The Big Picture: Mutants and Masses

[Gigatoast]

Can we just establish a new rule here? If you have no idea why fans are upset then you have no right to critisize them for being upset.

If anyone here understood that then this wouldn't even be an issue.

not true
i've been read into the major reasons this thing is happening, and i still think 'the retake' thing has gone to far.

You sure? The 'retakers' aren't really as absurdly over-zealous and disrespectful as you might think. We have ligitimate reasons and most of us are very polite to Bioware and their staff.

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10662944

 

[Samarith]

Just so you know:
Bioware and EA don't owe you a goddamn thing. They came out with a game and you bought it, played it, finished it, and either walked away from it or started crying all over my internet.

Internet quotes and press releases from anyone working on the Mass Effect series are not legally binding.

You should have rented it and saved yourself $55.

Plus you're detracting from real issues in modern entertainment, such as DRM control, DLC flooding, and mandatory Origin signups.

So gamers cannot express their ire at the shoddy ending of a series and we should get over it?

Well then to address your 'burning issues' in the same vein. If you don't like the DRM control attached to a game..don't buy it. If you don't like DLC flooding...don't buy the DLC and if you don't want to patronise the distributor then don't buy from them..even if that means you don't get the game.

Gaming as art is much like food as art. Certainly a chef is an artist but the eating experience is interactive; which means the customers appreciation of the chef's art is a key part of the experience.

If a restaurant's menu has 90% of it's customers throwing up, then they would probably see lawsuits...would likely offer refunds and almost certainly would change the menu. Assuming said restaurant wished to stay in business.

The idea that consumers have no right to complain because it's art is rediculous. The artist can of course stand by their creative vision but the consumer has the right to a refund if unhappy and they can also inform other potential consumers about the poor quality of the work.

 

[moosek]

I hate the way the press has handled this. I also hated the Mass Effect 3 ending. I don't want anyone to pick sides of either fans or creators, but ultimately people all across the press have largely ignored and disrespected the medium of games themselves. I'm just sick of this, that outlets are assuming that just because something disappointed me I want it changed (and without sounding too self-centered, I'm also referring to people who share my beliefs). Yeah, the ending sucked and it was obviously rushed, but I'm not demanding a new ending. I wanted new content, but now I don't care because if Mass Effect 3 all ends in the same place, why would I buy any DLC that they immediately tried to sell me on after I just witnessed ten minutes of nonsense. What can Bioware offer to get my $10? New weapons that get destroyed by the giant laser?

 

[LokiArchetype]

An analogy...

Person who has never seen Star Wars:
"I don't know what all this bickering about the prequels is about, sounds like a bunch of angry nerds whining about something that isn't even important. Who cares? Get over it. You know, I bet they weren't even that bad. I think George Lucas knows how to write a better story than you, he's the artist here, not you. Star Wars is his, he can do whatever with it that he wants."

Person who has only seen the prequels:
"I don't see what's so bad about the prequels. I bet you people would've never been happy with any new Star Wars movies because your perception of how good the originals were is warped by nostalgia. Face it, no movie could ever live up to your distorted expectations. The prequels were good movies in their own right, it's just impossible to please the fanbase, they'd whine over anything."

Person who has seen all the movies:
"The prequels were awful. Not only were they awful, but the awfulness spilled over and retroactively tainted the original movies. Fix them or declare them non-canon, but keeping them the way they are is a blemish on the entire series."


Now...
Whose opinion do we trust?

 

[RatRace123]

Gonna have to disagree about the Mass Effect part.
Well, not all of it. But speaking as a Mass Effect fanboy, I completely get why all the fans are so pissed about the ending.

That said, the retake movement did perhaps get a little overzealous. Transforming from the Alliance into Cerberus, as it were. But I still support it on the whole.

Videogames are an artistic medium unlike film, books, paintings etc... Video Games are constantly being changed, whether through DLC, patches, what have you. Games are not a static medium and the product that's initially launched is often not what the product will end up being all things said and done.

