By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Has BioWare Devalued the Video Game?

Tagged games:

Soleron said:
What about all those conflicting cuts of Blade Runner? Some of them with studio influence, some with reaction from focus groups used to change the ending. Was BR's integrity destroyed by that - maybe? Was /all of film/ devalued by that, as the article is suggesting? No!

You're never going to get a good answer to this, because Blade Runner's artistic merit was enhanced by the Director's Cut changes, not devalued.

The same is true of Kingdom of Heaven, while we're talking about Ridley Scott.

Art is malleable and constantly changing. It's not to be placed on some pedestal where it can't be touched.



Around the Network

One of these again.

Firstly, it isn't unheard of for film DVDs to contain alternative endings. I Am Legend is one example.

Secondly, the problem is not that the ending was somehow undesirable. The problem was that it made no sense whatsoever. They are doing themselves a FAVOUR by rewriting it, because maybe now they won't be remembered as the people who managed to fuck up a brilliant story in the final cutscene.

That ending destroyed anything resembling a general theme across the series, and I'm just disappointed that they're not throwing it out completely and starting again.

On a side note, the value of art is in its interpretation, so honestly the artist's opinion is the least important opinion in the world.



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

"Keyboard warriors", hahaha.



Everything in TV land gets shaped by the on going feedback of fans. Which cast members return, who gets more screen time, etc.

Just recently, the G. I. Joe 2 movie producers revealed that based on early screening feedback, they added more scenes with one of the actors who was also in Jump Street 21 because his popularity increased.

Game development throughout development gets focus groups, internal team opinions, etc.

Every form of art is highly reliant on feedback and most of it evolves before it is considered done.

Music gets remixed, movies get director and special edition cuts or edited for TV, and games get patches, DLC, and other post-release modifications.

I don't see Bioware expanding on the ending of Mass Effect 3 as a big deal. I don't see it as a big deal if some fans were to create some endings of their own. It doesn't matter. It's just a game...

Artistic integrity is a mythical concept



I like the writing style, but I disagree with the premiss. Art takes many forms and trolling can also be considered a form of art. Here is my thought on what is going on:

Step 1. Leading up to the release of ME3 the producers promised that the ending wouldn't be an A, B or C ending. They did this intentionally so that when they released the game the die hard ME fans would cry foul. They purposely ended the game with three similar endings to create a huge conversation around the ending.

Step 2. They go back and say. Ok we will add more content to clarify the ending for you guys, you just need to wait a few months. This helps prevent some copies of the game from being sold back to retailers for a few more months. Also it increases the interest in the game so more people will go out and buy it to see how bad the ending really is.

Step 3. The release the original intended epilogue to the ending currently on disc. This epilogue was intended from the beginning, but held back to create buzz over the game. This is the final part intended to be seen for the Shepard storyline.



Around the Network

Transformers released and film is still a form of art.



Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1

Soleron said:
What about all those conflicting cuts of Blade Runner? Some of them with studio influence, some with reaction from focus groups used to change the ending. Was BR's integrity destroyed by that - maybe? Was /all of film/ devalued by that, as the article is suggesting? No!

This raises a potentially valid point. As the definition of a "finished product" within media begins to change with the ability for content makers to make constant adjustments to content, who says what counts as the undermining of artistic integrity?



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Mr Khan said:
Soleron said:
What about all those conflicting cuts of Blade Runner? Some of them with studio influence, some with reaction from focus groups used to change the ending. Was BR's integrity destroyed by that - maybe? Was /all of film/ devalued by that, as the article is suggesting? No!

This raises a potentially valid point. As the definition of a "finished product" within media begins to change with the ability for content makers to make constant adjustments to content, who says what counts as the undermining of artistic integrity?


Emerges nothing, Doyle did this. Hell, Dickens did this.



Khuutra said:
Mr Khan said:
Soleron said:
What about all those conflicting cuts of Blade Runner? Some of them with studio influence, some with reaction from focus groups used to change the ending. Was BR's integrity destroyed by that - maybe? Was /all of film/ devalued by that, as the article is suggesting? No!

This raises a potentially valid point. As the definition of a "finished product" within media begins to change with the ability for content makers to make constant adjustments to content, who says what counts as the undermining of artistic integrity?


Emerges nothing, Doyle did this. Hell, Dickens did this.

True. From what i've heard, i would have hated Great Expectations as it was originally written.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Munkeh111 said:
They ARE NOT CHANGING THE ENDING!!!!

They are "adding clarity," that is all. Video games are fundamentally different to other forms of art, as they involve interaction with the subject medium, so don't really have to follow the same rules as everything else. I don't feel adding in some extra cut scenes ruins the artistic integrity

(also, indoctrination theory makes it a good ending)

QFT. This seems to have been ignored completely.

It seems a lot of people have misunderstood Bioware's statement, they aren't changing the ending but rather adding more detail to the ending that was in ME3. So Bioware isn't "bending over backwards", so to speak as it is being implied. I agree 200% that adding a bit more detail to an ending which in the opinion of many fans was very poorly executed can't in any way ruin the artistic integrity of the writers.

Speaking of artistic integrity, this still makes me laugh-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5Oh76SiHzs