The Big Picture: Mutants and Masses

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . . . 18 NEXT
 

hermes200:
Sorry, but I don't see the difference. They sure want it to be different (to change it), and they think they [the fans] know the way to make it better than them [Bioware].

Give a bad writer a good storyboard and he will come up with a good story told poorly. My point is that there is a difference between the events that happen in a story, and the skill with which that story is told. A lot of the ME fans would be fine with the events of the ending, broadly speaking, as long as they didn't conflict with previous canon, pull thematic right angles at the last minute and leave the final life-or-death fate of major characters dangling on vague implications.

I also don't like this idea that the writers (or artists in general) are these meek, spineless pushovers who will bend to the whims of the fans. If it truly is a work of art, the artist should stand by it and say no, this is how i made it and I'm not changing it.

Agayek:

It's fans bitching about false advertising.

I can't believe people are still falling for this shit. Nearly every company does this and people still get shocked and upset when a game doesn't appear to be what was promised.

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.

I'm still not entirely sure what they did wrong, apart from doing something that nearly every single developer does (false advertising/marketing). I disliked the ending immensely, but I will never join the group that demands the ending to be changed. Complaining (fully justified) and demanding/threatening and whatnot are two completely different things.

I should do an FTC to Bethesda one of these days.

Frank_Sinatra_:

Remember: BioWare has stated that their fans are equal creators in the story along with their actual writing staff.

Yes, as in "We create the world for you to live in, you get to choose how you want to live in it". We are the equal creators over Mass Effect as we always decide how the story ends, as long as the developers have created said possibility. We have the option of choice, not creation. Claiming that we get the right to change whatever we want about the game by filing complaints is foolish.

Just watch this:
http://www.screwattack.com/shows/partners/game-overthinker/game-overthinker-episode-68-crass-effect

hermes200:
...
To bow to public pressure is something no one that creates something should aspire to.

Under those terms, why can't we have Romeo and Juliet 2? or Kill Bill Vol 3? I believe the end of Fight Club was not epic enough, so we should all force Palahniuk to make a sequel. I also believe Indiana Jones wasn't clear enough, so George Lucas should work on a 5th one. Why not? It worked great with us fans clamoring for a better ending for Watchmen. Someone already mention how this public lynching was getting close to the villain of Misery, which sounds like a fair comparison too...

1) Romeo and Juliet had a strong, if tragic, ending.
2) Kill Bill Vol 2 wrapped up the story conclusively, with almost all the characters dead.
3) Fight Club had said its piece; the character's arc had reached an end.
4) George Lucas has already taken liberties with his Star Wars films - I think he was the wrong person to invoke with your strawman-ship
5) Watchman's ending was changed from the comic, and as far as I can see was the better for it for the purposes of the big screen.

If you notice, none of those (well, maybe bar the Watchmen thing - some comic fans did want to see a giant psychic squid, but then that's comic fans for you) do actually have any sort of public support; they are mostly examples of things that ended well.

Mass Effect 3 is not one of those.

You may also notice that all the example you chose are non-interactive films.

Mass Effect 3 is not one of those.

Your strawmen are weak, your protestations weaker. As has been posted and re-posted before, history is full of creative decisions being aided and directed by feedback; why should Bioware be any different?

You know what I won't be doing? Throwing a fit because some portion of the internet disagrees with me.

Listen Bob. Being opposed to the whole ME3 fiasco is fine. That's your opinion. But you really had no reason to get this upset about it. You are not tied to BioWare. You are not actually even in the Games Industry.

"Crybaby hissy fit." Nice to see you're being reasonable about this.

I read a proverb one time that said this: "A calm word stills an argument, but an angry one stirs it up."

Do I think that ME fans have taken this whole thing a bit far? Yeah, I do. However, I'm more irritated by the response from other people not involved. It's rage being thrown onto rage, it's tiresome, at the least. Depressing as Fuck, at the worst.

Is this really all the Internet age has brought us? Are we really so incapable of having calm discourses about things? Why is it whenever one group does something we disagree with are we have to respond with equal or greater outrage, regardless of whether we're directly affected?

And the topics we choose. Starving children? No. North Korea's satellite launch? Not a chance.

The ending of Mass Effect 3? Hell yes! People being upset about the people upset about the ending of Mass Effect 3? Absolutely.

....
.......
....

Really?

Really?

Frank_Sinatra_:

lacktheknack:
SNIP

Wow, generalizing. How very mature.
You apparently haven't been listening to any of the more rational and calm complaints.
Like this, or this.