And if fans are unhappy, I think it was perfectly OK for them to complain about it and rally to get the ending changed. Demanding to get the ending changed crossed the line, and then after it was announced more content was going to be added, asking Bioware to "meet their demands" as to what kind of content, was waaaay over the line. But it was Bioware's choice to react. They could've simply said no, and that would've been the end of it. They chose to react to the fans.

So Mass Effect 3 is going to have content attached to the ending, we don't know what, just yet. But it's not going to be the end of the world, and it doesn't mean that games can't be taken seriously as an art form, and it certainly isn't setting a bad precedent. After all, this is not the first time this happened, or does everyone forget that Fallout 3 was in the very same boat 4 years ago? And in my opinion, what's happening with Mass Effect 3 is no different than what happened with Fallout 3.

And as for the quality of the ending, it's not just that it's bad. It's bad, but it also completely goes against most of what the series stands for. And, though I think the "broken promises" arguments and the whole consumers rights issues are a bit of an overstep. The ending does go against what it was promised to be.

 

[burningdragoon]

"This story arc is coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot more different. At this point we're taking into account so many decisions that you've made as a player and reflecting a lot of that stuff. It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C." - Casey Hudson, ME3 Project Director

ending A B or C is exactly what we got.

we were lied to why wouldnt we have a problem with that? why wouldnt we ask for ending options we were promised I.E. not A B or C.

Technically you got ending A(1), A(2), B (1), B(2), or C. Just different enough to be true. Don't like it? Tough. Learn to not trust marketing people.

Hell you can go a lot deeper than that depending on how you look at it.

Let's say you only consider the "ending" to be everything after your final choices. So that means there are 7 endings that are different, right?
1) Destroy - Very Bad
2) Destroy - Bad
3) Destroy - Good
4) Destroy - Good + Shepard lives
5) Control - Bad
6) Control - Good
7) Synthesis

But wait! The people who get out of the Normandy at the end aren't always the same. So the Synthesis ending would have 7 distinct variations (Joker + Edi + 1 of the seven other squadmates). Just including that we already on 13 different endings. Adding just the other two(three) "good" version of the ending where it's Joker + 2 squadmates, we get 56 different possibilities each (8 potential people stepping out first, 7 potential people stepping out second). I think the bad versions have only 1 person step out, so that's about 8 variations for them. So now it's:

Ending 1: Destroy - Very Bad
Endings 2-9: Destroy - Bad (EDI can't step out so it's only 7 variations)
Endings 8-50: Destroy - Good
Endings 50-92: Destroy - Good + Shepard lives
Endings 92-100: Control - Bad
Endings 100-156: Control - Good
Endings 156-162: Synthesis

Holy crap, that's a lot of endings. Then if move the marker for the "beginning" of the "ending" to the conversation with the starchild (it's different' based on your EMS and if you destroyed the collector base in ME2) you have even more! Holy crap!

Now, taking it one (large) step even further. If you consider the entirety of Mass Effect 3 as the ending to the Mass Effect series, then you have a incredible amount of "endings."

Okay, there you go people. BioWare didn't lie about how many endings there were.

Please no one assume I'm defending the ending or the "promise" that was made. I'm simply pointing out that it's very silly to attach to one statement and use that as a basis for being "lied" to.

Edit: did some math wrong. I think it's right now.

 

[Waaghpowa]

It boggles my mind just how many people still miss the point. You'd figure that with the millions of posts and threads about this, someone would get it.

I'm on the side that claims false advertising. It doesn't matter who you are, if you make promises and claims regarding your product then fail to deliver, people should complain about it and the company should answer for it.

Spoiler

Someone being a marketer does not excuse them for lying about a product, however this goes well beyond marketing. If you head to the Bioware Social forums they had an entire thread dedicated to Bioware's promises about the game, which came from people in the development team who were all conveying a very specific message and making promises.

What's more the guys doing the writing for the ending, as revealed in the interviews from that app, mentioned specifically not allowing you to question "Starchild" and ask questions like "well, how long have you been reaping" deciding that the players did not need all those answers even if they could have given them. Making it clear that they could have done a much better job in fulfilling the promises that were made.

