Why?
[Gaming] Mass Effect 3 : It's here and thy ending is queeeeeeer.
- Thread starter Jay
- Start date
- Status
I resent having a game install an extra monitoring program on my computer, which is not removed when the game itself is uninstalled. I resent being treated as a potential pirate despite being a paying customer who bought the game at full price, while watching the actual pirates play the game without being inconvenienced by DRM.
I felt like an awful, awful person for shooting him in the back, and watching him bleeding, crawling on the ground to save the Krogan。 "Not yet....not...yet...". I was like..Renegade shep, victory at all costs! But fuccccccccccccck.
And of course
Shooting wrex in the face later on because of this decision. Tough choices to make, Commander.
I have not bought an EA pc game since they started using securom. Think the last one I got was the Sims2:Seasons expansion. I am sure there are other DMRs just as bad as that one used by other companies, but that is the one I am aware of. I don't file share so probably wouldn't have any adverse effect on my computer but fuck if I'm gonna be enabling that shit.
Back when it first came out, I had heaps of issues with Origin. I know Scythe did too. It was always a GD problem when we we're trying to play multiplayer.
North_Ranger
Staff member
If you don't mind, I'll use an example from my current state of health as an example... and spoiler it for those who don't want to hear such things.
If you've read my tumor thread, you know I went through radiotherapy some time ago. Radiotherapy that was centered around my lower abdomen.
As a side effect, the glands that produce the... ahem... bonding agent for my sperm stopped working. In other words, my body stopped producing the end product you get when you - as a man - masturbate or have sex. No biggie, right?
Wrong. You can get an erection, and you can definitely get the enjoyment out of that, but when you climax, you try to pump out something that isn't there. And it hurts. Badly. Like someone is shoving a chopstick up your John Thomas.
So what do you do? You can get some enjoyment, but you can't get the tremendous sensation of pleasure you remember from previous times. It just isn't the same, and even when you do get hard you can't really enjoy it 'cause you know if you go too far, there'll be pain.
In the end, you just stop spanking the monkey, because you just can't enjoy it that much because the ending hurts to much.
As a side effect, the glands that produce the... ahem... bonding agent for my sperm stopped working. In other words, my body stopped producing the end product you get when you - as a man - masturbate or have sex. No biggie, right?
Wrong. You can get an erection, and you can definitely get the enjoyment out of that, but when you climax, you try to pump out something that isn't there. And it hurts. Badly. Like someone is shoving a chopstick up your John Thomas.
So what do you do? You can get some enjoyment, but you can't get the tremendous sensation of pleasure you remember from previous times. It just isn't the same, and even when you do get hard you can't really enjoy it 'cause you know if you go too far, there'll be pain.
In the end, you just stop spanking the monkey, because you just can't enjoy it that much because the ending hurts to much.
Or if you want an example that's safe for work... think of it as if the Lord of the Rings movies were as they were today. Except that in the end of the third movie, Frodo sits down for tea and crumpets with Sauron, who tells him that if the hobbit puts on the Ring, he can end the war right there and then but die... or he can destroy the Ring but everybody dies... or he can merge with Sauron and every race in Middle Earth will turn into one and the same. And no matter what choice Frodo makes, the last scene is Sam escaping the lava on ponyback... and then waking up on a field of meadows with the pony and Boromir. Roll credits.
The first two would still be great movies, and the third would be awesome until you get to Mount Doom... but you'd still not enjoy the third movie as much, knowing that it ends in complete and utter clusterfuck.
I should mention this, but an ending can make or break something. A great movie/game with a horrible ending will always make you remember the ending rather then the stuff that came before it. I remember playing Haven: Call of the King, an old PS2 game, which was not actually that bad, but the ending murdered it, it murdered all the good will I had built, it was horrible.
This gets worst with trilogies, especially good ones, because rather then just ruining a good movie/game, it can ruin multiple movies/games. The ME3 ending has ruined part of my ability to enjoy the other games, because you have that lingering feeling in the fact of your head that no matter what you do, nothing will ultimately matter in the end.
Really, it's rare for me to get angry over something in a game. Usually, I just slap my hands together, say "Oh well" and move on, but ME3 really pissed me off, because it ruined a lot of what I loved about the series, and worst of all, the whole act was a CHOICE. I can understand something happening due to lack of time, money, maybe something else happened and they had to cut out some features, so they apologize and give what they can through DLC, but this is not one of those unavoidable issues, this was a cognitive choice made by the head of the creative department, and worst of all, he is sticking to it rather then standing back, being humble, and saying "Okay, we could do better, and we will". No, he thinks we want what happened to be better clarified rather then changed, because he is to butthurt to realize his "vision" was not what the fans wanted to see happen to those beloved characters we grew with.
This gets worst with trilogies, especially good ones, because rather then just ruining a good movie/game, it can ruin multiple movies/games. The ME3 ending has ruined part of my ability to enjoy the other games, because you have that lingering feeling in the fact of your head that no matter what you do, nothing will ultimately matter in the end.