And those I simply cannot get. I am physically incapable of seeing why being merely frustrated at the end of anything - even something you've sunk hundreds of hours into - causes this much rage and fury.

Eh... I'm too damn calm, I guess.

SnakeoilSage:
Really there's nothing new any of us can add to the whole debate. Very, very few of us are going to come out of this with some kind of closure. Let's just let it die.

Instead, let's talk about Dick Cheney, and how he got a heart transplant when by medical standards he's far too old to qualify for one and there are much younger and more needy patients in desperate need of said organ replacement. They were probably further up the list than he was, too. How about that?

There is one thing we can add (or more likely reiterate). Everyone needs to calm the fuck down because it is just a game.

Anyhow, how could Dick Cheney even get a heart transplant when he doesn't have a heart. Because ya know...he is one of Satan's minions..ha...ha.

On a serious note, it just seems like another Steve Jobs thing. More then likely he applied to multiple organ transplant lists and one of those lists had a short waiting time. He could only do that because he has money and power. I think that's kinda sad.

actually what bob said is why i have an issue with the movie. i spent 3 games choosing my shepards story and thing in the last 5 minutes it no longer my shepard and my shepards journey its biowares product

As typical whiners gonna whine, if they aren't whining about the ME3 ending, they're going to whine to those who disagree with them! Sorry but at this point I just can't take the ME3 fans seriosuly without them coming off so hurt and complaining about it! (Oh you can dimiss my opinion seeing how I have never played the games but I'm read about the game universe, characters and seen the endings.)

I kinf of find it abit hypocrite from Bob since I still recall how butthurt he was when the film The Expendables sold more than Scott Pilgrim Vs The World.

Af for the turtles, yes I am annoyed with the changes so I have no expectation toward it.

SnakeoilSage:
Really there's nothing new any of us can add to the whole debate. Very, very few of us are going to come out of this with some kind of closure. Let's just let it die.

Instead, let's talk about Dick Cheney, and how he got a heart transplant when by medical standards he's far too old to qualify for one and there are much younger and more needy patients in desperate need of said organ replacement. They were probably further up the list than he was, too. How about that?

Yeah but not everyone can have a wing added on to a hospital for getting that heart.
It's all about money power and connections my friend. Is it fair? Of course not, but we can't really do anything about it.....kinda like mass effect three lol.

Mcoffey:

Saxnot:
by this logic, i should be allowed to create a saw remake which consists entirely of a steady shot of a field of grass where nothing happens for 2 hours.

what? you buy the ticket, you take the risk, right? don't try to limit my artistic freedom!

artistic integrity is important, true, but when you're working on a series consistency is just as important. a good sequel manages to keep what's good and improve what's bad about the previous iteration. in that regard, the ending of ME3 throws all consistency overboard to create something mediocre at best. that isn't artistic freedom, that's artistic failure

Yes. You absolutely can. Don't expect to be very successful, but that's totally your prerogative if you get the go ahead from the company to make that movie.

That's not the issue. The issue is people not liking something and thinking that the reasonable response is to act like a bunch of five-year olds and demand other people change for them.

I didn't like the third Matrix movie.

I got over it, and I don't watch it anymore.

I didn't like the ending to Mass Effect 3.

I complained, got over it, and I probably wont buy any more Mass Effect games.

You see where I'm going with this?

I'm not going to demand they change the ending, to Mass Effect or the Matrix. That is simply not my call to make. And it's not the fans call either.

yes, but it's not that simple. the point i was trying to make is that artists don't exist in a vacuum. especially when you're talking about the ending to a series, it is expected of an artist that they at least try to stay consistent with their earlier work. this is not an unreasonable expectation, and when you break that expectation, you should have good reason for doing so.

what the ME3 witing team did is look at what made their game stand out, what the elements were that made so many people love it and go 'well, f*ck that, imma go make an ending where the colours are different.'
ending can be dissapointing, sure, but at least they are usually consistent with what came before. if they're not, that's reasonable grounds for complaint.

with regards to changing the ending: changing it at this point would not help much, the ending they shipped is the one that will make the lasting impression. it might be a point of artistic integrity to at least try to do right by their own franchise though

Art is made with artistic expression as the driving force, then sold (Sometimes).
Games are made with money and profit as the driving force, then claim to be art.

Do you see the problem here? Not all games are art. People seem to require this black and white approach that ALL games MUST be art, or none are.

