MovieBob's thoughts on the ME3 ending controversy

[80Maxwell08]

wow, movie bob can be very near sighted sometimes.

Sometimes? I was wondering why he was still here back when he "subtly" accused Bungie of being racist, and started insulting his audience. I can't wait for Tuesday when he tries to make himself look superior to the rest of us by telling us how stupid we are.

When did this happen? I know I don't usually keep up with things around here, but that's a big thing to miss.

It was his first episode actually. Here's the link to that.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/2428-Combat-Evolved

 

[Warachia]

Wow, Moviebob having a narrow, arrogant opinion based primarily on misinformation and a superiority complex? What a shocker.

Isn't he supposed to do this for a living? Then why is his argument more sophomoric then half of the random haters I've seen?

Except he isn't supposed to do this thing for a living, he was originally supposed to actually review and think things through about different topics, not just give his opinion on whatever he wants.

 

[Sentox6]

We were promised 32 flavors and all we got were chocolate, vanilla and strawberry.

I'd say that's a generous interpretation. What we got was more like chocolate, chocolate chip, and chocolate with sprinkles.

If chocolate tasted bad.

Even if you look at this from a further perspective, artists have been whores for centuries. Almost the entirety of the renaissance was funded by the church, and you bet your ass they'd make revisions if a cardinal or a pope told them to. Frankly art has been a product for a long time, it's a means through which an artist can sustain themselves, from simple digital commissions to the damn Sistine Chapel, the art was bought, paid for, and then approved.

Funny you should mention that. Someone bought this skit [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-v-f2mT94Y] up in relation to the exact same point you're making. It seems appropriate.

But gamers are also gonna look bad for raging, incoherently yelling, and, hell, even accusing of reviewers of being bribed. That... that's just too far, guys. That's not okay.

I'd agree with you that the accusations of bribery are out of line, for sure.

But this whole thing has been making me think about game reviewing in general. What has surprised me - in retrospect - is how the vast majority of reviews have had nothing to say about the ending. For a process that is ostensibly intended to inform consumer decision-making, that seems like a failing, to be blunt. I came across this article [http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2012/03/22/mass-effect-3-gears-of-war-3-and-why-reviewers-fail/] today which offers an interesting perspective.

Patrick put his ass on the line for this. I hope the poor bastard doesn't get the axe.

Not a chance. Firing him would be tantamount to admitting he did make the comments. Maybe BioWare are telling the truth and someone else somehow used his account to construct that mini-narrative, but if not, claiming that to be the case and letting sleeping dogs lie is the best outcome for them.

 

[Ticonderoga117]

*snip*

Oh wow, I need to look back on those episodes, though I can see that on Twilight. I can't stand even seeing a single scene out of that movie even with free food thrown in, never mind watching the whole thing.

*snip*

It wasn't that I was commenting on really. I agree that's it's a good thing we as gamers are holding developers to their own standards. What I was referring to was a video on youtube that, if I remember correctly, Jim doing some bashing on the detractors of this fiasco and not calling BS on people who gave ME3 100/100 scores or something like that. I would look it up by it's time to get some sleep for once. Heh.

 

[KingofMadCows]

I guess he's never heard of "A Clockwork Orange" or Sherlock Holmes or "Hamlet."

You're spot on with Sherlock Holmes, although that isn't generally considered high art.

And, I'll admit I don't know enough about Clockwork Orange. I've seen the movie. **shrug**

But I don't get your point about Hamlet. Shakespeare didn't change the ending - he just had an "extended version" and several "edited versions" for different audiences. He wrote them all in advance, and never changed things based on fan response. He wrote them because he knew that the King wanted to see different stuff than the commoners in the penny 'seats', so he made sure the play was ready to appeal to either crowd, or both, at need.

That's just good planning/marketing. Shakespeare knew how to handle fans. Bioware seems to be having trouble there lately. Obviously they could take a lesson from the Bard.

I'm not talking about just the ending, I'm talking about works of art where the artists were influenced by the audience or by factors other than their own vision.