Really, it's rare for me to get angry over something in a game. Usually, I just slap my hands together, say "Oh well" and move on, but ME3 really pissed me off, because it ruined a lot of what I loved about the series, and worst of all, the whole act was a CHOICE. I can understand something happening due to lack of time, money, maybe something else happened and they had to cut out some features, so they apologize and give what they can through DLC, but this is not one of those unavoidable issues, this was a cognitive choice made by the head of the creative department, and worst of all, he is sticking to it rather then standing back, being humble, and saying "Okay, we could do better, and we will". No, he thinks we want what happened to be better clarified rather then changed, because he is to butthurt to realize his "vision" was not what the fans wanted to see happen to those beloved characters we grew with.
I guess that's where we differ. I can still fully enjoy the game up until the ending.
GasBandit
Staff member
Sounds kind of like "Other than that, Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?"
well I mean besides the national tragedy I'm sure it was good
"Art", really, is a product of a community that appreciates it. Anyone can make something if they put a mind to it, but to make "Art" you have to display what you make for others to ultimately critique, and either appreciate as art, or criticize as rubbish. Just because some of us think video games should be treated as a form ofart does not mean we can't criticize said art when it falls below the standards we desire.
This is even more true when said audience is the one ultimately funding the art in question through our money and support.
Think of commissions. Many an artist will put himself out, offering to make art in exchange for money. Let's say I find an artist and I want him to draw a picture of two of my characters hugging eachother, and since he did some great art for me before, I trust his judgement on how to make the image work. He finishes it, sends it to me, and I notice it's not of them hugging, but instead beating eachother over the head with sticks. I ask why he did it and he says "Because I thought it looked better" and when I protest he just says "Artistic Integrity". Are you saying, since he is the artist, I have no right to criticize the change? Even though I am throwing my own money into the series that ultimately helped keep the franchise running?
That is not how it works. Art or no, the audience, more so the paying audience, have a right to criticize the choices made by said artist in regard to something they are selling us. Even more so when said purchase was based on promises that were broken.
Oh I never said you can't criticize it. By all means, do that. I will join you in criticizing the shit out of that awful ending.
And in this case, they aren't YOUR characters. They are the artist's. You've become very attached to their characters, and you really don't like what he did with them, but they're still his. You can still criticize it, you are right. That's a major component of art. But demanding something new because you don't like how the artist's work came out is just...ugh.
And I think the artist's vision is what defines art, not the community it is presented to. They play a big role in different interpretations of the art, but they don't make a project art.
And in this case, they aren't YOUR characters. They are the artist's. You've become very attached to their characters, and you really don't like what he did with them, but they're still his. You can still criticize it, you are right. That's a major component of art. But demanding something new because you don't like how the artist's work came out is just...ugh.
And I think the artist's vision is what defines art, not the community it is presented to. They play a big role in different interpretations of the art, but they don't make a project art.
Mass Effect is not just art... it's entertainment. Bioware can go fuck themselves. Bottom line... I was not entertained and I felt they pissed all over the world they created as well as the characters that we cared about.
GasBandit
Staff member
To continue the art metaphor, if a painting is commissioned, painted, and delivered... then the customer finds that the artist painted a dog poo in one corner of the canvas that could not be reasonably said to be expected in the art that was commissioned, the customer would not be unreasonable to demand it's alteration. The artist could refuse, of course. But that doesn't make the initial demand by the customer unreasonable. The question is just how badly the artist (or in this situation, game development company) wants to salvage the good will of its meal ticket.
Right, I get that. I'm not arguing that they screwed the pooch. I'm saying it's weird to demand a new ending.
To me, I guess I would say I didn't commission the piece. I enjoyed the first two pieces the artist came up with. So I bought the third thinking it would be perfect, and it wasn't. The artist made a choice that I think it utter shit (pun kind of intended). I can certainly tell everyone how much I hate the dog poo in the corner, but I'm not going to demand something new just because I bought his previous work and I expect something different.
figmentPez
Staff member
A game is interactive art, and Bioware made specific promises as to what level of interaction the game would provide. Not liking the specifics of the story is one thing, not liking that the interaction with the story was significantly less that promised is something else all together.
I think this is an interesting conflict, when art has functionality beyond simply being experienced, and I think it's going to be a conflict that comes up an increasing amount as video games move forward. There aren't many other forms of art that involve such interaction with the viewer (amusement parks are one of the few examples I can think of.)[/quote]
figmentPez
Staff member
What if it wasn't something added (a piece of poo) that was the problem, but it was something the artist said would definitely be in the piece? If someone pre-ordered a lithograph of Disney characters, with the promise that their favorite would be included, would they be right to complain at the absence of the desired element in the final product?
I'd change the metaphor to something more like if the artist had been promising not to paint any dogshit on the painting you're paying for, only for it to have the dogshit all over it in the final product.
I think the reason I'm so pissed... and am among those that would prefer a different ending is because they so thoroughly ruined their own game world that I can't possibly see any new content in it being good... which is a shame because they developed it so well. I basically can't get excited about any new Mass Effect universe game because the universe is shot all to hell no matter which ending you pick (and they would have to pick a canon ending too to continue developing things).
I can agree here. At this point I don't care what they do, I'm pretty done with Bioware in general.