So does that mean any game whose dev team listens to the community can never be "art"?
That's a pretty shitty definition of "art", don't you think?

SpaceBat:

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.

I'm still not entirely sure what they did wrong, apart from doing something that nearly every single developer does (false advertising/marketing). I disliked the ending immensely, but I will never join the group that demands the ending to be changed. Complaining (fully justified) and demanding/threatening and whatnot are two completely different things.

What they did wrong was finish an epic series that touted its varied choices and options with a trinary choice without meaning or perceivable consequence and which undermined all your actions up until that point.

Donating to a charity to demonstrate your passion to have the ending changed isn't a bad thing. It's even interesting how valid the legal action is when you read Bioware's marketing about every one of your decisions in the previous games mattering in the end and compare it to the actuality in which everything is thrown away to trim you options down to 'pick your favourite primary colour!' Not saying I support it, but it's a bad sign that such a thing can even pass casual inspection. Also, it would be nice to see laws against false advertising being brought up again, and to have publishers reminded about just how far they can spin the truth. They have enough power as it is without being able to lie to us about the content of their product - don't start defending them over that!

Wicky_42:

Taunta:

I disagree that players are within their rights to petition, etc, to have the ending changed. Well, maybe not "within their rights", because they always have the choice of doing so, but do I think it's okay to do? No.

Bob wasn't saying that you had to be okay with the ending, which was what that entire segment about TMNT was about. He's saying that you're perfectly okay to complain and bitch and moan all you want, but as soon as you start writing angry letters to the developer and signing petitions to the artist to change their work, that's when you cross the line. There's a line between "not being happy" and "entitled".

Anyways, while yes, gaming is an interactive medium, I'd argue that the player's actual freedom in the game is limited. The creators are still telling you a story, interactive or not, and you don't have complete freedom in how that story goes. Now it may be a choose your own adventure story, but the artist is still in control. You only have freedom insofar as choosing the options that the artist gives to you. The only games I can think of that the player has complete control over the story are games like The Sims, and even then you're limited by the tools the artist gives you and what you are and are not allowed to do within the rules of the universe.

First of all, something like the Infamous 2 model is a relatively minor change and has nothing to do with the actual story.

But as long as you're giving me good examples of changes, let me show you a few more bad ones.

The movie I Am Legend originally had an ending that was more faithful to the book. But after showing it to test audiences, they didn't like it, so the movie's ending was drastically changed. Now the movie ending has nothing to do with the book, and the entire message that the author was trying to get across in the book is gone.

Inuyasha was reportedly supposed to end a long time before it actually did. But fans demanded that they have more Inuyasha and Rumiko Takahashi bowed to pressure. So the overall quality of the anime went down the drain continuing and continuing and continuing until it finally ended with a giant middle finger to all of the fans.

Blade Runner is a poor example. First of all, it's an adaptation of the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? The original ending has the main character willingly do something knowing that she will die for it. It was sad, it was poignant, it had a message. The movie adaptation changed that, feeling that it made the movie "too bleak". They added a narrator to explain everything for the audience in case they wouldn't get it, and then who continued to explain that the main character actually lived happily ever after and there goes the poignancy point of the story.

Frank_Sinatra_:
Bad move Bob, very, very, very, very bad move.

It's apparent that you really haven't researched into the whole Mass Effect 3 debacle, so be prepared to hear that the Mass Effect series is a special case, BioWare didn't deliver on ANY of their promises, and they pretty much slapped their own IP in the face in the last 5 minutes of their game.

Remember: BioWare has stated that their fans are equal creators in the story along with their actual writing staff.

EDIT: Before you go crying about how you're sick of people complaining, I think I should point you to THIS.

That's funny.

You know who disagrees with you? http://extra-credits.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2008

MatsVS:
Once again Bob demonstrates an extreme unwillingness to even consider a different viewpoint than his own, much less engage with the actual arguments, as well as an abject lack of ability to do even cursory research on the subject at hand, and not to mention a tendency towards derogatory language and the overall dismissive attitude of his ill-conceived points. This attempt to create a false parallel between games and other kinds of media in the name of artistic integrity is, in a word, laughable.

Dammit. You read my mind then took a time machine into the past and posted my thoughts before I could.

Well said, sir, very well said.

The problem with Bob is that he has all the smug self-assurance of a great commentator without any of the talent (Extra Credits) or entertainment value (Jimquisition) to actually back it up.