Sherlock Holmes may not be high art but neither is "Mass Effect." ME is not "Blade Runner" or the Mars trilogy. It's more on the level of Star Trek, Star Wars, or Babylon 5.

The last chapter of "A Clockwork Orange" is really inconsistent with the rest of the book. Most people did not like it. Most publishers did not include it. Kubrick did not include it in the movie adaptation. The version of the book without the last chapter is pretty much considered the definitive version.

As for Hamlet, whether or not Shakespeare was influenced by response from his audience can be debated but he was certainly influenced by what he thought the audience wanted to see and he altered his "vision" to compensate for that.

 

[Sentox6]

It's 100% valid, if people just can't see it I guess their minds aren't clear and can't see it. I'm done with this argument, because it just seems there is too much unresolved anger for the opposition to see properly, or people just don't understand how a game like ME3 is art, and that is sad.

I seriously laughed. A lot.

You don't get the privilege of employing the label of "argument" if you bought no material to begin with. You just jumped onboard with the "crybabies" label, then as soon as someone disagreed with you, you tried to excuse yourself with some throwaway ad hominems about "unresolved anger".

Would you care to actually provide some reasoning for your viewpoint, or do you prefer that I write you off as a troll?

 

[Warachia]

Since everyone's unloading on him, I might as well outline his main failings.

He shared his favorite genres awhile ago I think his tops were 2d platform, shmup and fighters. But only seemingly old school shmups, AKA ones with extremely shallow scoring systems. And I can make a good guess that he isn't exactly an expert on fighting, he pretty much only wanted Tatsunoku because lolanime.

Likes JRPG over WRPG (that speaks for itself.)

Hates FPS and pretty much all PC games. RTS, TBS (Civ) any Sim.

He claims to be a proponent for "old school" challenge but:
Hates most multiplayer and doesn't seem to play competitively in any serious fashion
Hates complex scoring systems
Hates the most complex genres in the industry (PC-centric)

Expecting this guy to provide a balanced and comprehensive view on the industry is hopeless. That's his number one failing. His commentary on art is also pretty terrible even if it is a little better than most.

I find this guy pretty charming when he waxes nostalgic about Mario's giant shoe, so his dumbness actually makes me pretty sad

Let's not forget his game overthinker episode where he went out to call all of the people who hated Metroid other m racist against the Japanese, and how we only hated adam malkovich/play the metroid games because we like to be the people to boss samus around in power fantasies.

I am not lying, those were not taken out of context and were only some of the stupid things said in there, and you can find it here: http://gameoverthinker.blogspot.ca/2010/09/episode-40-heavens-to-metroid.html

 

[ablac]

Mass Effect betrayed what made it 'art' in the first place (although there isnt a definition and that means diferent things to different people). Why does external approval matter anyway? There is no such thing as art and product merely a mix in the middle. Besides with test audiences movies do this all the time and books have done this as well. One game and its community will not set gaming back ten years. Bob is an immature and facile human being. He has no idea about what hes talking about as usual.

 

[Eric Morales]

You know, I like Bob when he takes a nuanced position, but its times like these where he leans too hard on the "righteous indignation" button that can really put me off.

BioWare doesn't HAVE to do anything, the easiest thing to do would be for them to stand by their creation and continue enjoying their record shattering sales figures (maybe the angriest fans wouldn't buy DLC, but overall, that would be a negligible loss.) If BioWare is working to make a new or expanded ending, it's because they think they can do better. Hats off to whoever in the company had the job of sifting through the bile to find the actually cogent critiques of the ending.

On that note, this article from Gamefont
http://www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/
is probably the best I've read so far on the subject (I don't agree with every point, but it's clearly the work of a person concerned with the artistry of the series.) Though the odds are slim, I hope with all my heart that this or a similarly good article make it in front of Mr Chipman. Perhaps that would convince him to turn down his bile spigots.

