MovieBob's thoughts on the ME3 ending controversy

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 . . . 19 NEXT
 

lol I figured he'd say that. Being a pretentious person who sees it as their sworn duty to 'elevate' gaming into an artform accepted by everybody.

SmarterThanYou:
No. No. No no no.

Alright, children, here's the thing. You see, when someone wants you to buy their video game, they do this thing known as 'marketing hyperbole.' You see, hyperbole lets them put a positive spin on their products, so that people will want to buy them! Isn't that nice! Buuut, sometimes they are EXAGGERATING, which is a big long word that means they MADE THINGS SOUND BETTER THAN THEY REALLY WERE. This is a big mean thing to do, but it happens.

Now, kiddies, if a writer makes a story, then it is their story. You absolutely have the right to complain about it if you don't like how the story plays out. But it is still the creative work of the author. Not you.

So, remember, children. Anyone with the slightest bit of foresight could tell that the Mass Effect trilogy wouldn't be what it was hyped up to be. Feel free to complain about it, though.

How quaint, somebody else who doesn't know what they are talking about. I suggest you take a small reading of some quotes regarding the game development below.

That was a bit more then exaggerating, it was straight up, out right lying.

The statements about the nature of the ending were rather specific, and a number were made after the game went gold. Just look at these three (sources available in the link):

Casey Hudson (Director) 2/17/12:
There is a huge set of consequences that start stacking up as you approach the end-game. And even in terms of the ending itself, it continues to break down to some very large decisions. So it's not like a classic game ending where everything is linear and you make a choice between a few things - it really does layer in many, many different choices, up to the final moments, where it's going to be different for everyone who plays it.

Mike Gamble (Associate Producer):
There are many different endings. We wouldn't do it any other way. How could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can't say any more than that...

Mac Walters (Lead Writer) 2/28/12:
[The presence of the Rachni] has huge consequences in Mass Effect 3. Even just in the final battle with the Reapers.

Really getting tired of all of these posts...

MovieBob is kind of a dick honestly, he's a crap movie reviewer and a crap game reviewer.

I like MovieBob for his film reviews and film criticism, but considering he was one of the people that blindly said "herp, Metroid Other M is just fine" I'd take most things he says in regards to gaming with a huge grain of salt.

And I'd really like to point people to the dev quotes Murmillos posted above. Yes, it's promotional PR stuff, but everything they say is the exact opposite of what we got. No A, B, C ending? Oh wait, we actually literally got an A, B, or C ending. Rachin? Nope, just either a +100 or -100 on a list of numbers. Not forced into a bespoke ending? Actually yes, you literally get faced with an ending in which the only discernible difference is the color of the explosion that you see. There's a difference between hyping something up and blatantly lying and saying the OPPOSITE of what your end product contains. That's what happened here.

Look, I get the "artistic integrity" argument, but when companies like CD Project are adding content to their endings to flesh them out based on fan feedback, they don't get accused of selling out or caving and jeopardizing their integrity. But when BioWare does the same based on huge fan feedback and backlash, they get flak for it? No. I'm sorry, but you don't get to have it both ways. Either ALL companies modifying their ending in any way get thrashed for compromising their ideals, or none do.

And you want art in gaming? Look at Journey. Or The Stanley Parable. Or Braid. ME3 is fantastic, but at the end of the day it's more Shaun of the Dead than The Departed or The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. This whole "a medium can ONLY have art OR product" is complete and utter BS. Plenty of films are made that only conspire to be product and make a profit. Same with music and literature. To blindly categorize an entire medium into one OR the other is just as bad as blindly categorizing it into "not art."

And Bob really needs to check his sources. BioWare didn't "cave" at all - they said they'd be adding content to flesh out the endings without changing them. That's it. How exactly is that changing the endings again? Oh wait, it's not.

Seriously, the guy's great with film but when it comes to gaming he really needs to stop having tunnel vision.

Edit: Repeated Post.

Okay, I finally caved in.
FUCK ART, and fuck people showing games towards art.
All this obsession with art and other shit is the reason why gameplay in most games today is boring.

