I am an avid fan of the Mass Effect games. Seriously, I love them. I haven't played the latest one, however. The reason why is the Origin service. I am a PC gamer and I hate the origin service (if you're listening EA, you suck ass and you should drop this crap and realize you are a second rate game raper). So I haven't seen the endings to ME3. Now, i have heard about them from plenty of people I know and trust. Pretty much, I know exactly the ending, spoilers be damned.
Bioware should not change the ending. It won't fix anything let alone everything. They pissed in the well and now the whole thing stinks of rabies. That said, I have a serious issue with the gaming media. Now, when I say the gaming media, I mean gamespot and escapist magazine in particular and the gaming media in general (dambasses). You see, the cahnge the ending movement, which I disagree with, got their momentum from the immature gaming jounralists. However, much worse, this immature gaming journalists were so stupid, they made the change the ending movement sound more justified.
I'd like to go through some quotes. I will start with gamepsot's incredibly stupid commentary on this: "The very idea of allowing any work of art to be changed, edited, reshaped, reworked, deleted, or destroyed because someone, somewhere, didn't like it would render all art meaningless." I guess Charles Dickens wasn't consulted before this incredibly stupid statement was made because when he was writing Great Expectations, he wrote it serialized, and when he had extreme fan backlash, he was more than willing to change it. Now, gamespot has more than often revealed that they are uneducated louts in the past. In fact, I have come to know that commentary from this lazy, half-assed group of childish louts never deserves consideration. However, gamespot decided they would post their ignorance on an openly available forum.
Let's quote: "Kevin VanOrd@fiddlecub
I'm reminded of Beethoven, who made extensive revisions to Fidelio (and its overtures), in part based on audience disapproval."
Actually, read up, you might learn a thing or two about the process of music in that time. Then again, Kevin van Ord, I never suspected you of being that much of a reader. Yes, actually, Fidelio was specially tuned to a certain emperor's tastes, but maybe you don't understand that today art has the luxury of not being under the rule of absolute tyrants. Perhaps you live such a spoiled life that you have no comprehension of what life was actually like for artists when there were kings and emporers who could have your head because they didn't like what you said. However, somehow, Beethoven, who neither of us have anything in common and neither of us can possibly understand, made fantastic art, despite the despotic rule he lived under. Perhaps your sad reference to him suggests how little you respect his accomplishment.
Oh, here's another:Brendan Sinclair@BrendanSinclair
"So if the government comes knocking, games are art. But when we hate the ending, they're products and the customer is always right. Got it."
Actually, we don't need games to be art. We simply need them to be protected speech. I understand that if you are fairly incapable of discussing american government with any level of comprehension that you might not realize the difference. Fortunately for everyone who works at this site, journalists, who have never been acused of producing art, are also considering to have protected speech (in fact, if you read the constitution, that's what the thing starts with in the first place), however, i can see how someone so adle minded could be confused. On the other side of the statement, I am seriously wondering how magically art became something other than a product to be sold. In fact, I know many artists myself who are quite succesful and I know many artists who are not. More so, I have sold many charcoal on paper drawings myself and you know what? Every succesful artists I know lives and dies by what their clients say about their art. The others work at Walmart and KFC. Perhaps its time to get off your high horse and realize that art has no sanctification just like every other industry in the world. Then again, you might consider yourself too important to learn from others.
However, here's my favorite:Patrick Klepek@patrickklepek
"Just spent 30 minutes talking with @EWDocJensen about the ending of Mass Effect 3, the concept of fan entitlement, and, uh, LOST, of course."