In the end a strong enough case can be made where Lawyers are apparently willing to represent this, and an FTC complaint has actually been filed. In the end, we'll see what the ruling is. Maybe the authorities will agree with you, maybe not. Making desicians like that is why such authorities exist... it's their job, and there have been sillier complaints made over the years. I think it's wrong to say that the game industry should be viewed as beyond criticism and that it's foolish to go to the authorities with a dispute. They are not beyond the law.

What's more, even if they are able to defend themselves on those grounds, I do think they needed to be called on the whole monetization of the ending which was just frakking ridiculous. The reason why "we can't have nice things" as Bob puts it, is because we constantly bend over and take it from the gaming industry as it pushes and pushes for more and more money. On those grounds alone this needed to be opposed, because if we didn't it would start a trend where every game would demand you pay a fee, pay for DLC, and then pay more money to actually see the endings of your game.

Not to mention the central issue here does come down to artwork somewhat, as the ending does not fit the game, and was motivated entirely by money. This is the gamers calling the company on selling out and sacrificing it's artistic integrity, rather than gamers pushing for creators to satisfy them specifically.

See, no one is saying that Mass Effect is obligated to have the most epic ending ever that satisfies everyone, that's impossible. No ending to something like this will satisfy everyone, and that's true. The thing is that normally you see people going away at most saying "well I would have done things differantly" content if not impressed, and perhaps a tiny minority of pepople raving. Mass Effect 3 stands out for managing to have an ending which everyone hates, as opposed to a minority of people, and part of that hatred comes because it's obvious that the game's conclusion was being sacrificed for business move.

This isn't a series of events that's going to discourage risk taking in the gaming media, plenty of people have done that and it's paid off. At the very worst this represents how things can go wrong (which is why it's a risk). Overall though I think the message the industry should be getting (and probably will get) is that gamers will only be pushed so far by their profiteering. The industry was probing for how far it could go, and it just slammed face first into that wall and got their answer.

This guy gets it and it's mindblowing that Bob can't be bothered to do any research before coming off as a loud ignorant dolt. I should stop before I get into a rant about society being trained by the corporations to be increasingly complacent and submissive.

 

[shoddyworksucks]

Why is it when "artists" exercise their rights to ignore US they're just being artistic, when we exercise our right to tell them they're full of shit and ignore THEM we're entitled and whiny? This is how product to consumer works. You produce a product for the consumer and make them happy to take said product, whether that product is an actual item or an artistic work or a video you make for some website once a week. If consumers don't like that product for ANY reason they have every right to say "well, your full of shit bye" and take their time and money elsewhere. You of course are perfectly well within your rights to ignore these people and double down. How much this affects your business is dependent on the number of customers you fail to serve.

No. No. No. The problem isn't fans being upset about the ending or criticizing BioWare for, what they feel, was a lackluster or poor send-off for the series. The problem is that fans went so far as to petition the company to change the ending of THEIR game and brought the issue up with the FTC. That's the issue.

When people talk about entitlement, they're talking about that kind of snotty, ridiculous, childish behavior. As a consumer of media, including games, movies, music, etc., you are entitled to a FUNCTIONAL product. Not a good product. Not a fun product. A product that works. A movie that can be watched or a game that can be played. If you don't like it, you're free to criticize and critique the game and/or company, and you can also go the extra step and not purchase future products from said company. But you don't DESERVE the ending that you want, and no amount of whining will ever change that.

The silliest part of this whole debacle is the deluded notion that some of these people have that their claims of "false advertising" actually hold water. False advertising means that a company willfully cut or fabricated features or services from their product in order to effect consumer choice. If cutting promised features from a game qualified as false advertising, Peter Molyneux would have be fined into oblivion by now. Plus, what these fans are inadvertently saying by invoking the false advertising claim is that if BioWare hadn't made certain statements about the ending of their game, these fans wouldn't have purchased it. Really? You wouldn't have bought ME3 if they hadn't made those statements? You do realize that that HAS to be the case for BioWare to be guilty of material misrepresentation, right?

The people making petitions and talking about legal action aren't heroes fighting for the little guy. They're whiners who need to learn how to deal with disappointment. Welcome to the real world.

 

[StriderShinryu]

Should be interesting to hear what Bob has to say if Avengers doesn't live up to his expectations or makes alterations to the lore.

