grunger84 [2012-04-11 22:30:01 +0000 UTC]

I believe you are not an artist unless you have the mind to make your own creation? Who gives a crap what other people think about what you have created. Truth is that if Mass Effect started making a terrible game, no one would buy it. On the other hand, Square Enix needs to think about doing this, because they could make a terrible game, and people like me who has been playing final fantasy since I was 10, would still buy it, hoping that just maybe they made a reasonable game this time. I have to say that they are getting better with 13, but they have a few out that should have honestly never been made. 10 2 was terrible, but people still bought it. Most things should not be changed though, based on other people's opinion. Opinions are like butt holes, everyone has one.,

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SonJessica [2012-04-11 19:12:13 +0000 UTC]

Dudes, here's what I think. Personally, as an artist, I create whatever the hell I want, but at the same time I try to work on my works so as to satisfy those who like to read my stuff. Also, I try putting my heart and soul into it. I see this, and I think, "Why? Most those who complain*admittedly including myself* are just overgrown fanboys/girls who just cant accept that their childhood is over," then I think, "Y'Know? As an artist, it might benefit me as well as be the death of me and all that I am to listen to the audience." So, yeah, Im on the fence here. But I just think that changes to endings and/OR core mythos *coughcoughTMNTcoughcough* should only happen if it is truly necessary..Hell, their whole "Mutated Sewer Turtles" origin was actually starting to grow a little, I dont know, STALE, and maybe the notorious Bayformers creator himself wanted to see to it that it happened. There. That's my piece on it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

cozenkk [2012-04-11 18:44:15 +0000 UTC]

The original story is like a foundation of a house. You cannot and should not try to remove such an important part of the house. You can add to it, and you always have the option to rebuild, but you cannot rebuild a house from the roof down. Simular to this is Strawberry shortcake. The new version lacks Huckleberry fin and now he is a she. The comeback is not like the impact the carebears had so the product sits on the shelves hardly moving. Even the consumers who once had these dolls in their childhood complain dearly about the differences. This is a perefect example of why you should leave it alone.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

yugijak [2012-04-11 17:30:11 +0000 UTC]

Here's my opinion on the subject of story in games.

There is a ranking of importance in games in two different categories: hook and entertainment
When it comes to entertainment, even though I myself am a writer, I have the wisdom to understand that the story is not the most important to making a fun game, but neither is it irrelevant. To be honest, the design of the game controls and the enviroment, followed by the story, and then the graphics. Graphics being detailed enviroments and high poly counts, because honestly, would you rather have a game with killer graphics and you can't play worth a shit, or an awesome control scheme and fun enemies with sub-par graphics where you at least can tell the difference between pick-ups.
As for hook, graphics still come last, followed by design and story. When it comes to hooking a player and keeping them involved, a decent control scheme and killer graphics won't make you want to play it if there is no story. A video game allows you to embrace the story as the protagonist, making important decisions and fighting for your life, and if you can't convey that, then whatever the goal for sidequests or what you're doing as a mainquest becomes irrelevant, because the story is what ties all parts of the hook together, not controls and certainly not graphics.

I intend to become a game designer, so I know what I'm saying when I say that if you truly want to make a decent game, don't focus on whatever is the hype of the era, or the thing of the century, or what the hell ever. The greatest games blow that out of the water by being defiant of the trend and telling stories and trying things that other people refuse to try, in short, by not giving a damn about trends. Look at Bioshock, and Skyrim, and Portal, and all those other amazing games that refuse to follow, but instead work to be what a good game should be; fun.

This is my opinion, and I speak not as a high end gamer, or a casual, but I speak as myself, and that is the path that people cannot be pointed to, but can be helped along the way.

So all you game companies trying to make games according to trends, forget it, that doesn't ever work, you just have to enjoy making a good game about things you want to bring to other people to enjoy playing damn game in the first place.