It'd also be remiss of me not to mention that MovieBob also wrote on this site that the PS2 era was the creative peak for the industry, so I don't see why he's making such a fuss, according to him from way back in February 2011 its all downhill from here. Here's THAT article if you're interested.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/extraconsideration/8639-Console-Gaming.2

 

[Undead Dragon King]

I'm reminded of something I learned on the first day of law school:

"The more unsure you are about something, the more confident you need your answer to sound."

I wrote Bob off as a hack a long time ago.

 

[johnnnny guitar]

Couldn't give less of a shit what Bob says when it comes to video games he's way to narrow minded

 

[Falcon123]

So, I wanted to share my thoughts (for what they're worth) on MovieBob's tweets regarding the ME3 ending controversy:

Congratulations, "Mass Effect" crybabies. You've officially set the entire medium back a DECADE as an art form

Also, Bioware? SHAME on you for caving. You've chosen to make coloring books instead of The Mona Lisa.

This is the WORST thing that has happened to gaming since Sega abandoned consoles.

How many more times do I need to explain that this has NOTHING to do with whether or not you "liked" the ending?

if your going to accept a game as ONLY a "product" then yes. But that means we CANNOT ask anyone to take gaming "seriously."

Look, a medium can produce ART or it can produce PRODUCT. If games can be changed at the whims of fanboys, then they are just product and we have no right to demand that Ebert etc take them (or US) "seriously."

To be blunt, I wrote the first three tweets off largely as hyperbole. I'm not saying that invalidates the underlying viewpoint, but it's very hard to build any sort of reasonable discussion from them. Let's say they release a new Fast and Furious movie, and fans hate the ending so much they release a new cut with different footage. Has the medium been set back 10 years? Can it no longer be called art in any context? Clearly not (I would hope).

The next point, I agree with. It's not about whether you liked the ending or not. Subjective dissatisfaction with narrative content is not really a compelling reason for a change to that content. It's perfectly reasonable to assert that you don't like the content - there's nothing wrong with fan feedback - but it's not really a campaign platform.

It's the final two quotes that I really take issue with. They're a surprisingly binary perspective (they seem to imply that a game can be either art or a product, with no middle ground), and frankly, they strike me as a little naive. Part of the issue is clarifying exactly what Bob feels subverts the artistic integrity (if you will) of a game. I can see two possible interpretations:

1) Changing the content of a game as a result of external criticism by financially contributing parties is a betrayal of artistic integrity. If this is the intended meaning, then games are already lost as art. There is no way that publishers (especially since BioWare is now a division of its publisher) and investors (and therefore consumers, albeit indirectly) don't have an impact on the creative direction and development of the game. Mass Effect 3 was a commercial project developed by commercial artists in order to generate revenue. Art or not, the decision-making process undoubtedly involved concerns relating to product sales.

2) Changing the content of a game as a result of external criticism subsequent to release is a betrayal of artistic integrity. I don't find this line of reasoning convincing at all (so financial and fan interests can dictate the development of art, but not any amendment of it?). Either way, though, the existence of the Broken Steel DLC renders this interpretation irrelevant. The 'damage' is already done; the precedent is set. There's nothing new to see here.

Returning back to the point that it's not about one's subjective preference for the ending, the real problem in my mind is that - whether you call it art or a product - gamers did not receive what they were lead to believe they would. Here is one pre-release quote (of many in the same theme):

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.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and variety in them.

Anyone who has experienced the endings of ME3 can attest that this is the exact opposite of the actual content we received. The importance of "artistic integrity" should not be used as a shield to avoid this. Clear statements were made about the type of ending players would receive, and those statements were not adhered to. Is moral integrity worth less than a concept of artistic integrity? Is artistic integrity a defence against simple bad business?

Whether or not you want games to be considered art instead of products (if indeed those two concepts are entirely mutually exclusive), the fact remains that this game was sold as a product, and many indications of the content of that product were given. Those indications turned out to be patent falsehoods, and consequently some consumers are upset. Apparently they can't have the product they were lead to believe they would receive, though, because that would violate "art".