Sentox6:
Whether or not you want games to be considered art instead of products (if indeed those two concepts are entirely mutually exclusive), the fact remains that this game was sold as a product, and many indications of the content of that product were given. Those indications turned out to be patent falsehoods, and consequently some consumers are upset. Apparently they can't have the product they were lead to believe they would receive, though, because that would violate "art".

We were lied to and that pissed us off. We have every right to BE pissed off. We were given an ending that made no sense from any standpoint, whether it's the standpoint of a movie critic viewing the storyline as a linear narrative, or from a gamer's point of view who wanted their choices to have an effect.

Honestly I don't know why this thread has so many posts. MovieBob is barely qualified to critique movie's in my opinion, he's certainly not up to the complicated task of critiquing games which, unlike movie's, have to hold attention for dozens of hours on end deliver a compelling narrative WHILE letting the player interact with the world and much more. He really has no say on how Games are done.

anthony87:

Saltyk:

Then again, I haven't played Mass Effect 3. Yet.

So then why bother posting in a thread regarding Mass Effect 3 and the ending? Play it and then say something constructive otherwise what you've got to say has no value.

Because this isn't a thread about Mass Effect 3 and it's ending? Yeah, that's the option I choose to go with. Do I win?

The only real message I may take away from this whole affair is this: care less about things. Games, stories, life, eh. Expect disappointments like these in the future and you'll rarely be surprised. But you'll also avoid being crestfallen, so you might be better off.

Saltyk:

anthony87:

Saltyk:

Then again, I haven't played Mass Effect 3. Yet.

So then why bother posting in a thread regarding Mass Effect 3 and the ending? Play it and then say something constructive otherwise what you've got to say has no value.

Because this isn't a thread about Mass Effect 3 and it's ending? Yeah, that's the option I choose to go with. Do I win?

"MovieBobs thoughts on the ME3 ending controversy?"

Sure, the title isn't "This thread is about the ME3 ending!!!!" but it's considering that every other post in the thread is relating to the ending.....No. No you don't win.

anthony87:

Saltyk:

anthony87:

So then why bother posting in a thread regarding Mass Effect 3 and the ending? Play it and then say something constructive otherwise what you've got to say has no value.

Because this isn't a thread about Mass Effect 3 and it's ending? Yeah, that's the option I choose to go with. Do I win?

"MovieBobs thoughts on the ME3 ending controversy?"

Sure, the title isn't "This thread is about the ME3 ending!!!!" but it's considering that every other post in the thread is relating to the ending.....No. No you don't win.

Actually, I think he does. This is about the ending controversy, not the ending. Anybody who is defending the original ending is doing so on principle and not on the strength of the ending so whether you have experienced the ending is totally irrelevant to the issue at hand.

Starke:
Don't mistake "knowing" for "caring"

Because you know it proves you wrong?

Starke:
Actually, yes, and a lot of stuff that was, if not completely original, breaking new ground. Jet Set Radio was never my thing, but there's that. Splinter Cell was mindblowing, and not just for the graphics, GTA3 was an entirely new genre. Hell, I still remember reviewers trying to figure out how to describe it when it first hit. Granted, the PS2 version hit the year before, but I'm looking at the PC release here. Of course we have the original Neverwinter Nights, which there are still people playing and you can still actually find on store shelves... Sly Cooper's still held up as a high water mark for platforming. The NOLF franchise also has a pretty fantastic reputation to this day. So yes, I'm still seeing more creativity at work there than I see in a catalog of 2011's releases.

*chuckles* So, now you're making excuses? It doesn't really matter what quality the games are, they are derivatives. Things can be popular and very good but still extremely derivative, like every Zelda game ever made.

Starke:
Well, considering you still seem to believe GTA3 was a sequel, I'm not sure you understand the difference between slapping a number on your product to confuse people into thinking they knew what they were buying and an actual sequel. But, you know, not getting my hopes up.