Bob thinks he's a lot smarter than he actually is, which is why you'll see him shout his poorly reasoned rants from his ivory tower, but he'll never leave the tower and reply to rebuttals of his points.

Wicky_42:

Taunta:

I disagree that players are within their rights to petition, etc, to have the ending changed. Well, maybe not "within their rights", because they always have the choice of doing so, but do I think it's okay to do? No.

Bob wasn't saying that you had to be okay with the ending, which was what that entire segment about TMNT was about. He's saying that you're perfectly okay to complain and bitch and moan all you want, but as soon as you start writing angry letters to the developer and signing petitions to the artist to change their work, that's when you cross the line. There's a line between "not being happy" and "entitled".

Anyways, while yes, gaming is an interactive medium, I'd argue that the player's actual freedom in the game is limited. The creators are still telling you a story, interactive or not, and you don't have complete freedom in how that story goes. Now it may be a choose your own adventure story, but the artist is still in control. You only have freedom insofar as choosing the options that the artist gives to you. The only games I can think of that the player has complete control over the story are games like The Sims, and even then you're limited by the tools the artist gives you and what you are and are not allowed to do within the rules of the universe.

Here's the thing: I have no issue with fan complaints, or even creative works changing in response to fans. That stuff happens, because creators want to give people what they want, and fan response can carry things in a good direction. As a writer, I know that sometimes there are things I do that make more sense to me in a creative context than anyone else who reads what I wrote because I'm privy to a bunch of internal logic based on what's going on in my head that nobody else knows. Reader/fan response can be a valuable tool to making a better story.

If the "Retake Mass Effect" movement was a group of people coming together to tell Bioware what they disliked about the ending, fine. But that's not what it's about. Again, *neither Bob, nor I, nor a number of people who disagree with the movement disagree with complaining about the ending.* We disagree with the really nasty assertions being made about what fans deserve from creators. And what that position boils down to is this: YOU DON'T DESERVE ANYTHING. When Conan Doyle brought Holmes back from the dead, that was his choice. The changes to Cole? Sucker Punch's choice. Ridley Scott had a choice to change Blade Runner (and even then, there's now a longer Director's Cut that Scott theoretically feels is more faithful to his artistic vision).

When it comes right down to it: you were not sold a broken product. It is not incumbent upon Bioware to cater to your whims. If they want to clarify or change the ending to ME3, so be it. But that should be their choice. Bioware could have made Shepard a talking, stuffed elephant for ME3, and I would have supported them in keeping him elephantine. Because at the end of the day, they are the folks who own Mass Effect, and they can do whatever they want with it. If you have a problem with that, tough.

hermes200:

Saxnot:
by this logic, i should be allowed to create a saw remake which consists entirely of a steady shot of a field of grass where nothing happens for 2 hours.
what? you buy the ticket, you take the risk, right? don't try to limit my artistic freedom!

Of course you would. Then people would complain about it, even ask for their money back... and that would be IT.

No threats, no lawsuits, no "Ohhh... Saxnot lied to us", no "We DEMAND that you change the ending, because WE know better". Nothing of that is excusable (especially the threats part)

threats are never permissable, and people are always free to try and sue each other for a percieved wrong (though it wont work, evidently)

people demanding of me that i do right by my own art though, i don't view as unreasonable in their demands. clearly the question of whether i want to respond to that in any way is up to me.

i think we agree with one another, and your point is directed at people who feel the artist should be FORCED to change their product. if these people actually exist (i don't think anyone really meant that, but i could be wrong), they are silly and should be ignored.

Well, I like Bob's shows and respect his opinion. But today I simply have to disagree. If there is a medium where fans have a right to complain, it's videogames. "classical" art can exist without the observer, art rarely is created to sell well and even movies can exist without someone watching it. But videogames need the interaction with the viewer, they exist thought the viewer. And yes, Developers and Producers can do with their "product" whatever they want but they should keep a sense of obligation towards their fans, especially when the main protagonist is to tightly linked to the player.... but I guess Bioware sold their sense of obligation to EA...

Wicky_42:

hermes200:
...
To bow to public pressure is something no one that creates something should aspire to.

Under those terms, why can't we have Romeo and Juliet 2? or Kill Bill Vol 3? I believe the end of Fight Club was not epic enough, so we should all force Palahniuk to make a sequel. I also believe Indiana Jones wasn't clear enough, so George Lucas should work on a 5th one. Why not? It worked great with us fans clamoring for a better ending for Watchmen. Someone already mention how this public lynching was getting close to the villain of Misery, which sounds like a fair comparison too...

