Author Topic: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box  (Read 20830 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chocobo_Rider

  • Embrace the status quo.
  • Score: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #50 on: April 05, 2012, 10:05:32 PM »
Bug fixes and balance changes the content of a game. Are you saying all fan feed back is negative and developers should never give a damn?

No worries, friend. That's not what I meant at all.  I was referring to narrative-related decisions.  Nothing more.

I didn't think I was crafting a philosophical suit of armor so I apologize that my lack of specificity left a chink big enough for you to pry open. =P haha

Imagine if Nintendo had engineered in hooks to fix MK7 Mahu Wuho, a legitimate problem, would you be against fixing it? Do be careful about making blanket statements.
...
 You can be excused for having a short/limited gaming memory.

No need for excuses.  You misunderstood me so I assume we're cool now and you didn't mean those inferences about my gaming knowledge.  Though, if you're trying to make a powerful point and then question someone's gaming memory, you should probably make sure to be at least reasonably accurate.  ;) LINK: http://mariokart.wikia.com/wiki/Maka_Wuhu

@broodwars

I am VERY GLAD to see that they are not charging extra for this particular DLC!!

Thank you for bringing it to my attention.

Offline oohhboy

  • Forum Friend or Foe?
  • Score: 38
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #51 on: April 06, 2012, 01:36:43 AM »
It doesn't matter if the ending is bad or if a new ending is better. Once it has been released that should always be the correct version of things. New ending may appease people, but it should never be the canonical version.

Look at star wars for a reverse of this argument.
Wrong on both accounts. Both sides of the same argument is based on the assumption that the artist is infallible. We know that artists are human beings, far from infallible beings. Declaring yourself an artist is no shield against bad work.

Secondly for virtually every single movie out there the theatrical cut, the original movie still exists to stand for all time. For Star Wars this is not true. There are the VHS tapes, and the laser discs, but the original cut is not available in a modern format with the same matching quality as it's altered counter part. The release is being block by an equally flawed "artist"(Debatable at this point) for no reason other than ego, the self belief that GL is infallible.

As for the concept of artistic integrity or more accurately "Purity", it doesn't exist. Broodwars said it best, No art is created in a vacuum. No man is an island unto themselves. The idea of artistic purity is absurd and is no more than an excuse to put out bad work.

Ninsage

I am glad that we have come to some level of understanding, but even confining argument to the "narrative-related decisions" is problematic with the reasons stated above. I only ask what is so special about the narrative in a game that you can grant it immunity?

As for Maka Wuhu, I think it illustrates perfectly my follow up argument. It was a moment of a conscious laziness on my part that produced an error and I published it knowing it was wrong. You and I know I could have googled it in seconds. You are not going to find me claiming to be an artist or a writer in order to claim false immunity to criticism. Why should this not extent to larger works of art?

Even with the error you understood the underlying meaning. We forgive miss strokes, continuity errors, typos, momentary lapses due to the innate understanding nothing is perfect. But a clear error should be called out on as you have done and it's no different from the people who have called foul on the ending asking for a change, an amendment. You are right, there was an error on my part, but the argument still stands. Why draw such arbitrary lines in the sand as to what kind of errors are fixed?
I'm Lacus. I'm fine as Lacus!
Pffh. Toilet paper? What do you think cats are for?

Offline broodwars

  • Hunting for a Pineapple Salad
  • Score: -1011
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #52 on: April 06, 2012, 01:57:03 AM »
I would also point out the hypocrisy of the gaming media in all this.  Here they are, almost all universally moaning about "artistic integrity" and whatnot when it comes to the Mass Effect 3 ending.  Yet when a game developer comes to them in a preview session with requests for feedback, do they refuse on the grounds of violating the developer's "vision" of how the game should play or look?  If video games are a medium built on interactivity, wouldn't gameplay be considered "art" guided by people with specific visions (game designers)?  When Sucker Punch decided to change lead character Cole's character design for Infamous 2, where was IGN's respect for artistic integrity when they ran articles demanding that the design be reverted to the character's Infamous 1 design?  I wouldn't be surprised if there were dozens of stories like that over the past decade or so.