You're right, the III at the end is just a coincidence. It's not like they both had the exact same concepts, right? Stealing cars, doing missions for the mob, running over people, reckless murder, evading the cops. Everyone of those were snatched directly from the two preceding games. That is the very definition of the word "derivative", IE the game is derived from the concepts of the preceding games in the series.

Starke:
Really? Again, go back and look at GTA3, then go back and look at GTA2. These aren't even remotely the same game. That's like me saying that Neverwinter Nights was a sequel. Sure, I can say it, I even have a reason to say that, but the Neverwinter Nights in 2002 had less than nothing to do with it's processor.

Actually, it's funny that you should mention NWN, because there is no genre that has remained quite as stagnant as DOD-based video games. Of course, there are bad and good ones, but there is no innovation whatsoever to be had there.

Starke:
Also, look at the top 10. We've got Halo and Kingdom Hearts, because that tells you were the industry was.

So, all of the six best selling games of the year were in no way indicative of any trend, but numbers 8 & 9 were?

Starke:
Yeah, see, for those of us who have been around long enough to graduate college, here's a little secret we can let you in on. Nintendo has been milking the same franchises for nearly thirty years, not fifteen. Unless you're talking about back in 2002 in which case, yes, it had been a mere 20 years then.

Of course; when you can't make an argument, you nitpick.

Besides, is them making the same three games for 30 years supposed to be an indicator of how amazingly innovative the past was?

Ultratwinkie:
It was an EXMAPLE you twit. DO you really expect the facebook generation to care? No, they don't. They rather watch their "expendables"or go off to watch the Jersey Shore. The masses have moved on from art, it no longer holds their attention like it did in the past.

Here is the key word:In their time

The modern masses don't care, they don't. Media would rather go on about some woman's pegnancy than talk about anything of importance or culture. Thats the entire point: the world has changed. Large budget movies are EXPECTED to cater, so why not games? Because we are "artistic?" That view of gaming died in the 90s with the corporitization of consoles. Now consoles have no relevant sway other than inside their own market.

Now there are two games: Art games and product games. Product games are bug bugdet blockblusters in game form, and the art games go and do their own thing. Gaming has diversified enough to do BOTH. We don't need to bullshit ourselves anymore.

Saying Mass Effect 3 needs artistic integrity is like saying "The Expendables" needs artistic integrity or movies wont be taken seriously as an artform.

Said Cato, just before concluding with "Carthago delenda est".

This is the oldest complaint in the book. "The new generation doesn't understand art, all they care about is their silly little shit-tv, and their shit movies, we were the last generation to actually give a shit, art is doomed BAAAAAAAAAAAW".

You do realize, of course, that this is the exact same complaint your parents have with Videogames, and that their parents had with The Beatles (or whatever else, depending on how old you are, i'm assuming mid twenties, judging by the posts at hand).

And i know, before you point it out yourself, that i hideously misrepresented your post in my deliberately mocking impression, but the jist of it is that. This generation doesn't know art from their derriere, only games made for the sake of making art games are really art, they can't be art if they're big budget. To which i say: Bullshit for all the reasons i listed in my previous post. I bloody well know the Mona Lisa was an example, i was just underlining how stupid an example it was and how much of your ignorance of art history transpared from that particular choice. You could've picked Van Gogh, and it would've been a better illustration of your point and, while still holding a flawed POV, you would at least have avoided dismantling your own argument from within.

You pointing out that they were appreciated "in their time", on the other hand, is flat out stupid. You wouldn't be studying Van Gogh and Shakespeare if people didn't still appreciate them, at least on some level. And no, students never give a shit about them. It's called "being forced to study", it makes everything indigestible. If you were right, that people don't appreciate these artists anymore, we wouldn't see people getting degrees in Literature, Art, Art History, Cinema, etcetera. Of course not everyone cares, that has ALWAYS been the case. People care about different things, go figure.

Nobody, ever, cared about art in principle. They care because of any combination of three reasons: personal entertainment, pleasure in creating something other people enjoy and the fun acting superior when they think the "get" something other people don't. That's it. If you think the past is any different, read the examples i posted again. That's ART. That was made for the enjoyment of the masses.