1) Romeo and Juliet had a strong, if tragic, ending.
2) Kill Bill Vol 2 wrapped up the story conclusively, with almost all the characters dead.
3) Fight Club had said its piece; the character's arc had reached an end.
4) George Lucas has already taken liberties with his Star Wars films - I think he was the wrong person to invoke with your strawman-ship
5) Watchman's ending was changed from the comic, and as far as I can see was the better for it for the purposes of the big screen.

If you notice, none of those (well, maybe bar the Watchmen thing - some comic fans did want to see a giant psychic squid, but then that's comic fans for you) do actually have any sort of public support; they are mostly examples of things that ended well.

Mass Effect 3 is not one of those.

You may also notice that all the example you chose are non-interactive films.

Mass Effect 3 is not one of those.

Your strawmen are weak, your protestations weaker. As has been posted and re-posted before, history is full of creative decisions being aided and directed by feedback; why should Bioware be any different?

1 to 5- "It wasn't fulfilling enough. I want it changed !!!" That is by far the logic most posted here.
4- George Lucas is the perfect example to invoke. He is one of the best (if not the best) creators that measures his visions in terms of merchandise, money and profitability. He is the one that hates his previous work (THX and American Graffiti) because "they didn't make any money". He is the one that added Jar Jar Binks because it ranked high in kids test audiences. He is the epitome of what you want Bioware to imitate: a creative person directed by audience feedback.

I must point out that your opinion on "Mass Effect not ending well" is just that, an opinion. I am not claiming mine is more than that, but based on the people that supported the author of the games, I believe its far from unique.

You are free to express your dislike about an ending. I have posted in this forum before how I deeply dislike the endings of Metal Gear Solid 4 and Borderlands... but that is only my opinion and I treated like it... That is all.

MovieBob:
MovieBob goes into detail about the difference between artists and fans.

Sorry but considering the topic I think it would have been wise to take the same precautions as when you said the Hunger Games was mediocre :P

--------------

I actually agree with your point which is "Its theirs, not yours. You can't form the ending just because you liked it up until the end."

I actually liked the ending. Its cleaver and it makes you really puzzle over what the fuck is going on... also you see Shepard hallucinating all the time so... indoctrination much? Two options are to give in and the final one is to resist... as you see his armour and what looks like a breath.

Looking at all other media's secrets intended by the creator only come out much much later... Blade Runner... turns out the guy hunting the androids was meant to be an android.

The best stories in my opinion are not those that have a clear defined ending but have multiple interpritations... multiple aspects where a literal reading or suggestive meaning could be true...

So yeah in short as you put it:
This is why we can't have nice things.
Because this is a nice thing (maybe a tiny bit too unclear)... and everyone fucking rejected it outright...

MovieBob:
Mutants and Masses

MovieBob goes into detail about the difference between artists and fans.

Watch Video

*shakes head* .. Bob, I thought with me quoting you on your previous video about what you said on Twitter, that you would announce a video on why Mass Effect 3's ending aien't such a bad deal. But in truth, the only thing you said in this video overall was that "Artists should do what they want, you must respect that. Stop whining about the ending."

I'm just going to say that you've missed the point big time. I really thought you would of given a long, well thought speech about it thus me understanding where you're coming from but from that little brief 'rant' you made on ME3.. I can't really make anything out of your points on it. Really, the fans aren't mad or outraged because the ending isn't living up to the hype.. it's just a very hollow, poorly written, plot hole everywhere ending that even asks for you to buy more of their DLC at the end.

Also Bob- when we do state our concerns and give criticism to Bioware.. guess what? They shut their forums on us. Closing the threads so we can't state how we feel overall, our opinions being shunned and ignored. So overall we not only get a bad ending to where it defiles everything Mass Effect stood for but Casey Hudson makes excuses and Bioware doesn't want any feedback like they said they'll be happy to receive. So this episode was.. a no go for me.

Even in his own Game-Overthinker show he stated he has not played the games, nor does he know what the endings are. THAT'S THE FUCKING PROBLEM BOB! You lack context and investment and can easily stand on your damn soapbox and act as a superior while spewing pretentious dribble.

So Bob, shut up, play the games, see the endings and then voice your opinion, otherwise your input is worthless on the matter.