I mean that's what it's come down to. Show me a discussion on ME3 and I can show you a neckbeard whining that he deserves something better and Bioware better deliver.
Honestly, that's a solid metaphor. And yes, I can certainly see asking for your money back and complaining about it (as I could in Gas' metaphor). I just think it's weird to tell an artist he has to change his work. I get that it's a different circumstance when you paid 60 bucks for it, but still.
You are correct they are not my characters, but they put those characters out for me to be a part of and interact with. I have invested myself into what happens to them, so while I don't have full creative control of the character, but if they want us to enjoy it they need to give up some of the control to the audience. They knew this in ME2, because they made Tali and Garrus into a romance options because the audience desired it after ME1. They have to give and take a bit when it comes to what they created.
And while technically we can't demand a change to an ending, as that is ultimately up to the Bioware writers, we can show our displeasure through no longer funding their future "Art" regardless of quality, because they were to cocky to give just a little bit to the audience while keeping up with what they promised us.
An artist defines the style of his art, but whether such item is art is entirely based on the community that establishes it. Again, I can make a zergling out of welded soda bottles, but I am not the person that defines welded soda bottles as art, the people around me do, because they ultimately acknowledge it as art.
When it comes to video games, those arguing that video games are not art don't do it because of things like storylines or endings, they do it because for a long time the nature of art has been about visuals, a medium in which the audiences "sees" but does not "touch". Games are like putty, games evolves, change, or alter based on all those gamers sticking their hands in it, and so those art hipsters don't consider it to be a true form of art.
But really, I don't see anyone telling the artist in question that he has to change his work. Even in the upcoming DLC, they've said they're not changing the ending, only clarifying it. People have said that they really wish he would change his work, that they won't support his future projects because of how this one was completed, that they won't buy anything further from his company, etc.; but they aren't forcing him to change what he did, they're just pointing out in an extremely loud and persistent manner that they feel that his ending product didn't live up to his promises, and that he should die in a fire.
It's not the first time that this has happened to a game designer, and it won't be the last. There was similar, if not as strident, outrage after Fable was released because the designer over-hyped and under-delivered that game, and then the artist had the chance to do a better job with Fable: The Lost Chapters, Fable 2, and Fable 3; and after buying and playing the PC version of Fable 3, I can honestly say that I will never buy another Lionhead Studios product again. I'm just not screaming that from the rooftops because, well, who the hell cares?
It's not the first time that this has happened to a game designer, and it won't be the last. There was similar, if not as strident, outrage after Fable was released because the designer over-hyped and under-delivered that game, and then the artist had the chance to do a better job with Fable: The Lost Chapters, Fable 2, and Fable 3; and after buying and playing the PC version of Fable 3, I can honestly say that I will never buy another Lionhead Studios product again. I'm just not screaming that from the rooftops because, well, who the hell cares?
I'm using it more as word to describe those types. Not saying anyone who hates the game is a mouth-breather. If anything, I agree with most of the points against the ending. Again, I'm just against people demanding a new one.
See that's perfectly fine. A reasonable response, even. What are we arguing about?
North_Ranger
Staff member
I guess it got started when I stated I decided not to buy ME3 because I thought the ending was so terrible it ruined the entire Mass Effect experience, and you stating you didn't understand my point of view.
And then people started discussing what is the definition of art.
GasBandit
Staff member
I do agree the word "entitled" gets tossed around too easily as a dismissive pejorative. Precedent had been set for a reasonable expectation. Deliberate, high level, meddlesome corporate malfeasance sabotaged the experience that was expected. That's not entitlement.
The only reason that it seems "unreasonable" to demand a change to a product in this way for some people, I think, is because previously entertainment was a bell you couldn't un-ring. If Return of the Jedi's climax had unmasked darth vader to reveal he had been Mork from Ork all along, the franchise would have been ruined, and there would not have been anything reasonably possible to do to fix it. You couldn't recall, recut, and redistribute the millions of reels of celluloid without going completely bankrupt.
But we've come along way in the last couple decades. Software patches are commonplace.
The only reason that it seems "unreasonable" to demand a change to a product in this way for some people, I think, is because previously entertainment was a bell you couldn't un-ring. If Return of the Jedi's climax had unmasked darth vader to reveal he had been Mork from Ork all along, the franchise would have been ruined, and there would not have been anything reasonably possible to do to fix it. You couldn't recall, recut, and redistribute the millions of reels of celluloid without going completely bankrupt.
But we've come along way in the last couple decades. Software patches are commonplace.
And I think the ending DLC should be a patch, not DLC, even the free kind.
I think people who aren't Chippy make a lot of good points. It really does come down to, Hudson said the ending would be diverse, not an A-B-C choice, and then it was an A-B-C choice, not diverse. I'm guessing these epilogues added with the DLC will show what happened to different characters and hopefully some of that will be dependent on your interactions with them, but I'm not convinced that I won't be getting to the point of the choice and pulling a Bioware vs. cupcakes and shutting the PS3 off.
Also, as for not being our characters: Shepard is. Each player made and acted their own Shepard. No one should've been forced to make that A-B-C choice.
No, he's/she's not. That's clever and all, but he's/she's really not.
- Status