BioShock Creator "Sad" Over ME3's Ending Scandal

[Greg Tito]

BioShock Creator "Sad" Over ME3's Ending Scandal

Ken Levine and other videogame auteurs respect the finished product.

No matter which side you fall on the argument, it's clear that the ending of BioWare's last non-MMO game [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/tag/mass%20effect%203?from_search=1]. Other game designers are especially invested in how BioWare decides to handle the controversy. Speaking at a symposium to celebrate the art of videogames at the Smithsonian in Washington DC, Paul Barnett from BioWare-Mythic said that if games are to be considered art then the audience must respect the creators' right to make the game as they see fit. Ken Levine from Irrational Games - currently working on BioShock Infinite - chimed in to say that even if BioWare wrote a new ending, the audience still would be disappointed and that the whole thing made him "sad".

"If computer games are art then I fully endorse the author of the artwork to have a statement about what they believe should happen," said Barnett. "Just as J.K. Rowling can end her books and say that is the end of Harry Potter. I don't think she should be forced to make another one."

Those gathered to hear the discussion loudly applauded Barnett's words. When the ovation died down, Ken Levine made sure to express his opinion on the controversy surrounding the ending of Mass Effect 3 because he saw this as a watershed moment in gaming.

"I think this is an important moment," he said.

"I think if those people got what they wanted and (BioWare) wrote their ending they would be very disappointed in the emotional feeling they got because ... they didn't really create it," Levine said.

"This whole thing is making me a little bit sad because I don't think anyone would get what they wanted if that happened."

Source: Vox Games [http://www.theverge.com/gaming/2012/3/19/2885173/the-argument-over-mass-effect-3s-ending-makes-ken-levine-sad]

Permalink

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

I'm not demanding that they change the ending. I'm just insulting the ending that they gave us and if they get tired of it and change the ending, I'm not complaining.

 

[Zen Toombs]

Ken Levine and other videogame auteurs respect the finished product.

I don't mean to assault a horse -especially a dead one- but the product plainly wasn't complete. The "ending" wasn't really an ending at all.

 

[VonKlaw]

I don't want video games to be considered art, I want them to be bloody entertaining.

 

[Imre Csete]

That kind of ending can be expected from David Lynch and his ilk, can't say the same about a "respected" game developer like BioWare.

I wouldn't be proud of a last minute asspull twist ending, art or not.

 

[Dandark]

I find myself kinda agreeing with him, I would prefer they don't change the ending or add in a new one but rather left it as it is.

 

[RatRace123]

Again, people make the claim that art is something that exists only in the mind of the artist and can't be changed and people just need to get that, and again comparisons are made to works in different forms of media!

Why don't we draw comparisons to other games when discussing the "change the ending" subject. Why, I myself can think of a game that was released a few years back that had its ending changed due to fan complaints.

Was Bethesda's artistic integrity less valuable than Bioware's when they changed the ending of Fallout 3? Didn't they also have the right not to let their fans bully them into submission?

Of course they did; they could've told fans "Nope, screw y'all, ending stays." They didn't though. They chose to listen to fans and change the ending because it was a good business move.

I believe games are art, but they're also a huge money making business. A business which is fueled by the fans, so it's a good idea from a business stance, to placate the fans. Now Bioware doesn't have to do this, they can say that they don't intend to change the ending and then the fans would drop the matter, and incidentally they'd probably also stop buying Bioware games.

They're perfectly within their rights to stick to their artistic vision and tell the fans to suck it up, but it would be a good business move for them to make an ending change DLC. Not just for Mass Effect 3's profits but for the profits of future Bioware games.

50,000+ people have expressed disappointment with Mass Effect 3's ending and many of them have said that they won't buy another Bioware product until their complaints are addressed. Assuming they all bought it new for 60 bucks, that's 3 million dollars in sales. Even if 50,000 is a small fraction of the 3.5 million people who've purchased the game, 3 million dollars is not a sum to sneeze at.
Now assuming those 50,000 people stay true to their word and never buy another Bioware game or product again, that's 3 million dollars in potentially lost sales. That might not matter for a hugely popular game like Mass Effect 3, but for a new IP or for a less popular series, that 3 million could make or break it.

 

[ThreeKneeNick]

Criticism/critique and interpretation are as much a part of art as creation is, mr Barnett.

 

[Proverbial Jon]

The majority of people aren't mad about the "sad" or "downer" nature of the endings, god damnit. People are mad that they spent 100+ hours on a series, only for every single choice they made to be thrown out the window and not make a single damn difference in the end.

This, of course, is after we were told that our choices actually would matter.

Exactly.

This is just the point that everyone on the other side of the argument is missing. We were not angry because the story didn't end the way we wanted it to, we're angry because everything we did amounted to shit. Frankly I see this as more of a gameplay/structure issue than a problem with the script itself.

We want 2 things:

1) Closure. This is NOT the same as a happy ending. Closure simply means we want a fair ending which ties up the loose ends and doesn't create more plot holes. Even when terrible events happen you can still find closure afterwards.

2) Choice. We wanted an ending based on OUR decisions, you know, the ones we spent three whole games making. Choices that were given more consideration and investment than some of our own real-life, everyday choices! Instead we all got the same ending. Everyone got the same ending. Paragon Shepards and Renegade Shepards got the same ending. I got the same ending as you and you and you.

The same ending.

 

[Fr]anc[is]

It doesn't matter if you consider games art or not. Art can suck too.