To play Devil's Advocate with the FTC complaint, it wasn't "I hated the ending," which is what most people are complaining about. It was "they lied about the product."

It doesn't make the complaint any more valid. Companies lie about their upcoming products a LOT and get away with it with the simple "subject to change at any time" disclaimer during every damned interview. Just saying, you seem to imply the FTC complaint was over the ending being BAD, which it wasn't. It was over Bioware straight up lying about it.

miloram:

Wicky_42:

Taunta:

I disagree that players are within their rights to petition, etc, to have the ending changed. Well, maybe not "within their rights", because they always have the choice of doing so, but do I think it's okay to do? No.

Bob wasn't saying that you had to be okay with the ending, which was what that entire segment about TMNT was about. He's saying that you're perfectly okay to complain and bitch and moan all you want, but as soon as you start writing angry letters to the developer and signing petitions to the artist to change their work, that's when you cross the line. There's a line between "not being happy" and "entitled".

Anyways, while yes, gaming is an interactive medium, I'd argue that the player's actual freedom in the game is limited. The creators are still telling you a story, interactive or not, and you don't have complete freedom in how that story goes. Now it may be a choose your own adventure story, but the artist is still in control. You only have freedom insofar as choosing the options that the artist gives to you. The only games I can think of that the player has complete control over the story are games like The Sims, and even then you're limited by the tools the artist gives you and what you are and are not allowed to do within the rules of the universe.

Here's the thing: I have no issue with fan complaints, or even creative works changing in response to fans. That stuff happens, because creators want to give people what they want, and fan response can carry things in a good direction. As a writer, I know that sometimes there are things I do that make more sense to me in a creative context than anyone else who reads what I wrote because I'm privy to a bunch of internal logic based on what's going on in my head that nobody else knows. Reader/fan response can be a valuable tool to making a better story.

If the "Retake Mass Effect" movement was a group of people coming together to tell Bioware what they disliked about the ending, fine. But that's not what it's about. Again, *neither Bob, nor I, nor a number of people who disagree with the movement disagree with complaining about the ending.* We disagree with the really nasty assertions being made about what fans deserve from creators. And what that position boils down to is this: YOU DON'T DESERVE ANYTHING. When Conan Doyle brought Holmes back from the dead, that was his choice. The changes to Cole? Sucker Punch's choice. Ridley Scott had a choice to change Blade Runner (and even then, there's now a longer Director's Cut that Scott theoretically feels is more faithful to his artistic vision).

When it comes right down to it: you were not sold a broken product. It is not incumbent upon Bioware to cater to your whims. If they want to clarify or change the ending to ME3, so be it. But that should be their choice. Bioware could have made Shepard a talking, stuffed elephant for ME3, and I would have supported them in keeping him elephantine. Because at the end of the day, they are the folks who own Mass Effect, and they can do whatever they want with it. If you have a problem with that, tough.

Ah, so they are using the wrong word? Is that really all you complainer-haters are being so angry about - that the fans used "demand" rather than "desire" or "want"? That they feel the relationship between them and Bioware to be the reciprocal sort where they give them money, pour time into their product, buy the DLC, talk about the stories with friends, publish articles etc etc and expect the next instalment to be a rewarding, satisfying experience that builds on the previous games, wrapping up the epic trilogy in a fitting manner? Rather than as a series of throw-away experiences churned out of an uncaring machine that expects the consumer to mindlessly choke down whatever they put out?

I dunno, I would have hoped that the industry was a bit more special than that and whilst I can see your anti-entitlement sentiments (as I have seen brought out against political protesters with a cause), I can't help but feel that, as with the political protests, you're missing the point, the root of the issue in favour of something you can comfortably attack and dismiss.

Blatherscythe:
Even in his own Game-Overthinker show he stated he has not played the games, nor does he know what the endings are. THAT'S THE FUCKING PROBLEM BOB! You lack context and investment and can easily stand on your damn soapbox and act as a superior spewing pretentious dribble.

So Bob, shut up, play the games, see the endings and then voice your opinion, otherwise your input is worthless on the matter.

You're missing the point. Whether or not he would like the ending doesn't matter. It's not about liking the ending, it's about crossing that boundary between creator and audience and feeling like you DESERVE a new ending.

That's what the entire segment about TMNT is about. He knows he's probably not gonna like the new treatment of it, but is he going to fly into a rage because this is not the movie that he is entitled to? No. The artist isn't here to please you.