If you think only hipster deliberately tortured egotistical "you don't get it" art-for-art's-sake artists make genuine art, think again.

They are the lowest of the lowest common denominator, the kind that will never actually be remembered as good artists, but as provocateaurs at best, shitheads at worst.

And before you repeat your point, I agree completely that one item in a medium doesn't invalidate the others, that's absolutely not my point. I get that even if mass effect's artistic integrity flew out the window because of this decision (had it not already flown out the window for entirely different reasons) other games could still be art regardless.

My point is that if you honestly think that big budget = product = not art you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about and should seriously take a couple of history and art history classes.

wintercoat:

I will quote what is probably the best summation of this whole thing I've read so far:

boag:
Artist advertises a pictures of an apple

Buyer commissions picture of an apple

Ends up with picture of a fork

Buyer complains that he wants a picture of an apple

Artist says reviewers loved the picture of the fork, which he gave them for free

More Buyers complain that they want picture of an apple, not the picture of a fork.

Artist says he might make a transparency add on, that might have an apple that people can put on their picture of the fork.

Some Buyers are ok with that, because they can get the picture of the apple, other buyers say that the complainers are ruining the picture of the fork.

Some Internet reviewers say the complainers have ruined the artistic integrity of the artist for making him draw an apple add on to the fork picture.

True Story

We were promised a specific thing for the ending. More importantly, we were promised that the ending wouldn't be the exact thing we got. People like me are pissed about this and want what we paid for.

Yes, and I sympathize with that. There's no real way around the fact that you and the ME3 community were lied to. Which is kind of problematic for me, as I'm put in a position where, for reasons of my own, I want to defend liars. Casey Hudson dug Bioware's grave when he said what he said. Without that quote, there's no other reason or justification for wanting to change the ending besides being upset with it. He gave the outcry actual merit.

I think the biggest problem with this whole affair is that, in order to give their claims substance, gamers who (desperately and loudly) want to change ME3 need to claim that the game is in no way art. ME3 is a product and that's that. Otherwise they can claim no real power over Bioware besides being fans.

It's a stupid thing to do, not only because I can guarantee you that a lot of these people defends video games as art whenever it suits their purposes(For example if/when a government or state tries to censor or regulate games, such as in the Supreme Court Decision.) But also because these gamers are the ones forsaking their own medium in order to get what they want. We lose so much ground for an argument, should we ever need to defend video games again. Which we might.

anthony87:

Orthon:
The problem with this whole ME3 debacle is that instead of people saying more reasonable things such as "We though the ending was bad, because of this or that."

The thing is dude, there are THOSANDS of people doing exactly that. Hell, in this thread alone there have been plenty of people calmly outlining what they didn't like about the ending and why they think it failed only to be met with a response of "STOP CRYING! STOP BEING ENTITLED! IT'S ART AND YOU JUST DON'T GET IT! YOU'RE NOT A TRUE FAN IF YOU THINK THAT! OH BUT ARTISTIC INTEGRITY MHWHABABLAHAH!"

....Okay I may have over-exaggerated a tad but my point is that there's loads of people who are upset with the ending and they've explained why, such as this:

http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=15395

and this:
http://www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/

Please have a look at those and try to understand we're not all idiots looking to go file a lawsuit.

As I said in my earlier post, anyone who defends artistic failures with "It's art. You can't criticise it." is not getting art in the first place and is one-hundred percent wrong.

And I totally understand that not everybody is contacting their local authorities over this. Honestly, I kind of feel sorry for you guys. I mean, due to the fact that people have been shouting nasty words at Bioware for screwing up ever since ME3 released, any sort of post-release DLC that modifies the ending won't be regarded as Bioware listening to fans, but caving in to loudmouths.

Thammuz:

Ultratwinkie:
It was an EXMAPLE you twit. DO you really expect the facebook generation to care? No, they don't. They rather watch their "expendables"or go off to watch the Jersey Shore. The masses have moved on from art, it no longer holds their attention like it did in the past.