I find the gaming media's reaction to this situation very curious, as if they're afraid that fans have discovered a means to influence developers that up until now was exclusively theirs alone.  As I wrote on Twitter once, "Inside Access Must Have Meaning!"
« Last Edit: April 06, 2012, 02:22:00 AM by broodwars »
There was a Signature here. It's gone now.

Offline Traveller

  • NWR Staff
  • Score: 14
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #53 on: April 06, 2012, 03:37:59 AM »
The difference is that previews are done before the product is finished, they are much like test or rough cuts of films. Also I think the infamous comparison fails, as the general public did not force the developer to make that change.

Fixing bugs or bad frame rate is also an example which is on a different level, you can clearly tell when something is a gaffe or mistake in terms of technical problems within a game, much like movies with say a boom pole. Story endings are subjective and cannot be deemed outright failures I feel. Can they be bad, yes, can they be not enjoyable to your expectations? Definitely! But someone out there may feel differently.

Anyway this whole topic is always an interesting one in regards to artists vs consumer.
Nicholas Bray - Australian Correspondent

Offline oohhboy

  • Forum Friend or Foe?
  • Score: 38
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #54 on: April 06, 2012, 07:34:49 AM »
You're claiming immunity under the same fallacy. It's art therefore it it is untouchable. An art piece is not much different to a computer program, only that it runs in a persons brain that is meant to illicit a certain reaction. If it produced an unintended result, you cannot claim credit as an intended result as part of your so called "Artistic vision".

There is no reason why it can't be viewed objectively with subjectivity as the end result. If a story is not mechanically sound, what use is it to claim subjectivity? Besides, there is no different levels between the program and the story, paint is useless without the canvas and vis versa.

ME3 and FO3 had a very low level of acceptable error compared to other games as the story underpins everything in a universe that had consistant rules. They created a far too big of an error with the ending that was disconnected to it's own internal logic. There is a number of very good reasons you're told to never use Deus Ex Machina in writing. It was one of a chain of errors that collimated into a failure. Bioware had a pattern of work with ME showing that they were better than this. Why can't a story be analysed objectively? There is no reason as to why you can't just because it has an emotional aspect.

You're doing it again, dividing, labeling us vs them. "artists vs consumer". Why can't it be "artist and the consumer"? Artist connecting to the consumer is what it's about.
I'm Lacus. I'm fine as Lacus!
Pffh. Toilet paper? What do you think cats are for?

Offline Ceric

  • Once killed four Deviljho in one hunt
  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #55 on: April 06, 2012, 11:13:27 AM »
Here's how I see this issue.

Whoever owns it has all the rights in the world to do what they please with it.

Lucas owns Star Wars.  Its his so if he wants a mutation to spread throughout the Star Wars Universe turning everything into Gummy Caricatures its his right.

Nintendo owns Mario.  If they want him hitting hookers and popping fools thats there perogative.  I won't get the game, but its theres they can do what they please with it.
Need a Personal NonCitizen-Magical-Elf-Boy-Child-Game-Abused-King-Kratos-Play-Thing Crimm Unmaker-of-Worlds-Hunter-Of-Boxes
so, I don't have to edit as Much.

Offline Chocobo_Rider

  • Embrace the status quo.
  • Score: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #56 on: April 06, 2012, 10:58:44 PM »
@oohhboy

Well, keep in mind that's just my opinion.  And while I hate when internet discussions duck behind the "my opinion" shield, in this case, I think it's applicable.  Personally, I think that audience feedback can be used to refine and improve the nuts and bolts of a game.  But, as far as narrative, even if a game is only 1% "art," I believe the author should keep that 1% loyal to the best interests of the narrative.  Not the whims of the (fickle) audience.

Any narrative decision were steered by the audience will trend towards the homogenous and, ultimately, boring.  If the audience steered the ship, Aerith never would have died, right? Maybe it would have been a happier ending, but it wouldn't have been as powerful/memorable, right?

But, as I said, this is just my perspective.

And again, the ME3 thing I feel is separate because I believe the issue was with Bioware not making good on a promise of gameplay that was tied to narrative - not the narrative itself.  Even though I'm sure plenty of folks complained about that or just never saw the distinguishing line.

@broodwars

I agree, man ... funny how (gaming) media is always willing to look past its own shortcomings for the sake of criticizing others, right?