There is a line between being displeased with the ending and feeling like you deserve something else.

as for what bob said on twitter.. while i dont aggree with him hes entitled to say it

i do have a question though for bob. total serious because i have genuine interest. how does this compare to fallout 3 changing its ending due to fan complaints, or fallout loosing its time limit due to the same or a movie getting an alternative ending due to audiences not being happy with it?

not trying to be confrontational im just curious how you see it bob.

Bocaj2000:
...
Agreed. Also, incase you don't know, the ending to ME3 got changed due to leaked info a few months before it got released. I'm expecting the "real" ending to get released via DLC eventually.

...I wouldn't advice them to specifically market it as "the real/actual ending" though.

If they start to say that the original product was never meant to be a complete whole, but was from the start dependant on making further unannounced purchases to see it through, then that complaint might actually gain a bit of merit. It'd then be about whether the design was purposefully kept incomplete, rather than just about full product whose ending people thought didn't live up to a rather unspecified hype (...probably still wouldn't be enough though, as it could be easily argued that it was a complete whole, and the DLC is just a mini-sequel).

Actually never did play Mass Effect, as I can't say that a series whose supposed fans apparently spend most of their time lambasting it for pretty consistently not living up to their expectations hold much draw to me[1]. But I know a bullshit consumer complaint when I see one.

[1] As well as a few guys in a user group I trust voicing reasoned criticism of the storyline of the third game, though they did praise the gameplay.

Okay, picture this:
You order a portrait of your friend from a highly-respected artist.
Said artist ,after 1-2 months ,hands you a canvas with shit smeared all over it.
Do you say A:What a fine piece of art, thank you for pouring you emotions into capturing the magic.
OR B: TAKE THAT SHIT AWAY FROM ME!
And than do you demand back your money, which you paid up-front.
(oh and when you are leaving he tries to sell you the bottom-right piece of the picture, which is lovely painted with golden dust)

The game was FINE (not excellent) until the very end, even the main themes were intriguing ,like Shepard finally sacrificing himself,and the whole cycle-business, but it was riddled with plot-holes and unanswered questions.

Granted ,this hissyfit people are throwing is disgusting.

Wait! Mario gets the Tanooki suit from a leaf!?
The Leaf is only supposed to give him a raccoon tail!
I say we all boycott and send nintendo tons of hate mail and start petitions to fix this monstrosity.

The main difference between these incidents is that one has the original creator boutching it but the other one is some guy no one wanted on the project.

Bioware made Mass Effect and therefore know how the story, characters, and ending works better than the fans do. They're not above doing something retarding with the ending but it was theirs to fuck up.

However, when it comes to TMNT, one of the guys that actually created them went on record as saying Michael Bay's idea is stupid. Its some totally unrelated guy coming and fucking with someone else's creation.

Oh, and the 2003 turtles cartoon is awesome. Everyone should watch that.

Wicky_42:

miloram:

Wicky_42:

Here's the thing: I have no issue with fan complaints, or even creative works changing in response to fans. That stuff happens, because creators want to give people what they want, and fan response can carry things in a good direction. As a writer, I know that sometimes there are things I do that make more sense to me in a creative context than anyone else who reads what I wrote because I'm privy to a bunch of internal logic based on what's going on in my head that nobody else knows. Reader/fan response can be a valuable tool to making a better story.

If the "Retake Mass Effect" movement was a group of people coming together to tell Bioware what they disliked about the ending, fine. But that's not what it's about. Again, *neither Bob, nor I, nor a number of people who disagree with the movement disagree with complaining about the ending.* We disagree with the really nasty assertions being made about what fans deserve from creators. And what that position boils down to is this: YOU DON'T DESERVE ANYTHING. When Conan Doyle brought Holmes back from the dead, that was his choice. The changes to Cole? Sucker Punch's choice. Ridley Scott had a choice to change Blade Runner (and even then, there's now a longer Director's Cut that Scott theoretically feels is more faithful to his artistic vision).

When it comes right down to it: you were not sold a broken product. It is not incumbent upon Bioware to cater to your whims. If they want to clarify or change the ending to ME3, so be it. But that should be their choice. Bioware could have made Shepard a talking, stuffed elephant for ME3, and I would have supported them in keeping him elephantine. Because at the end of the day, they are the folks who own Mass Effect, and they can do whatever they want with it. If you have a problem with that, tough.