Here is the key word:In their time

The modern masses don't care, they don't. Media would rather go on about some woman's pegnancy than talk about anything of importance or culture. Thats the entire point: the world has changed. Large budget movies are EXPECTED to cater, so why not games? Because we are "artistic?" That view of gaming died in the 90s with the corporitization of consoles. Now consoles have no relevant sway other than inside their own market.

Now there are two games: Art games and product games. Product games are bug bugdet blockblusters in game form, and the art games go and do their own thing. Gaming has diversified enough to do BOTH. We don't need to bullshit ourselves anymore.

Saying Mass Effect 3 needs artistic integrity is like saying "The Expendables" needs artistic integrity or movies wont be taken seriously as an artform.

Said Cato, just before concluding with "Carthago delenda est".

This is the oldest complaint in the book. "The new generation doesn't understand art, all they care about is their silly little shit-tv, and their shit movies, we were the last generation to actually give a shit, art is doomed BAAAAAAAAAAAW".

You do realize, of course, that this is the exact same complaint your parents have with Videogames, and that their parents had with The Beatles (or whatever else, depending on how old you are, i'm assuming mid twenties, judging by the posts at hand).

And i know, before you point it out yourself, that i hideously misrepresented your post in my deliberately mocking impression, but the jist of it is that. This generation doesn't know art from their derriere, only games made for the sake of making art games are really art, they can't be art if they're big budget. To which i say: Bullshit for all the reasons i listed in my previous post. I bloody well know the Mona Lisa was an example, i was just underlining how stupid an example it was and how much of your ignorance of art history transpared from that particular choice. You could've picked Van Gogh, and it would've been a better illustration of your point and, while still holding a flawed POV, you would at least have avoided dismantling your own argument from within.

Nobody, ever, cared about art in principle. They care because of any combination of three reasons: personal entertainment, pleasure in creating something other people enjoy and the fun acting superior when they think the "get" something other people don't. That's it. If you think the past is any different, read the examples i posted again. That's ART. That was made for the enjoyment of the masses.

If you think only hipster deliberately tortured egotistical "you don't get it" art-for-art's-sake artists make genuine art, think again.

They are the lowest of the lowest common denominator, the kind that will never actually be remembered as good artists, but as provocateaurs at best, shitheads at worst.

And before you repeat your point, I agree completely that one item in a medium doesn't invalidate the others, that's absolutely not my point. I get that even if mass effect's artistic integrity flew out the window because of this decision (had it not already flown out the window for entirely different reasons) other games could still be art regardless.

My point is that if you honestly think that big budget = product = not art you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about and should seriously take a couple of history and art history classes.

You assume gaming is anything like the art market, and assume what I mean. Since when was money (around 20-100 million minimum) was thrown around on that scale? taking years to make? and was so risky NO publisher would DARE make a game that wasn't a sequel? When has anyone made "Mona Lisa 2: the half-smile returns?"

You assume gaming is even close to the art of the past. When something gets that big, with that much money and fear, it becomes a industry of "safes."

They refuse to do anything beyond what is basic, invalidating the big budget market for the time being. The AAA market is not known for its artistic merit, because AAA games are in the same boat as block buster movies.

When the AAA market is that restricted, art cannot form. Only when the corporations and red tape go away can it form. This is the reason art didn't form on consoles after the PS2 era past.

anthony87:

Saltyk:

anthony87:

So then why bother posting in a thread regarding Mass Effect 3 and the ending? Play it and then say something constructive otherwise what you've got to say has no value.

Because this isn't a thread about Mass Effect 3 and it's ending? Yeah, that's the option I choose to go with. Do I win?

"MovieBobs thoughts on the ME3 ending controversy?"

Sure, the title isn't "This thread is about the ME3 ending!!!!" but it's considering that every other post in the thread is relating to the ending.....No. No you don't win.

Actually isn't it considered that every post in this thread will relate to MovieBob's thoughts on the controversy?

