that their fans are equal creators in the story along with their actual writing staff. Fans are equal creators in the same way that readers of 'choose your own adventure' books are equal authors. Read: They aren't. "But they SAID we are!" Yeah! And the cover of my 'Choose your own Adventure' book says I pick where the character goes! But even IF every choice I make in the book ends up at the same, unsatisfying conclusion on the final page, the bottom line is: That's how it was written. I might not like it, and I might even feel cheated, but that's the creator's choice. I can not buy from them again, I can critique it like crazy, I can even bitch about it on the internet, but to DEMAND that a creator, that an artist CHANGE THEIR WORK because I am unsatisfied is the height of self-entitled bullshit. No, it's not false advertising. No, they don't owe you a thing. Geez, I'd be happy with another bullshit 'boycott' rather than this garbage. People need to grow up. Seriously. Ive gotta say, just today ive seen 3 major push backs against the ME controversy. Dan from Extra creditz post, Movie Bob, and now this. I must say, it seems people are getting tired of hearing so much over reaction and are coming out of the woodworks. EDIT: Also, ZP posted a good article to. Also, I notice for every single argument anyone makes, most of what is said is 'Oh, your missing the point'... even though every point is being addressed. No kidding. This got old faster than a certain arrow and knee centric meme. $80,000 made for the Child's Play charity. The only good thing to come out of this whole nerd rage infested mess. Let's not forget how frightening all this "Retake Mass Effect," and the like, really is. "How is it frightening?" I can hear them asking. The Mass Effect fanboys are wanting the power to force an artist, writer, film maker, game developer, and/or musician to change their creative work at the slightest whim. They are trying to use a government entity to compromise the creative freedom of somebody else. If these fanboys have their way, then artists of all types will live in constant fear that a group of butt-hurt fans will have direct control of their intellectual property. For example, a writer could advertise the last book of his/her popular book series as having an "epic ending that will answer important lingering questions." This writer could honestly feel that the ending they wrote satisfied the claims they made, and all it would take is one extremely loud vocal minority to destroy it all. If they don't like the ending they could make the claim to a government entity that the ending wasn't "epic" and didn't "answer important lingering questions," and force the writer to change the ending of his/her creative work. In other words, these fanboys think they should have the same oppressive and tyrannical power that SOPA would of given corporations! That is friggin' scary as hell!


Pages PREV 1 . . . 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or

Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook

or
Register for a free account here