Ah, so they are using the wrong word? Is that really all you complainer-haters are being so angry about - that the fans used "demand" rather than "desire" or "want"? That they feel the relationship between them and Bioware to be the reciprocal sort where they give them money, pour time into their product, buy the DLC, talk about the stories with friends, publish articles etc etc and expect the next instalment to be a rewarding, satisfying experience that builds on the previous games, wrapping up the epic trilogy in a fitting manner? Rather than as a series of throw-away experiences churned out of an uncaring machine that expects the consumer to mindlessly choke down whatever they put out?

I dunno, I would have hoped that the industry was a bit more special than that and whilst I can see your anti-entitlement sentiments (as I have seen brought out against political protesters with a cause), I can't help but feel that, as with the political protests, you're missing the point, the root of the issue in favour of something you can comfortably attack and dismiss.

In short: Yes.

Because "desire" and "want" have different connotations than "demand". Demand implies a sense of urgency and anger, that you feel injustice because you DESERVE a new ending. Desire implies "Meh, I wish the ending would have been better, but oh well. That's how it goes."

Wicky_42:

What they did wrong was finish an epic series that touted its varied choices and options with a trinary choice without meaning or perceivable consequence and which undermined all your actions up until that point.

It actually didn't undermine anything, really (your actions may not determine the outcome of the battle, but what comes after), but all right. As I said before, there are multiple good reasons as to why the ending is absolutely awful, but whether it's good or not and whether it met our expectations or not, isn't the point. I'm simply trying to find a legit reason as to why so many people believe that Bioware is obligated to change the ending (other than false advertising, which is a pointless action as we won't win). and that the difference between mediums such as movies and games in terms of artistic integrity and whatnot, are still open for discussion.

Wicky_42:

Bioware's marketing about every one of your decisions in the previous games mattering in the end and compare it to the actuality in which everything is thrown away to trim you options down to 'pick your favourite primary colour!'

That's not the reason they charged them with false marketing as far as I can remember. They stated that the actual ending wouldn't be a multiple choice question, which is the reason behind the legal action, right? Because everything you did, does matter for the ending. A game's story (or any story for that matter) doesn't end when the credits start rolling. Your decisions will decide how the future will work out, which is left open to interpretation.

My point is, I'm afraid that this might result in more games changing their ending in order to meet their user's expectation, which is an absolutely terrifying thought to me. Imagine a future where game story's lose their value as the creators get less freedom to work with and need to change endings in order to satisfy a self-entitled userbase.

Blatherscythe:
Even in his own Game-Overthinker show he stated he has not played the games, nor does he know what the endings are. THAT'S THE FUCKING PROBLEM BOB! You lack context and investment and can easily stand on your damn soapbox and act as a superior while spewing pretentious dribble.

Huge Mass Effect fan here who hates the endings. You're missing the point entirely. How much invested you are into a world has nothing to do with how entitled you are to a different ending.

Blatherscythe:
Even in his own Game-Overthinker show he stated he has not played the games, nor does he know what the endings are. THAT'S THE FUCKING PROBLEM BOB! You lack context and investment and can easily stand on your damn soapbox and act as a superior while spewing pretentious dribble.

So Bob, shut up, play the games, see the endings and then voice your opinion, otherwise your input is worthless on the matter.

Actually, that gives him a better perspective on the backlash than you do. He's not emotionally invested in the game nor the company. As a neutral party he can look at the movement it's self which is going wildly too far.

By nature of being a video game commentator he's going to have more knowledge of the industry and sympathy for gamers than the average non-gamer, and even with these sympathies he sees this as going way beyond the rational. The fans here are going into Annie Wilkes of Misery territory.

Blatherscythe:
Even in his own Game-Overthinker show he stated he has not played the games, nor does he know what the endings are. THAT'S THE FUCKING PROBLEM BOB! You lack context and investment and can easily stand on your damn soapbox and act as a superior while spewing pretentious dribble.

So Bob, shut up, play the games, see the endings and then voice your opinion, otherwise your input is worthless on the matter.

The man is right though. Fans have no right to a new ending.

This is what people miss, and honestly, I wonder if Bob made it unclear on purpose (like he said, it's good publicity). It doesn't matter if the ending is good or bad. He never argued it either way. The point is, the ending is Bioware's decision, and they do with it as they will.

Turns out they decided to change it. Not me, not you, not the complainers. BIOWARE chose to change. Still their call.

It's an awful ending. One of the worst ever. But I still say it's a bad idea to PAY them more money to fix their mess. Which is what this fanbase IS doing...

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . . . 18 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here