Revolutionaryloser:

anthony87:
SNIP

Actually, I think he does. This is about the ending controversy, not the ending. Anybody who is defending the original ending is doing so on principle and not on the strength of the ending so whether you have experienced the ending is totally irrelevant to the issue at hand.

Yay! I win! What do I win?

Bobs an idiot if he thinks ART cannot also be a PRODUCT.

They aren't mutually exclusive. If I ordered an ARTIST, to paint a portrait of me, and it failed to live up to what I expected, I can tell him that unless he/she gets it right, I won't pay them.

eh, i lost my respect for him when he called all halo fans douchebags. and then again when he called all the transformers fans douchebags. and then again when he called all the people who didn't like Metroid Other M straw feminists.

so basically i stopped respecting him when he called me straw feminist double douchebag.

and i don't even want bioware to revise the ending. what bugged me was they didn't explain anything. a paragraph explaining what actually happened and the results and the resolution at the end is pretty much all i want.

well one would expect bob to let his inner snob out on this one. considering bioware abandoned their own original ending to give us this, which may very well be a rather underhanded ploy to sell us DLC, its not exactly like their artistic integrity was very fucking high to begin with.

its fucking EA/bioware that has set the industry back 10 years with what is either an incredibly lazy ending or an incredibly devious business ploy. stop sounding like roger ebert commenting on video games, bob. you cant use "art" as a shield against a failed product anymore than you can use "product" as a shield against failed art.

and i hate to break it to you, but you really, really should be aware of the fact that art has ALWAYS been part business. leonardo didnt paint the adoration of the magi for shits and giggles, he was commissioned to make it; he also chose to take years longer than promised on many works instead of just rushing it out, and never even completed a lot of paintings. THAT is fucking integrity, not sticking by intentions you were too bad of an artist to realize would end up in failure. ill admit that changing the ending isnt going to fix anything, but quite frankly sticking to the one we have because of "artistic integrity" would be much, much worse. you want to talk about establishing bad precedents? how about an industry that can get away with any hackneyed, rushed, thoughtless bullshit of a storyline under the shield of "art"? if you start defending failure as part of the "art" of a game, then youve done nothing but give publishers another excuse to get away with it.

some endings are polarizing. this is not one of them. NOBODY is championing this ending, the best anyone can come up with is that it was really a dream and ME3 has no ending. we all agree that it is shit, there is no fucking artistic expression we are not getting. it FAILED as art, and you dont excuse failure whatever the form.

Welp, there went all the respect I had for moviebob.

"Bitchbitchbitch ART ART ART"

"But they used false advertising to get us to buy it."

"ART. ART. ART. ART. ART. ART. ART."

"But they aren't doing it for the art, they're doing it to make money."

"ARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTART."

jedizero:
Welp, there went all the respect I had for moviebob.

"Bitchbitchbitch ART ART ART"

"But they used false advertising to get us to buy it."

"ART. ART. ART. ART. ART. ART. ART."

"But they aren't doing it for the art, they're doing it to make money."

"ARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTARTART."

Why did you lose respect? Bob is like a high functioning genius or something. Every time Bob is wanting for hits he posts a video or a tweet about an extremely hard line stance to generate controversy over an almost always irrelevant issue. This generates massive amount of hits and traffic for Bob generally in the form of massive nerd rage either for or against him and presumably generates him more fame and money. Even his detractors are supporters they just don't know it .

All commercial art is also a product. I'm hearing Movie Bob's argument a lot, and frankly it's insane. No-one defends movies, TV, or plays this way, and alternate endings pop up all the time in those. Gaming is never going to advance as an art form if critics keep treating every major release as an untouchable sacred cow.

Rather than keep complaining about moviebob the hypocrite douchebag just stop watching his videos until the escapist gets rid of him.

I'm really not sure who annoys me more.

Moviebob or the dude who wrote this

Seriously, what kind of journalist opens with

"I don't know what the ending of Mass Effect 3 entails, and I don't care. I haven't even played Mass Effect 3 yet. Hell, I'm still working through the first one at the moment."

and then proceeds to write a 2 page article on the matter?