Offline oohhboy

  • Forum Friend or Foe?
  • Score: 38
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #57 on: April 07, 2012, 12:50:03 AM »
That does hold true most of the time. The problem with ME3 was that they had written themselves up against a wall requiring them to "Magic*" their way out of their position. The story was mechanically deficient and inconsistant. Thats not to say you can't ever use magic* at all, Doctor Who is rife with it and it's acceptable because that is how that universe works.

*Magic is Deus Ex Machina.

Here's how I see this issue.

Whoever owns it has all the rights in the world to do what they please with it.

Lucas owns Star Wars.  Its his so if he wants a mutation to spread throughout the Star Wars Universe turning everything into Gummy Caricatures its his right.

Nintendo owns Mario.  If they want him hitting hookers and popping fools thats there perogative.  I won't get the game, but its theres they can do what they please with it.

This might have been true back in the early to mid 20th century and before, when media existed effectively only as a read-only medium. We now live in a culture where virtually anyone has access not only to editing, but distribution. We now live in a culture that is read-write. Once it gets released it become owned by culture.

That isn't even going in to the fact virtually all media these days is a collaborative effort. No one person owns any piece of art outside of arbitrary legal definitions of ownership.

Geoge Lucas doesn't "Own" Star Wars. The original theatrical cut wasn't done by him. His original cut was a mess and they had to bring in outside editors* to fix it. If it wasn't for these people, SW would have died on the spot. Then he was forbidden from directing the two sequels. He doesn't own SW. The real reason why he won't release the original theatrical cut in all it's glory is because he knows it's better than anything he did, requiring him to give both credit to that editor. George is nothing but a egoistical hack. Never invoke Star Wars or the George Lucas defense, you're only going to end up shitting on yourself.

*One of the editor was his then wife, Marcia Lucas.
I'm Lacus. I'm fine as Lacus!
Pffh. Toilet paper? What do you think cats are for?

Offline Plugabugz

  • *continues waiting*
  • Score: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #58 on: April 07, 2012, 04:38:10 AM »
I'm wondering if anyone from NWR is actually going to respond to me or not.

Offline oohhboy

  • Forum Friend or Foe?
  • Score: 38
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #59 on: April 07, 2012, 05:11:54 AM »
I think they are waiting for the gender testing results to come back.
I'm Lacus. I'm fine as Lacus!
Pffh. Toilet paper? What do you think cats are for?

Offline Plugabugz

  • *continues waiting*
  • Score: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #60 on: April 07, 2012, 06:16:47 AM »
I think they are waiting for the gender testing results to come back.

They might need further samples for those.

I'm just incredibly disappointed in the whole Game coverage (Greg's segments on RFN excluded) and the general lack of anything since. The collapse and re-birth of Game isn't exactly Nintendo specific but it affected Nintendo (and hence their sales of new games) first.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2012, 06:28:07 AM by Plugabugz »

Offline NWR_insanolord

  • Rocket Fuel Malt Liquor....DAMN!
  • NWR Staff Pro
  • Score: -18986
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #61 on: April 07, 2012, 07:21:02 AM »
I think there's a pretty significant difference between changing the ending and going more into detail about the one that's already there, which seems to be the way the DLC is going. Bioware is going to attempt to convince people that the ending they wrote isn't bad by expanding on it. They're not compromising their artistic integrity, they're just trying to offer better insight into what they did. Changing the ending because of fan outcry would be bad, but that's not really what they appear to be doing.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2012, 07:24:31 AM by NWR_insanolord »
Insanolord is a terrible moderator.

J.P. Corbran
NWR Community Manager and Soccer Correspondent

Offline Chocobo_Rider

  • Embrace the status quo.
  • Score: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Episode 286: Jill-in-the-Box
« Reply #62 on: April 07, 2012, 11:05:50 AM »
@Insanolord

1) If that's what they are doing then that actually seems like a pretty smart way to handle things.  Especially if it's FREE as broodwars confirmed it is.

Though, I still think it sucks that if someone wants to play ME3 10 years from now they will likely not be able to experience this expanded ending.... which is why the safety net of DLC can be bad for devs.  But that's slightly tangential.

2) I will sorely miss your awesome Hank Scorpio avatar!