Attached Link: http://techgnotic.deviantart.com/art/The-Future-of-Storytelling-Has-Arrived-293860261?utm_source=dev

To me the idea of dictating the way a game or film should play out seems knid of odd. I want to see what the artist's vision is - whether I like it or not. I know that people develop an emotional investment in their fantasies but insisting that that the story always play out the way they want kind of defeats the purpose of fiction IMO. 

I'm more sympathetic to the idea of not tampering with long established stories. I disliked some of the things done to the characters in the last Star Trek and Sherlock Holmes films, but I still enjoyed both of them. In any case, I don't feel that it's my place to demand that the creators compromise their vision to please me. If individual artists want to come up with creative forms of collaboration with fans, that's fine but I hope that downbeat endings, quirky character shifts etc. don't fall victim to some kind of art by consensus mentality.

Sure, why not?  There have always existed artists who enslaved themselves to the tastes of the consumer, whether that consumer was a single wealthy patron or a crowd of factory workers or an entire population of pre-teen girls.  I wouldn't expect anyone who was overly concerned with popularity or commercial success to be particularly innovative, of course, though no doubt some have managed it.  But that's always been the tradeoff, hasn't it?

I suppose it's quite apt to ask at this time of year whether we should re write the bible as well, do a few versions, agnostic, athiest, pro christianity- anti christianity versions, everyone is happy, no more wars.......I need the Nobel peace prize........

Anyone with an ounce of integrity should stick to their own vision.  If, however, your primary focus is to make money, you should always please the punters.  Just don't try to tell me it's art.  Anything made for pay is product, nothing more.

My take on ME3's ending.

I honestly have no idea what Bioware was thinking with that game.  I'm kinda glad I didn't get 2 or 3 now.  I'd like to say EA is partly to blame because I'm sure they had bioware devote resources to adding multiplayer, but still, from what I've gathered, that failed ending is solely Bio's fault.

Bioware has been on a downhill slide forever, so I know this isn't the end of it.

Please yourself first - if you don't like it, you'll lose your fans because it'll likely show in your work that you didn't care about it.

Edit: as for the ME3 thing - I played the games and I was fine with the ending. I understood that this is how they wanted the story to end and that it probably plays into how the next story in the franchise begins. I don't think they should have done anything to alter the ending. It's one thing if at the outset you seek out fan approval and then make adjustments before starting the project. It's a whole other ball of wax if you have completed your vision and then bow down to the masses because they didn't like it.  If that's the case, I'm heading to Stephen King's home to demand a better ending for the Stand and over to George Lucas to just smack him in the back of the head for the Star Wars prequels.

No, if you have a vision and you've completed that vision - fans don't get a say. They can like it or not but don't expect it to change. I didn't like Macy's selling the necklace I bought my girlfriend at half price the week after I bought it but I don't expect them to care.

"You see, you can't please everyone, so you've got to please yourself." Ricky Nelson

Well as someone who tries to make a living from poser stuff it's a regular question. I know if I stuck with stuff like buildings or even dumbed down to the adult stuff and endless V4 textures I'd probably be a lot better off. Though to be straight that would bore me cr*pless. Like Sam says if it's all about cash, you'd only make what sells. Thing is I like to be creative and original and that doesn't always work with Poser stuff. Indeed sometimes you can too creative for the mainstreanm poserverse, which can be very conservative at times. So usually the payoff is not getting a financial payoff. Thats simply how it is. Problem is for content creators it's getting harder and harder to get sales, simply because we're all struggling right now. So I try to balance both the creative and pay the rent sides with a mix of stuff. Not always easy and I also think it's important to make sure that stuff for both sides is made with the same level of care and detail.

I always start from within first and then branch out from there, but ultimately I create stuff because I want it in my scene, no ones doing grunge/scifi/game type stuff...so's I help myself!

I guess the argument with Mass Effect is that games are an entirely different medium, and games that encourage role playing and intense user participation can be expected to evoke a different response than, say, movies.

Okay... sorry, that's just what Winterclaw is saying. I agree.

It's one thing not to like the ending to a Harry Potter book, a variety of entertainment that, even if I had read the entire series, would only have involved me for 15-20 hours or so.  But a game that I might play for 300 hours represents a significant investment of my time and likely my emotions. 

The same could be said, and was said in the original article linked by the OP, about long standing comic series with which readers had engaged for years.

So in the end the finished product belongs to the creators and they should and do call the shots.  But in some media particular, failure to take into account the emotional investment of spectator-participants may result in backlash.

As for Poser content, I think vendors are working for a very slim margin and deserve  considerable gratitude for producing anything beyond erotic slutwear (or whatever it is that actually sells in larger numbers).

We could ask Thomas Kinkaid, but he's dead. I somewhat agree that games can be different. In particular, if it's a game where you actually create your own character and choose a course that you wnat to follow. Having that all seemingly come to naught would be a sobering experience. That's the way the universe works though. Having multiple possible outcomes is nice, but picking which one you want - why play when you know the outcome?

I'm not sure that getting paid for something makes it not art. Someone probably paid for most of what we consider to be great masterpeices, so perhaps I'm not understanding.  Some people have the clout to insist on doing it their way, over the client's misgivings. OTOH, I'm pretty sure that clients have insisted on changes that improved, ot at worst, didn't hurt the work untimately. Maybe Leonardo wanted Mona Lisa to be frowning and the money man insisted on a smile :-)

Still, I think my argument is valid.  If it's for pay, it's product.  Doesn't mean to say there isn't artistry and skill in there, though.  Any "great artist" should be capable of using their skill set to produce a satisfactory result, even when they're getting paid for it.  In fact, I'd go so far as to say, you wouldn't become a great artist if it wasn't for the money.

It's the love of the work and the creation thereof that goes to making it art, I guess.  But then we're back to the old "What is art?" discussion, which is pointless anyhow.  Even so, I cannot for the life of me see how a computer game, no matter how well done, could be considered a work of art, since its primary purpose is to separate people from their cash.  Even the entertainment/enjoyment aspect is, part of that process.  They are the tools by which the manufacturers make you reach for your wallet.

Even great artists were hired for pay.  Take the sistine chapel, one of Michealangelo's friends had to paint over the nudity at his request as he was dying do to the uproar it caused.  People forgot about the edit and when they did the restore a decade or two ago, they relearned what happened.

So if you say "it can't be art if it's for pay" mean a lot of artistic movies would have to be left out of the equations, books, music, etc.

I absolutely agree that the "what is art" discussion is pointless -- at least outside of a debating or philosophy class, anyway.

But I do wrestle with the question whenever I put books back on my bookshelves. Does it belong on the literature wall or the fiction wall? I admit, I'd probably change my mind about various book a lot more often if it weren't such a PITA to keep things organized alphabetically. I'll probably never settle the issue firmly in my own mind. ;)

I agree with the above.  if they pay, do what they want. if not, do something original.

Just use the Dewey Decimal system and filing's a breeze!

Quote - Just use the Dewey Decimal system and filing's a breeze!

The issue is when you have too many books, not enough bookshelves, and you have to find space on a specific shelf without re-shelving everything below it.

Yes, I suppose the Dewey Decimal system might solve my dilemmas... but then I'd have to shelve both my erotica collection and a few odd books by Robert Ludlum between Doris Lessing and Toni Morrison, and somehow that just doesn't seem right.

ETA: But it's an excellent suggestion for non-fiction. :)