Not saying the whole Retake ME movement is something I totally get in with, but Bob has already proven how hypocritical he is with this sort of stuff.

 

[Falsename]

Bob.... You don't have the voice for being in the 'complaining' role of media.
Urg... it sounds so whinney and terrible, like a fat kid denied the last piece of deep fried chicken in a family meal from KFC.

Now ME3's ending IS terrible. It's the majority of people who believe it's terrible, and it's also a minority of people trying to change it most because more people don't care enough or are busy.

Let me say it again. The Endings were TERRIBLE. Why not fix it?

The fact that you think if people complain about everything then game developers won't take risks is fine by me. Because... uh, why are they taking risks anyway? It's a big game not some indie thing that represents the artistic integrity of coal miners during the civil war... or some crap like that.

It's a trader. There are businesses and there are consumers. The fans are the consumers.

This is a step FORWARD for video games not a step back. We're evolving, just like any other medium. How the problem is dealt with doesn't matter the fact is we're having a problem and we're also finding a solution.

(PS: Bob your voice.. urge, your voice Bob. Omg your voice Bob, omg!)

 

[Johnson McGee]

Buying something does contain some inherent risk, that doesn't mean complaining about poor quality isn't justified. Getting a fly in your soup justifies wanting a refund, some people have just gone overboard with the vitriol.

Also, I got the impression (as an outside observer who hasn't played the game) that the complaints were less about the artistic direction and more about the perceived laziness of the limited nature of the game's ending, coupled with the whole stock image / Tali portrait debacle.

 

[theheroofaction]

Enough mass effect, now is the time to talk of turtles.( yay alliteration)

Anyhow, we all remember how Bayformers has "Ruined" transformers forever, but really that's a stupid arguement. Whether or not Bayformers was a good movie is completely beside the point. It's an alterverse story. Transformers is mostly the same as it was before.

The same can be said for "turtles". Yes, bay said that the turtles are alien. Yes, that does go against canon, that's how alterverse stories work. nobody ever said the "Red Son" series "ruined" superman. Now, though, because this isn't in the same medium as the comics, or in most fans case, the animation, it shouldn't somehow be expected to be more loyal to the series than any other alterverse story. Now, if bayturtles were to somehow change the original canon, then you can go ahead and whine. But, until that happens, you're can go ahead and Avoid bayturtles, or give it some negative reviews, but you can't truthfully go about saying that bayturtles is "ruining" TNMT until it actually changes TMNT.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Personally, I see no reason to apologise for pointing at a broken thing and saying, "Hey, that thing is broken!"

Honestly, "artistic freedom" is turning into "freedom from all criticism".

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

No Bob, corporate greed is the reason we can't have nice things.

 

[zinho73]

And BOB still doesn't have the slightest idea why people were upset in the first place.

To me it is baffling how clearly intelligent people fail to see... well, the big picture. And I'm just getting tired to link the same articles and repeat the same arguments. This is not a precedent to nothing, it happened several times already and it is not even problem of artistic integrity (or at least not the biggest one - if companies are not taking chances you must first blame the suits, not the consumers).

But at this point it appears that everyone has formed his opinion and locked themselves in their own little world.

Yeah, Bob's points are valid but they are just tangential to a much bigger problem and the center issue of the Mass Effect debate: Yes, "demanding" a better ending - and I say "demanding" in quotes because most people understand that it means adding or clarifying the ending instead of completely erasing this one - might be a strong reaction, but it is not a reaction because the ending was bad (although it helped).

The reaction was fierce because it is not OK to lie to or mislead the consumers in order to sell a product - this leads to this kind of outrage.

If the press continues to insist on the artistic integrity thing, Bioware executives might believe in them and not take a second look of the integrity of the company itself. Coverage like this is doing more harm to the industry than any fan rage, because fans are expected to rage but journalists need to be smarter than that.

If you still want to see a valid, unbiased opinion from some journalists that manage to get what's happening from the outside I urge you to follow the issue on the Forbes website. Here is an example:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/03/27/mass-effect-3-and-corporate-influence-over-commercial-art/