So do yourselves a favor, and focus on what really matters, having fun and being apart of a damn good story.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Forgotten-Destnation [2012-04-11 16:21:51 +0000 UTC]

I don't really want tog et into this, but a quick comment regarding Mass Effect 3's ending:
Casey Hudson himself promised that there would be WILDLY DIFFERENT ENDINGS based on the player's choices over the trilogy. We did not get this. In fact, he himself also said that it's not like in games where endings are like A, B and C, but this is exactly what we got. That's where most of the anger at Mass Effect 3's ending originates from.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

I-Am-DeVan [2012-04-11 15:42:52 +0000 UTC]

I don't believe people have a right to change artwork when they do not enjoy it.
I do believe we should change a product when it doesn't meet the standards we were promised.
I on the other hand...
deviantART muro drawing

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

daChaosKitty [2012-04-11 15:08:08 +0000 UTC]

1. As a visual artist, criticism can help make something better. But, sometimes you just need to go with what you know is right, while taking some criticisms with a grain of salt.
As a reader/viewer, I do feel that there is an entitlement. I mean, I thought that industry people were getting better about this? Remember the "Transformers" movie? The original one, I mean. Or the crappy "Hulk?" You don't take your audience into account, and you end up with a LOT of very mad people... or, in the case of "Transformers: the Movie," audiences of children crying their eyes out at the death of Optimus Prime, and angry parents demanding refunds. "They're just toys" was the write-off. They thought that they could kill this character who had become so important in these children's lives, and that was it? Not what happened. Which totally screwed the chances for other cartoon-based movies to hit the big screen such as "GI Joe" and "Jem."

2. Both. I mean, I don't want to waste my money on something I'm not going to enjoy. I openly boycotted the "Last Airbender" movie, because the casting pissed me off. The only reason I saw it was because I was dragged along, kicking and screaming. "King of Fighters" and "Dragon Ball" two more pieces of crap I won't touch because of casting choices. If people dislike something, they'll say it, but they'll say it with their mouths, and their dollars.

3. It depends how strong the response is, and what I had planned. If they're demanding something that's coming far off, then I won't change anything. But, if it's something that sounds plausible, and won't ruin the integrity of a piece, then I don't see why not? Hell, I can take good ideas.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ChroniclesOfInsanity [2012-04-11 14:43:12 +0000 UTC]

To me, writing is good when you feel it's good Taking any plot direction worth a damn can be done by anyody, but to feel the story you write is how you distinguish if it's good. When I'm spacing out arcs, I listen to music that connects with what is going on. Say I am thinking of a steathy and thief-like moment, I listen to music thats very sneaky sounding, almost silent but you feel it's presence and you know something large is going on by the way it sounds. If something is going on in a way where there is a reveal or if there are characters approacing an endpoint, I listen to dramatic music that builds up to something. Action, music that sounds explosive and jumpy.

For visualising areas and characters I look at people and environments around me, I look at pictures and photographs of places and characters. Even references that are cartoons or artificial. But the important thing is I don't take the style immediatly. I look at other styles of the same category. I mix them all into my own style and see how the architecture and design can change the story.

If a writer has the connection with his story, music and a unique descriptive style he can connect it with the reader. But he has to make it so it feels completely right to him and he has to see if it will connect to others. Michael Bay relies on "Explosion, explosion, explosion." and the Mass Effect developers didn't keep their optional direction of gameplay throughout the entire series. The lack of endings showed poor writing. Bay and Bioware must think about this before they put out just anything. It's especially tricky when your working on already existing and loved franchises and characters. People doing this must understand they already have a story and personality that eople have grown with and they need to continue that without changing characteristics.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

darker-then-I-seem [2012-04-11 13:41:00 +0000 UTC]

I personally hope to make an anime with my characters one day possibly one thats adult and one more geared towards kids...it's unlikely but it's a dream.
Anyway based on this if i was to make something and enough people protested something like a character's death or the ending of a season i'd sympathize to an extent and maybedo a parallel universe episode or something to show what would have happened which mite lead to diverging story lines but that's as far asI would go with it,if you cater to others too much you may find you altered the thing they once loved to the point it's unrecognizable.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Askarbes [2012-04-11 12:22:21 +0000 UTC]

1. As a writer most of the time it's my own feeling of imperfection or plainly not liking the final outcome of a story driving me to change parts of my works. Still I take critiques seriously and thus try to improve still unfinished projects.
As a reader or viewer I also like to share my thoughts and there are quite a few books or movies where I wished, there had been a different outcome but it is up to the creator in which way he wants the story to continue.

2. Since I don't have such a materialistic view on things art-related, I'd have to say that is something solely based on emotions. When I heard Anne Rice, creator of the Vampire Chronicles had decided not to add any more books to the series, it felt like a betrayal to me. I had grown to love the writing style, the adventures and most of all the characters themselves. It's like having to say goodbye to a bunch of friends but it would be wrong to force the writer to continue something she'd lost the connection to.