Let's talk about fan entitlement. So, you make a game and you take a risk on it. You do a good job and you atract a fanbase. You've done well. You make another game and the fanbase grows. You've done even better. Now you make a third game and while a bunch of stuck up reviewers say it is untouchable, you find it horrible. Evidently, you are a entitled fan. Let's not point out that you have said down sixty dollars every time a game was released. Let's not mention you puttng ten dollars down every time they put some DLC out (even if it's a gun retexture). You clearly haven't contributed anything to the process. No, the third game would have been made without you. In fact, if everyone who had become fans of the first game hadn't bothered, this holy art would still have been made, right? Oh wait, that's a load of BS. The only reason there is a ME3 is because people like you bought ME1 and ME2. But, on the otherhand, you have nothing to do with the art so BERK OFF!
Now, I've been picking on gamespot. However, this is more universal. Let's say we talk about an outlet that doesn't cater to teenagers (no offense towards teenagers but a lot of offense towards those who pretend to understand teenages (and I don't)). Let's see an Escapist Magazine article: "I don't really have a stake in either side of this debate, although I think it's absolutely fantastic that theRetakeMass Effect- Child's Playdonation drive has so far raised over $67,000, but you don't paint a new smile on the Mona Lisa just because the original's a bit flat."
This is stupid on so many levels. Let's start by talking about the Mona Lisa. I have seen it in person. It's a small portrait painted by a single person (albeit famous enough to have a Ninja Turtle named after him) that was widely loved because of the expressionate look on the subjects face. ME3, on the other hand, is a video game made by the biggest third part publisher in the industry, has perhaps one of the hugest advertising budgets in video game history, was play-tested out the wazoo, had a beta release, perhaps even had a focus group and was built on fan feedback from the previous two games. This has got to be the most dombass comparison I have ever heard. Comparing Mass Effect 3 (notable that this game has a big ole '3' tacked on to the title) to the Mona Lisa is like comparing apples to run. That is to say, they aren't even the same part of the sentence structure. So perhaps, that means you should shut up - and I mean before you reveal that you never managed your GED.
I want to repeat, EA(bioware) should not change the ending. EA has clearly killed bioware and any attempt to fool us otherwise is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of. F-off (bioware)EA and die in hell. You are the cancer of the gaming world. I know this and every sane gamer knows this. You don't deserve to exist and that's the end of the story. However, perhaps they should realize that they don't get take backs when they piss in the well. You can't buy up a company like Bioware, kill it's creative talent, and expect us to appreciate you. No, EA, we know you suck and no ammount of BS from your idiot CEO can convince us otherwise.
However, the gaming media has shown how childish they are. Many of the most famous artists of all time have changed some of their art after they had feedback from who purchased it. Out of that group, many never complained. Art is not sacrosanct. We are not talking about artistic integrity. We are simply talking about pride - the gaming journalist's pride. Gaming journalists (and reviewers) feel they are talking about something holy. That's the dumbest idea ever. Get over yourselves you idiots.
Now I'd love to say I am awaiting the BAN-HAMMER, but I'm not. I haven't posted here in a long time and a lot of that has to do with how much I can't stand the reviews and reporting here. So, you can ban me and I will never come back. you may think that doing so frees you from my accusations. If you do think so, you're proving your existence is just so sad. I'm not going to notice whether you ban me or not. YOU, gamespot, SUCK. YOUR EDITORS SUCK. YOUR REVIEWERS SUCK. YOUR "PERSONALITIES" SUCK. You are nothing but another group that provides free advertising to gaming companies. Again, I don't want Bioware to change the ending - in fact, I haven't even seen the ending. What I have seen is that your self-aggrandizing attitude is exactly why the rest of the world views video games as just games and not art. Your childish attitudes are holding us all back.
Seriously gamespot, YOU SUCK. YOU ARE MAKING THINGS WORSE. YOU MAKE IT HARDER FOR ME TO VOCALIZE THE VALUES OF VIDEO GAMES. YOU MAKE IT HARDER FOR ME TO SHOW PEOPLE WHAT THIS CULTURAL PHENOMENON HAS TO OFFER TO THE WORLD. In other words, you are a bunch of money-grubbing pathetic children who refused to ever grow up. You can ban me and I don't care. You've read my words and you're not worth it.