I wrote a couple articles on this (you can find them here: http://www.redshirtcrew.com/2012/03/why-mass-effect-3-has-changed-industry.html) but though I was initially opposed to MovieBob's tweets, and I hate siding with fans against the creator...I agree with everything he said. One of the following three things happened:

1. Bioware just forfeited their authorship to the fans to avoid controversy, thus forfeiting their claim to be artists to a large degree.

2. This was their plan all along, and they're holding their fans hostage for money with this DLC (because the game is NOT complete if the indoctrination theory is true), which sets a dangerous precedent.

3. Bioware misjudged how pissed off people would be by making them wait for the upcoming free DLC that fixes all of this.

Given I don't think Bioware is dumb enough for option 3, I think options 1 or 2 are the only real possibilities, and because Bioware is such a big part of what defines this industry, I believe the industry has been set back considerably either way, and I don't think a decade is a big leap in logic, sadly

 

[Sentox6]

1. Bioware just forfeited their authorship to the fans to avoid controversy, thus forfeiting their claim to be artists to a large degree.

So, seriously speaking, we can no longer call Bethesda artists?

For what it's worth I read your article, and I just cannot agree with this assertion in any way, shape, or form:

Art is produced by the artist, by his or her creative vision alone.

I will borrow another post from earlier in the thread, because it already provides the obvious contradiction:

Also, many of our old art treasures (like, you know, Mona Lisa, most of what Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, Wagner etc. wrote, almost all of Raphael's and Michelangelo's sculptures and paintings and so on into infinity) were commission jobs. That means someone paid the artist to make the final product just like the commissioner wanted. If the buyer wasn't happy with how Mona Lisa smiled or how Eine Kleine Nachtmusik sounded, then Da Vinci and Mozart had to go back and change it up. If the church wasn't happy with the ceiling decoration in the sistine chapel, Michelangelo had to go back up there and make adjustments.

This notion that "true art is never changed because of criticism" and the idea that "true art is an uninterrupted personal process" are both fairly recent inventions and most of what we consider classical art would not fall within either category. Artists throughout the ages have been very pragmatical and have altered their masterpieces to fit their client, because even they had to eat.

So really, the eventual alteration of ME3's ending is not the killing blow to the concept of games as art.

 

[OniaPL]

I understand Bob and I understand the fans to a degree. However, rather than wanting to change the eneding, I wonder why people can't learn to vote with their wallets. I played ME 1 and ME 2. I did not like some things about ME3 (such as Origin only) so I decided that I would not purchase it.

 

[irishda]

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.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and variety in them.

You see this, Chipman? THIS is the issue.

We were promised one thing, and subsequently given THE EXACT THING THEY PROMISED NOT TO GIVE US.

Could you, you know, consider this fact first before you start throwing insults willy-nilly?

I've seen this time and time again, the main point for contention for the "change-the-ending" crowd. "This is what someone said we were gonna get, and we didn't get it."

Have Mass Effect players never seen any other pre-release statements from developers before this? How many times have other developers told us "this game is gonna revolutionize the genre" or "this game's gonna have so-and-so". Welcome to the world of hype for the sake of sales. The rest of us stopped listening a long time ago.

 

[Freechoice]

wow, movie bob can be very near sighted sometimes.

Think that has anything to do with his glasses?

Thatdouchewiththeglassesdotcom

Wait, Yathzee has glasses too...

Pisses me off really.

What doesn't?

 

[Sentox6]

I understand Bob and I understand the fans to a degree. However, rather than wanting to change the eneding, I wonder why people can't learn to vote with their wallets. I played ME 1 and ME 2. I did not like some things about ME3 (such as Origin only) so I decided that I would not purchase it.

Easier said than done when you've already purchased the game.

It's one thing when you know in advance about aspects of the product you consider to be negative (such as Origin) and can evaluate your purchasing decision appropriately.

It's another thing when you get told you'll have an array of endings that will reflect all your prior choices and provide closure and you get... this.

I'll be voting with my wallet when BioWare releases their next game if they don't do something to address this, but until then, I don't have that option.

I've seen this time and time again, the main point for contention for the "change-the-ending" crowd. "This is what someone said we were gonna get, and we didn't get it."

Have Mass Effect players never seen any other pre-release statements from developers before this? How many times have other developers told us "this game is gonna revolutionize the genre" or "this game's gonna have so-and-so". Welcome to the world of hype for the sake of sales. The rest of us stopped listening a long time ago.

Just because misleading pre-release statements are 'par for the course' does not make the behaviour accceptable.

It's more problematic than typical here because:

1) The fans are more invested than they are in your 'typical' video game.

2) The statements about the nature of the ending were rather specific, and a number were made after the game went gold [http://social.bioware.com/forum/Mass-Effect-3/Mass-Effect-3-Story-and-Campaign-Discussion-Spoilers-Allowed/Commentary-for-BioWare-on-false-advertising-10473356-1.html]. Just look at these three (sources available in the link):

There is a huge set of consequences that start stacking up as you approach the end-game. And even in terms of the ending itself, it continues to break down to some very large decisions. So it's not like a classic game ending where everything is linear and you make a choice between a few things - it really does layer in many, many different choices, up to the final moments, where it's going to be different for everyone who plays it.

There are many different endings. We wouldn?t do it any other way. How could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can?t say any more than that?

[The presence of the Rachni] has huge consequences in Mass Effect 3. Even just in the final battle with the Reapers.

 

[Shazamwizard]

I'm still haven't bought into the idea that something ceases to be art if it is changed due to someone else's opinion, concept art is asked to be changed by the art director all the time, and I think most people will still call it art.

 

[Canadish]

I wrote a couple articles on this (you can find them here: http://www.redshirtcrew.com/2012/03/why-mass-effect-3-has-changed-industry.html) but though I was initially opposed to MovieBob's tweets, and I hate siding with fans against the creator...I agree with everything he said. One of the following three things happened:

1. Bioware just forfeited their authorship to the fans to avoid controversy, thus forfeiting their claim to be artists to a large degree.

2. This was their plan all along, and they're holding their fans hostage for money with this DLC (because the game is NOT complete if the indoctrination theory is true), which sets a dangerous precedent.

3. Bioware misjudged how pissed off people would be by making them wait for the upcoming free DLC that fixes all of this.

Given I don't think Bioware is dumb enough for option 3, I think options 1 or 2 are the only real possibilities, and because Bioware is such a big part of what defines this industry, I believe the industry has been set back considerably either way, and I don't think a decade is a big leap in logic, sadly

Just tried to get to your article there, but the site doesn't seem to be working!

I think you make a interesting point there.

No matter where you stand on the issue, or however this ends:

This whole thing is going to have major negative impacts on the industry, one way or the other.

I understand Bob and I understand the fans to a degree. However, rather than wanting to change the eneding, I wonder why people can't learn to vote with their wallets. I played ME 1 and ME 2. I did not like some things about ME3 (such as Origin only) so I decided that I would not purchase it.

Easier said than done when you've already purchased the game.

It's one thing when you know in advance about aspects of the product you consider to be negative (such as Origin) and can evaluate your purchasing decision appropriately.

It's another thing when you get told you'll have an array of endings that will reflect all your prior choices and provide closure and you get... this.

I'll be voting with my wallet when BioWare releases their next game if they don't do something to address this, but until then, I don't have that option.

This.

You can't really "un-buy" the game. I don't see EA accepting any refunds.

I dropped Bioware after Dragon Age 2, and just watched a Let's Play of ME3 to know how it all ended.

But I don't know if an awareness campaign online can compete with the EA marketing team appealing to casual audience who will just be looking at the trailers.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

I don't recall gaming being set back as an art form when they made Cole more like his Infamous 1 self for Infamous 2 after fans complained.

Or when Bethesda released Broken Steel which made so you didn't die at the end.

But there was a major plothole there since your Mutant buddy could do it for you! It was justified, unlike this ending!

.....
Oh wait.