3. Having only a tiny online audience but a greater one offline the influences of readers are not so distinct. Usually I only post them after some approval by others.

4. I might not be familiar with those three artists and their works, but I'm a great fan of Drowtales, another online comic. While the main comic is free to read there are also sections you have to pay to get access. This also allows you to contribute your own ideas and thus not only passively watching as the story unfolds but actively pushing it in the direction the majority of readers wants it to go. There are even sections where you are able to create or own characters and be even more a part of it.

5. Even if I would have liked to see my decisions in the previous two parts having more impact on the plot I actually liked the ending as it is something I would have probably wrote myself.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Triskaidekathon [2012-04-11 09:11:03 +0000 UTC]

Well, the answer is simple, and is in itself a question. Who owns the content? J.K. Rowling owns hers, she wrote Harry Potter the way she wanted. She could have listened to consumer feedback, or ignored it. Ultimately, she was accountable only to herself. An artist who owns their work can please their customers, or starve. Sometimes that means bowing to the taste of their customers, sometimes it means maintaining artistic integrity.

But the writing team of Mass Effect and Michael Bay do NOT own the intellectual properties they create! In fact, Mass Effect and TMNT belong to the owners of the companies they work for- the shareholders. The purpose of a corporation, and the job of all its employees, is sole and singular- to maximize shareholder value. ME and TMNT do this by selling entertainment and related merchandise for as high a price at as low a cost to as many people as reliably and for as long as possible.

Mac Walters and Michael Bay are servants of these corporations and they employ their artistic talents to create entertainment products and services. They do not own the things they create, and if they make decisions based upon the belief that they do (maintaining artistic integrity), they are acting unethically, irresponsibly, and arrogantly. They should only be making artistic decisions based upon how it will benefit (ultimately) the shareholders. Bioware has made it clear they are not changing the endings to ME3 with future DLC, only clarifying it. Are they refusing to change it because they believe doing so would violate the artistic integrity of the story? Or are the refusing because it would impose significant costs upon the company, and thus impact profits, and possibly dividends? Is Michael Bay imposing his tastes upon TMNT to satisfy his artistic ego, or is he trying to make the franchise more relevant and marketable to a broader consumer base? How these questions are answered will determine whether or not these artists are behaving in a responsible manner.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

giygas101 [2012-04-11 08:55:22 +0000 UTC]

You should be more concerned about CISPA and ACTA

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Lee-Howard-Art [2012-04-11 06:15:18 +0000 UTC]

I think it's always up to the creator of the art to decide whether they should change things or not. I don't like that George Lucas has made a lot of changes to the Star Wars movies, some I dont care about, but some I hate. But they're HIS movies, really. I can always just go back and watch the original versions if I want to, and I'll be fine with that.
With the TMNT thing, I'm not going to get into an uproar until I have seen the movie. Or at least a trailer. But if one or both of the creators of the Ninja Turtles are Okay with it and LIKE it, then everybody should calm down.
But I can still understand that when a movie or something big like that is released into the public, for the fans, it become a PART of them, so to then alter it, I see why they feel personally offended. I read a cool quote from Joss Whedon today:
"All worthy work is open to interpretations the author did not intend. Art isn't your pet -- it's your kid. It grows up and talks back to you."
- Joss Whedon on how he feels about how his work has been delved into so deeply by academics, students & fans to the point of publishing interpretations even he didn't intend.
Joss is goddamn awesome.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

5000DRL [2012-04-11 04:57:04 +0000 UTC]

[link]

This. 'nuff said.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

KCKinny [2012-04-11 04:13:33 +0000 UTC]

1. As a visual artist and a writer, I am rarely pressured to change my art, but when it does happen it can throw me into chaos. Others opinions can be given consideration but unless you're making a product specifically designed to bend to the input of others, you'll usually just end up with a crappy, confused or diluted product.
Hollywood makes movies by committee and most movies coming from Hollywood all seem the same and are terribly boring because of it. The cult classics, the big successes, the inspiration movies come from a singular vision, not mass input.

I do NOT feel I have the right to force an artist to change a work I am personally disappointed in. I will, of course, voice my opinion.
If the work is badly altered from it's original source or has undergone some kind of bastardization, I do feel the right to complain of mishandling (particularly if it's "Hollywood-ized" or taken from the creator's hands.)
I will bitch endlessly about Star Wars Episodes 1 - 3 and wish they'd remake them to be not-shitty.

2. I tend to feel like a work "belongs" to me when I am completely fascinated with it. It's emotional investment.


3. "As a writer or visual artist, is the connection between you and your audience important enough for you to want to make a change pleasing to them?"

No. If it's just to "please" people, then no. If I think the change is worthy, then maybe.

4. There is indeed value in being able to communicate with the author and/or the fans of the aforementioned comics. I enjoy it quite a lot, though I am not much of commentator.
It... CAN bond me more closely to the work. I value that extra tidbit of info that the creator adds at the bottom of the work more than my conversation with the author or fans.
I generally ignore fan art and fictions.

CLOSING OPINION: Art and stories should NOT be decided by a group unless designed to do so. You'll end up with a weak product if you listen to the "masses" in most cases.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Judg3m3nt [2012-04-11 03:19:26 +0000 UTC]

Although I do agree with the fact taht we are purchasing a product of an artist and a large portion of consumers have an unjustifiable sense of entitlement, I feel I must point ou tthat many of those directors, artists, creators and people in general are creating a product that they hope will bring them success financially. If you are creating something that you want sold to the public then you are setting yourself up to adhere to teh wants and needs of the audience. I would not say that the TMNT has to adhere to the established plotline if the director does not but by messing with a childhood favorite of much of today's consumer population, he is bringing "nerd rage" upon himself. He is marketing to have a movie that aspires to be a financial success and starts off by throwing dirt in the face of the pre-established fans (and in most cases the guarenteed buyers), risky move. As for Mass Effect the main issue is that they built up the game to be something the fans altered for themselves. No two player's experience should be exactly the same because their choices had some impact, somewhere. The problem is that this is a task that requires colossal effort and in the end they had to bring it down to a very narrow ending spectrum and fans felt betrayed. I honestly can't tell them how they could have done it differently withouta lot of extra work and money involve so I am not sure how I would complain about the outcome. I think these are two very different cases of consumer vs producer and each instance needs to be examined mostly on its own. I for one am not happy about the change to the TMNT and am rather displeased with Mass Effect 3 (as it was one of the few games in the past decade that really pulled me in to the story and characters) but honestly it is a buy and sell world and if I am bothered too much I simply won't buy and they will put effort into gaining buyers back or close down shop. If there is a space somewhere between that we can mutually benefit from each other's opinions and work I would love for us to reach it but such situations are often pipe dreams. One can always hope.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

LexGoyle [2012-04-11 02:27:46 +0000 UTC]

It's quite a interesting thing going on isn't it? Well my view on this subject is really somewhere in the middle. I don't feel an artist/writer/etc should deviate from their own vision based on what the general public stays or reacts. Granted from a business point of view that may not be quite so...wise either. But I wonder how many original stories out there we've missed out on because of the backlash of a group of people who didn't like aspects of it.

With the alien ninja turtles it's.... an interesting idea. To me there are things you shouldn't alter on that level with an established property or (with permission from the holder of the IP) create a similar work based on the idea just to try out something different. I'm not fond of the idea of them being shown as aliens but chances are... I'll probably still see the film anyway. I like visual FX, I like the way CG in general is progressing and that is an area of interest. So on one hand I'm protesting but I'll wind up supporting it financially by going out and seeing it. What a contradiction.

So basically, while I feel we should have room for new.. ideas, artists and writers and anyone in the arts should stick to their guns on what they want in their work but it can affect the business side of things so it just depends on what one is more important for a given piece. But once you have something established, it makes little sense to go back and change something significant about it while at the same time it can still be... interesting at the very least.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Violet-Violence [2012-04-11 02:23:17 +0000 UTC]

I'm all for innovation, but for something with roots like TNMT people really should be sticking to the original story as much as possible.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Von-Krupp [2012-04-11 02:10:08 +0000 UTC]

1a. I have indeed experienced pressure to alter the aesthetics of something, but not really to make it more "salable" but to make it "more classic" or "because it's cooler." What I usually say to these individuals is that, in the first case, the whole point was precisely to NOT be classic (e.g. redesigning Halo's Assault Rifle for a mod whose aesthetic is totally different) and to the latter I say that there is a distinct reason for why it looks that way, and it's functional. If you can make a prettier design that is just as functional and efficient while meeting requirements of the setting, then by all means do so and show it to me.

b. As a writer, can't say I've ever been bothered.

c. As a consumer of content, I only feel entitled if I was promised something and didn't get it despite paying for it. Take Battlestar Galactica; I absolutely loathe the way they chose to end that show, but I'm not clamouring with pitchforks to change it because I did not directly pay for the show. Yes, I invested some soul into it but ultimately I have no real stake in it and Ronald Moore is free to do whatever he wants because it's his vision. Now let's take Halo 3: I was promised a good ending to that story arc and a fun experience, and I got neither after paying $70 for the Collector's Edition. I also paid for the development of this game by buying Halos 1 and 2. If I could try before I buy, I would be fine, but I can't. It's not like I could dip my toe in and decide if I liked it, and I think that's the issue here. We have to gamble with our money based on a few pretty screenshots and the word of some very biased review publications. When the vast majority of stuff released is shovel-ware, it's hard to blame the consumer for being money-conscious.

2. I feel I can only complain if I put some money or work into the content. Heart and soul is too subjective and ultimately intangible. I like to try and stay objective about this. If you have a physical stake in it that the creators are actually capable of being aware of, then you deserve to have a say. I mean, normally you would just not use the product if it sucks, but with movies and games and books it's hard to know without first trying it out...which requires you to pay usually.

3. No. That said, not having a fan base makes that question rather easy to answer. But even if I did, I still have something in my head that very few are likely capable of fathoming even after taking two hours to hear everything all out in detail because, let's face it, they didn't come up with the IP. I only ever critique something when I understand the idea behind a work and know a better way to accomplish what the creator seeks. I guess with me, it's "do your homework before you make suggestions."

4a. I'm just along for the ride, I want to see what other people are doing. I like to respect their vision. If something isn't interesting to me, I [usually] just stop following along instead of getting out the pitch-forks.

b. I think it's nice when you can talk to the author, and when they offer insights into their reasoning. Then you can build a dialogue and, instead of clamouring blindly for a change you want, you might be able to understand their side and offer some insight as a reader into how the author can achieve his/her vision and successfully convey it.

c. I feel like it does, especially with web-comics. A good example would be when there is a guest-strip so good that and where the proper author enjoys it so much that he/she makes it canon.

5. I actually don't mind the ending, as I see it less of a breach of trust and more of a technological limit they were unable to overcome because they spent time making a multiplayer component instead. There are only so many variables you can take into consideration before your game story spirals out of control, and I feel like they did their best to consolidate the choices made in previous games. They don't all manifest at the very end to create a Good/Meh/Bad ending scenario, they manifest in more tangible ways throughout the game. And besides, the rest of the game was pretty good, even if I still prefer the ME1 style to the whole streamlined shooter thing.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

JSinner [2012-04-11 01:18:49 +0000 UTC]

As an artist of many fields, writing, visual art, and music, I feel it is equally important to consider the consumer as well as the talent when creating. My emotions are the base for my creativity but I find I must also incorporate a certain amount of consumer appeal into my work in order to make it marketable. Failure to do so has often resulted in an unsalable product. In music for instance, if you do not touch the listener in a way they can relate to, you will surely loose them to distraction. In conclusion, I always try to listen to my fans without loosing sight of my own vision. It is an often difficult balance but necessary to the popularity of art.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

OD-Apache [2012-04-11 01:13:15 +0000 UTC]

No matter what they say, saying their work is "art" doesn't mean it can't be criticized or even ridiculed. Calling something which was rushed due to budget and deadline pressure coupled with poor executive decision making "art" is too lazy of an excuse for me to accept, if they would just own up to their mistakes and literal false advertising the issue would mend itself. I'm apprehensively optimistic about the free DLC, but saying words such as "closure" and "clarity" implies that there is something more for fans to interpret, that there is something we don't understand. This isn't an issue of "clarity", or even storytelling, it's a development issue. The game itself was compromised to maximize profits, which in my opinion is a bigger affront to "art" then altering a mediocre product.

However this made me appreciate developers who still walk the talk when it comes to fan service. I can't remember Hideo and his team ever releasing a buggy product, and CD-Projekt's creative teams blow competitors out of the water. As a creative writer and an "artist" (I actually just shut myself in my room and scribble neat things on paper) I would LOVE to work at a place like CD-Projekt or at Kojima Productions, they release the best products in the industry, and they seem to stay away from EA and Activision, which is nice.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0