MovieBob confuses me. There are times when I couldn't agree more with him. There are also times where he just pisses me off and comes across as pretentious, misinformed and downright hypocritical.

(It also amuses me that he makes extensive use of all-caps and ridiculous hyperbole in posts about internet "crybabies" and nerd rage :P )

SmarterThanYou:

Murmillos:
[quote="SmarterThanYou" post="9.355624.14136507"]No. No. No no no.

Alright, children, here's the thing. You see, when someone wants you to buy their video game, they do this thing known as 'marketing hyperbole.' You see, hyperbole lets them put a positive spin on their products, so that people will want to buy them! Isn't that nice! Buuut, sometimes they are EXAGGERATING, which is a big long word that means they MADE THINGS SOUND BETTER THAN THEY REALLY WERE. This is a big mean thing to do, but it happens.

Now, kiddies, if a writer makes a story, then it is their story. You absolutely have the right to complain about it if you don't like how the story plays out. But it is still the creative work of the author. Not you.

So, remember, children. Anyone with the slightest bit of foresight could tell that the Mass Effect trilogy wouldn't be what it was hyped up to be. Feel free to complain about it, though.

How quaint, another asshat who takes that kind of crap at face value.

You do love to insult people, don't you?

I suppose at this point it's worth mentioning that Bioware have already altered one of their products to appeal to fan consensus. Namely the novel 'Mass Effect: Deception' which featured numerous continuity errors and plot grievances and was panned in a very similar fashion to ME3's ending.

The book was changed, so I guess by Bob's logic the authors "artistic integrity" was forever destroyed and it did untold damage to the novel industry, right?

I'd love to hear Bob's thoughts on our thoughts on his thoughts on the ME3 ending controversy, too bad he doesn't have the integrity or spine to face people who disagree with him in any intelligent manner.

I wonder what will be Movie Bobs reaction when it turns out EA/Bioware just cut off the ending to sell for DLC. I wonder how anyone using the art defence will try to fix their argument then?
You know I think this whole thing was planed to see what they could get away with. Either that or they were not given enough time to finish the game.

Set gaming BACK? Hmm... Anyone want to a thrown down with Jim Sterling now? That was a bold statement in the other direction haha.

WOW, it seems that Mass Effect spells Threadnaught...

Still i would be okay with just the current ending,
i would though expect them to leave the part that is already in place intact.

If they continued the story after the renegade ending it would be more logical.
Also it would be fitting if they would explain if the ending sequence was or wasn't a hallicunation induced by reaper indoctrination.

Seriously guys? This thread boils down to "Bob doesn't know anything about video games! he is a movie critic who said some other things I disagree with!" Number 1: Bob DOES know things about video games HIS LONGEST RUNNING SERIES IS DEVOTED TO THEM. Number 2: No one other than bob would get this kind of flak for these comments, Graham Stark shares THE EXACT SAME OPINION and nobody is flaming him. That is because he is beloved and bob is not. Why is there suddenly an increasing amount of bullshit from the escapist forums from "Nerds with an above average intellect" BECAUSE SOMEBODY SAID YOU WERE STUPID FOR BERATING A TOY COMPANY ABOUT THEIR DAMN TOY!

Honestly, I agree. They really shouldn't change the ending.

The ME3 ending is a mistake. Any attempt to change it would only make things worse. Instead, learn from it. Learn what made it so bad and use it going forward.

Although I disagree with the idea that it was art at all. It was a product from the beginning, nothing more. It wasn't art at all.

But hey, we just got Journey and that turned out as a success. So one step backward and two steps forward I guess.

lordmardok:
He's a crap movie reviewer and a crap game reviewer.

Point to me a game he reviewed in "overthinker."
Even when it comes to film criticism, he explicitly stated that what he does is analysis, not product testing.

EDIT: OP omitted this retweet:

no writer worth a damn will want to work in videogames again if Bioware cave and change the ending. #disgusted #Masseffect

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 . . . 19 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked