The ME3 ending controversy, games are art, and committee design.

Recommended Videos

mightybozz

New member
Aug 20, 2009
177
0
0
It's a hot thread atm, so I clicked on Sentox6's thoughts about Moviebob's tweets re. the ME3 ending http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.355624-MovieBobs-thoughts-on-the-ME3-ending-controversy.

I don't want to open another thread on the same point, but instead open the discussion on one point mentioned by Moviebob which I've heard several other times.

Several people have claimed that if games are to be considered a valid art form, they cannot bow to commercial/community pressure, but have to stand by their original production for artistic integrity.

That's a valid argument for a small development team, where there is a direct link between a clear artistic vision and the end product ie. Doublefine's work, or development by an auteur such as Suda51.

But ME3 is a blockbuster, marketed up the arse to the masses. Moreover, it had multiple development teams working on different aspects, and teams of writers. I don't believe any of them had a strong central vision of the product and what they were trying to do with it. Hell, if they did, the ending might make some bloody sense :p.


TL;DR summary:

Is it really valid to the deploy the "artistic integrity" argument in favour of committee-designed mass-market material?

And where does the "you can't criticise it, it's art" argument end? Moviebob criticises films after all. Surely this makes him a hypocrite?
 

Redd the Sock

New member
Apr 14, 2010
1,088
0
0
There was a video about ten years ago of a cat's agony after having been skinned alive that was being defended as "art" as it was a performance art piece on cruelty in the meat industry. Guess how much respect I have for the "it's art" defense. I'm not behind fanboy whining either, so it isn't a black or white issue.

In fairness, Bob's arguement is not that we can't criticise, just we have no right to expect a retraction based on our personal tastes. But while he seems to place a divide between a commerical product and art, I see a blurry field of overlap as yes, very little creative work is done without mind to the consumer. Even among what can be considered art is often a play for critical attention ie films like the King's Speach which was a litteral oscar grab. To pretend otherwise is arrogant. It occured to me a week ago in a world full of DLC something like this was going to happen as, while we had to live with Raiden in MGS2, now we can get things changed. Is it wrong? only if you think the end user shouldn't have input at all. Is it whining? I judge that on a case by case basis. We've all heard a lot of reasoned responses to why ME3's ending is bad, I don't think I've heard the writer's rebuttal as to why I should have liked it.

And the art by comittee disconnect is nothing new. The director is usualy iven full credit or blame for a film, not the writers, actors, designers, or any of the hundres of other people in the credits. The number of people involved doesn't stop something from being art and never has.