 

[Petertimmy]

Dear Kevin

Please watch below link and tell us again how "they didn't really create it,"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm82gjZDIDU

Kind regards

 

[Muphin_Mann]

A: I, personally, WANT games to be art.
B: Pandering to the lowest common demoninator in a given situations (here a whiny buncha people with internet connections) is undignified
C: Someone said its 50,000 people who dislike the ending. My response: So what? Thats like 5% of the playerbase? Bioware could tell them to ****off and still be rich. Not to mention "lots of peopele say this so it must be true" is a horrible line of logic.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

indeed, Ken. I am nothing short of EMBARRASSED by the gaming community when I heard that people are demanding refunds just because the ending was unsatisfying. THIS is what the gaming community has sunk to? Just throw a hissy fit, angrily stamping your feet like a five-year-old until you get your way? Really? This is one of most pathetic moments in gaming culture I can think of and it's probably within Bioware's best interests as designers and story writers to not cave into this juvenile bullshit. Let's face it, even if Bioware DID change the ending there's a chance that people will, again, just kick and scream about how it sucks. What then? Ya demand they change it AGAIN until everything is basically the equivalent of sugary fanfiction?

 

[TsunamiWombat]

Again, people make the claim that art is something that exists only in the mind of the artist and can't be changed and people just need to get that, and again comparisons are made to works in different forms of media!

Why don't we draw comparisons to other games when discussing the "change the ending" subject. Why, I myself can think of a game that was released a few years back that had its ending changed due to fan complaints.

Was Bethesda's artistic integrity less valuable than Bioware's when they changed the ending of Fallout 3? Didn't they also have the right not to let their fans bully them into submission?

Of course they did; they could've told fans "Nope, screw y'all, ending stays." They didn't though. They chose to listen to fans and change the ending because it was a good business move.

I believe games are art, but they're also a huge money making business. A business which is fueled by the fans, so it's a good idea from a business stance, to placate the fans. Now Bioware doesn't have to do this, they can say that they don't intend to change the ending and then the fans would drop the matter, and incidentally they'd probably also stop buying Bioware games.

They're perfectly within their rights to stick to their artistic vision and tell the fans to suck it up, but it would be a good business move for them to make an ending change DLC. Not just for Mass Effect 3's profits but for the profits of future Bioware games.

50,000+ people have expressed disappointment with the game. Assuming they all bought it new for 60 bucks, that's 3 million dollars in sales. Even if 50,000 is a small fraction of the 3.5 million people who've purchased Mass Effect 3, 3 million dollars is not a sum to sneeze at.
Now assuming those 50,000 people stay true to their word and never buy another Bioware game or product again, that's 3 million dollars in potentially lost sales. That might not matter for a hugely popular game like Mass Effect 3, but for a new IP or for a less popular series, that 3 million could make or break it.

Actually it's 3.5 million shipped, last time I checked in on sales data it was more like 2 million actually sold, but your point remains /pedant.

The idea that this is over happy endings or sad endings is a fallacy (though as angry joe points out, why the fuck NOT a happy ending?) - this is about a rushed product, marketing lies, writing staff changes mid stream, and the effect on a game when you haven't ironed the story out up to the very 11th hour of production. If you watch the last hours of mass effect, it's obvious they simply didn't know how to end the game, and so right till the end they were debating and making changes until they ran out of time and they shipped with something that would mean "lots of speculations from everyone". IE, the mystery asspull ending because they ran dry on time, creativity, and money as a result of their own disorganization and inefficiency.

And you know what Levine? I'm sad too. Because even if we do get our ending, yeah, we probably won't be 'happy' happy. We'll be satisfied, but we'll forever be suspicious of Bioware, and it's reputation will finally, be really burned for a long time.

In effect, it'll be the death of a legend, and the imposistion of harsh reality on a hero figure.

indeed, Ken. I am nothing short of EMBARRASSED by the gaming community when I heard that people are demanding refunds just because the ending was unsatisfying. THIS is what the gaming community has sunk to? Just throw a hissy fit, angrily stamping your feet like a five-year-old until you get your way? Really? This is one of most pathetic moments in gaming culture I can think of and it's probably within Bioware's best interests as designers and story writers to not cave into this juvenile bullshit.

Juvenility is a fallacy. These are people of all ages, from all walks of life. 40 year old fathers, mothers of three, doctors, lawyers, professionals, students, and yes even teenagers. Your brain is conjuring snot nosed neckbeards and nerds and that is simply not the case.

 

[Redd the Sock]

First, video games are commerical art: aka you can do what you want with them but you aren't garunteed sales on project X or any subsequent projects. Hence artists that want to do more than sling lates at Starbucks generally try to please the audience.

Second, the majority of the complaints about the ending have little to do with the content but the delviery. Rushed, forced, and no sense to consequence or aftermath. Conceptwise, I liked it and I think others might have too had it been given the same attention the rest of the series got.

Third, being defined art doesn't dismiss criticism. Half the problem with the ending was the sudden shift from a pure survial war story to something more philosophical. It was a sudden shift in tone that didn't fit the conflict (at least not in the time condensed explaination we got).

 

[Crimson_Dragoon]

I'm agreeing with Ken on this one. First and foremost, this is Bioware's game. If they're proud of what they made they should keep it that way. Don't like it? Stop buying games from them.

And having just finished the game a few minutes ago I have to say, I didn't mind the ending at all. Actually kind of liked it. So there you go, Bioware, you've got at least one person's support.

 

[Niels Bro]

This explains, in great details, the frustration we're experiencing from the current ending:
http://www.themetagames.com/2012/03/why-you-enjoy-art-and-one-problem-with.html