FB » Articles » All of This Has Happened Before » Comments
Comments on Dan Hemmens' All of This Has Happened Before
It doesn't matter that there are only two options because for pity's sake it's Star Wars and “Light Side/Dark Side” is the only option you could possibly want.
That said, I'm amazed at the number of internet pundits who are freaking out at the very idea that something as sacred as an Author might be asked to change something as immutable as a Story at the whim of something as unworthy as Players. I don't think I've seen anybody call it censorship yet, but give it time, everything is censorship on the internet.
Another trap gamers have fallen into is the sheer disgust with which the notion of “being told a story” is met. The distinction with gaming, you see, is you get to make choices, and those choices have consequences, and thus the game is unique to us. That notion makes sense in a game like Minecraft, but applying it to narrative, pre-scripted projects like the Mass Effect series is just naive.
Building on their research, Exec Producer Casey Hudson and the team are hard at work on a number of game content initiatives that will help answer the questions, providing more clarity for those seeking further closure to their journey. You’ll hear more on this in April. We’re working hard to maintain the right balance between the artistic integrity of the original story while addressing the fan feedback we’ve received. This is in addition to our existing plan to continue providing new Mass Effect content and new full games, so rest assured that your journey in the Mass Effect universe can, and will, continue.
Sorry for triple post but Gadget Review's editor has made a compelling case that the ending can't simply be patched with DLC.
That being said, if they really explain that "indoctrination was our plan all along", this is still a horrible, horrible way to end your game.
It's like watching Brazil or Fight Club in a cinema and having to wait for the DVD release to learn that Sam wasn't freed by Tuttle and that Jack was Tyler Durden all along.
It might be because Child's Play stopped accepting donations because they "didn't like the precedent" of people giving money to sick children as a means of protesting the end of a video game.
I HAZ CLOSURE.Those were weirdly convincing actually :PI particularly liked Jacob's...and Garrus's.
"As the main point of contact for Child’s Play, Jamie has been buried under mail about this situation. Apparently some of the people giving to the cause seemed to think that they were paying for a new ending to Mass Effect. She’s been asked what the goal is, and how much they need to raise in order to get the ending produced. We’ve also been contacted by PayPal due to a high number of people asking for their donations back. This is in addition to readers who simply couldn’t understand how this was connected to Child’s Play’s mission. We were dealing with a lot of very confused people, more every day, and that told us we had a problem.We have policies in place to deal with direct abuse: we don’t allow companies to use Child’s Play in order to sell more stuff. To that end we do not allow deals like “1 cent of every dollar goes to Child’s Play!” or whatever. But this isn’t anywhere on that continuum! This is a passionate community that formed around one thing, and some of that passion was expressed in charitable giving. I actually support this cause, but I am a pessimist, and I’m thinking about the next time something like this happens - when someone attaches Child’s Play to something we can’t get behind, or leverages your history of generosity and fellow feeling for their own weird bullshit. So, we need to have something like a policy on this. This is the best way I can think to say it:Child’s Play cannot be a tool to draw attention to a cause. Child’s Play must be the Cause."
"While we did receive some negative mail regarding the drive, I can assure you our decision was not about bowing to pressure from anyone- corporate, individual, or otherwise,“The real concern on our end was the slippery slope that attaching causes to fundraising for Child’s Play can create. While RME had the best of intentions and was overwhelmingly generous, it shed light on an issue that we needed to address. It pointed out a dangerous precedent for others to use the charity for agendas we clearly do not support.“We’re taking a step back and looking at our policies to see what we can do to still appreciate and support the community while avoiding implications of Child’s Play being attached to other causes.”
To be fair, Dan, I think you're misrepresenting the Child's Play business by implying they're throwing an ego-paddy.
Rejecting somebody's money is a political stance just as much as accepting it, after all.... I don't think refusing to take money from RTME3 is a completely neutral action. As you point out, it's rather like a University refusing to take money from a particular donor - you're making a clear statement of protest.
You’ve got to have a cut-off point, and I think “will the public mistakenly associate you with this cause or this person’s agenda?” is a reasonable one.
The problem is that "agenda" is a label people apply to the beliefs of people they disagree with.
Do you really think that they would have instituted this policy if a bunch of Bioware fans had raised $80,000 dollars in order to celebrate the end of the Mass Effect saga?
My understanding is that it went like this:- ME3 ending haters went "the ending is shit, we want it fixed".- Ending defenders went "you are weeping babies".- Someone said "Hey, let's do a charity drive - putting up money would indicate we're serious enough about this to put our hands in our pockets, plus giving to charity isn't exactly the sort of thing massively entitled people do."- People donated.- People mistook the charity drive for a kickstarter.- Cupcakes.
I don't even know how to parse that idea – how can you at once believe something has “depth and cognitive impact” and also dislike it? Isn't that like hating a book for being too well written?
I guess it's possible to respect the technique of something and dislike it for other reasons. Which of course isn't to say that that something is actually good.
I'm still not sure I can get my head around disliking something and still considering it "deep"
But Dan, you have only to think of my reaction when confronted with meaningful literary books that win prizes...
"I enjoyed this", to me, means "this made me happy inside", whereas "I liked this" means "I found some value in this", so "enjoy" is a subset of "like".
In all seriousness, I quite often don't like things that are probably both clever and worthy, usually (but not always) because they're miserable. In other cases they are just really freaking long, yes I am looking at you, Wolf Hall.
I foresee more "War Asset Acquired: Tri-Color Cupcakes" in Bioware's future.
Because the problem isn't that the endings are bad, it's because the players are too stupid to understand them.
Kyra: I've been inspired by this, and the Mind Meld article you linked to in the Playpen to create a new theme.
To be fair the Forge, I don't think it's true that they pidgeonhole people or games - it's a fairly clear part of the "Big Model" that people shift between Creative Agendas, and that one could favour a mixture of CAs at any given point (although they insist that one should be "primary").
Back to "All of This Has Happened Before "
© 2006-2012 FerretBrain.com Legalese -