Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

The recently announced changes to the core mythos of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and the backlash from fans over the ending to Mass Effect 3 have ignited an incredible discussion about the rapidly evolving “collaborative” relationship between producers and consumers of videogames, movies, and similar “products.” Now it’s exploded beyond the secure borders of top news publications, gaming and entertainment websites. Looks like this long-bubbling cauldron of traditional ways and means, modern tech, web economics, core beliefs and future shock has finally boiled over...

Should you listen to your audience?

The Contenders

The gaming industry, and gaming media, is wrong to label upset consumers as ‘entitled’ or ignore the
investment of fans beyond simply spending their hard-earned cash.


They don't "owe" you anything. They make a product, and then you decide if you're going to pay for it. Since many of you think it's okay to download anything you want for free, even that second step isn't a guaranteed part of the process anymore. But it's a very simple transaction. They make. You consume. … Even so, you are not actually owed anything beyond whatever entertainment they produced for you in the first place.

It’s the question roiling the genre arts sparked by the release of Mass Effect 3 and speculation about changes Michael Bay may make in his reboot of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles:

Should a video game creator rework a game’s ending if

enough fans are dissatisfied with the original?

Should fans’ responses to rumors about

projects-in-planning be a major consideration in

the creation of those projects?

In this article I contend that it’s not simply that the gaming and movie industries are mistaken to dismiss
disgruntled fans as nuisances deluded with a false sense of “entitlement” – I actually contend that commercial
storytelling across all media should increasingly incorporate community feedback as an essential element in a
project’s success. Fan influence might alter a project by 5% or 60%. It’s all in the balance of how fan feedback
is utilized in the process.

Let me make another important point. I’m always annoyed when the “they make – you consume” contenders try to moot or obviate the whole discussion of producers and consumers by referring to movies, games, songs, etc. as mere “entertainment”.

When I eat a cheeseburger at Umami, ride a rollercoaster, or laugh at a joke in a late nght talk-show host monologue,
I am partaking of an “entertainment”. These are those momentary pleasures in life that help you relax or give you a cheap
thrill – and they are instantly disposable.

But movies, videogames and music are different. We “invest” ourselves greatly in them. Ask any young fan who thrilled
to vicariously inhabiting one of the characters in the Hunger Games. Dick Clark once rightly said that music becomes the
“soundtrack of our lives.” Movies have always been (and now, too, videogames) the alternative “religions” or mythos that
we choose to identify with, and by which we often define and direct how we think about our lives, sometimes to an extent
exceeding actual religions or ideologies. What I’m saying is that the “psychic stakes” in this current dispute are a little
higher and more vital to our culture than it just being a “consumer complaint” situation.

From TheArtist GodsOf The Genre

There is no such thing as a singular fan reaction. Art is an interpretive experience. What you read in Moby Dick,
and what I read in Moby Dick, are different things. That is very much one of the joys of the arts. We don't have a singular
response. There's a quote which states, 'All art aspires to the condition of music,' and that's because music is infinitely
interpretable. Who would want to conform an artist's vision into something else?

No person other than the artist can make his or her art. Art is the manifestation of one man or woman's vision for a
better world. And, hopefully, that vision will inspire generations to create their own art. That's just the way I see it.

CliveBarker, as a uniquely modern renaissance man, is especially qualified to comment on our topic. Only Stephen
King rivals his fame atop the charts of popular fantasy and horror fiction. As a novelist his books include "Abarat", "Imajica" and "Thief of Always". The Candyman and Hellraiser films were based on
his writings. But he is also a renowned visual artist, his paintings and drawings having hung in prestigious fine arts galleries.
He has been creatively involved in videogames, comic books, films and even costume design. He has produced films as diverse as
Gods and Monsters and The Midnight Meat Train. His perspective is that of an absolute original.

In my personal experience, listening to the feedback of a rabid fanbase can be a double-edged sword. Say your film or TV show is
based on preexisting material like a comic. On the one hand, you have to be careful not to adhere too closely to the source material.
What's right for one medium (a comicbook or videogame, say) may not necessarily be right for a film. And vice versa. Secondarily, when
thinking about a film or TV show, you're talking about million or even tens of millions of viewers (as opposed to, say, 40,000 comicbook
readers). You are making a mass-market adaptation, so the broader audience may or may not be amenable to certain conceits.

But the flip-side is, ignoring the early adopters or original fans can be to your peril. Often, film and TV executives are far removed
from their actual consumers. Many of them no longer see movies in a public theater. More still, have never set forth in a comicbook
store. To some executives, there is literally no differentiation between, say, Superman and some small-press indie comicbook. They
perceive all comicbooks to be the same. They may have no understanding of the source material's DNA. I can't tell you how many times I've
had an executive suggest a change that I knew, in my gut, would send the fans screaming. It's hard to explain that to an executive,
sometimes. It's truly a gut-check kind of thing.

David Goyer provides invaluable perspective, having mastered every facet of the genre arts narrative. He is a
screenwriter (Dark City, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Man of Steel) who has also written for TV, comic books and videogames. He is
a film director (Blade: Trinity, The Unborn) and producer (Blade II and Trinity, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance). He is a novelist
(Heaven’s Shadow). Heaven’s War, the second book of his sci-fi trilogy, is unleashed this July; The Dark Knight Rises, the film sequel
from his original story, is in post-production; and his newest creation, Da Vinci’s Demons will debut soon on Starz.

Personally, I think the best storytelling is the product of a strong, single voice. I think it's important for creators to listen to
their fans and to make adjustments along the way, but I'm not so sure that a collaborative effort can create a singular vision. I think a
creator should not only write to please their audience but also to occasionally surprise them.

Jeff Kinney
Author/Creator of “Diary of A Wimpy Kid”

So what’s really going on with theMass Effect 3& TMNT showdown?

The makers of Mass Effect have, I imagine quite by accident, found themselves suspended over what they must find a frightening abyss, with
one foot planted in the old way of doing things, and the other foot toeing the unfamiliar terrain on the other side of the yawning chasm. They
encouraged fans to change the outcome of the game with their own decisions – but then largely ignored those decisions. Is this really a dispute
over creator’s rights vs. fan entitlement – or is it about how technology’s new tools are fundamentally changing commercial story narrative creation?

There have always been editors, censors, critics and all the other intruders necessarily a part of commercial publishing. And the “input” of public
readership has always factored in as well, with some artists cursing it and others embracing it. Rather than write “take-it-or-leave-it” novels,
complete at time of publication, Charles Dickens was famous for creating his serialized stories a chapter at a time, published weekly of monthly
in magazines or newspapers specifically so he could gauge readers’ response to each chapter before writing or revising the next. Great Expectations
is certainly the product of Dickens’s brilliant compassionate mind and expert writing talents – but it’s also to a tremendous extent a collaborative
creation with hundreds of “contributing authors”!


Having an open and sincere dialogue with fans has become an integral part of our business and our books. We value their passion
and input, so direct conduits like social media have helped us form a solid bond and bring us even closer in what is already a
tightly knit industry.

Ted Adams
CEO/Publisher of IDW Publishing

While I think there is a lot of merit to the idea of listening to the core audience of any given franchise. I think "caving" too
much to what fans want can lead to a watered-down product. Sometimes fans think they want something and as soon as they get it, the
franchise suddenly loses its dramatic tension. The bottom line, for me, is that sometimes there's a groundswell that is too loud to ignore.
If the majority of your fanbase is upset by something you've done or clamoring for a plot point that has been ignored, it would be
silly to dismiss it out of hand.  But creators should also be wary of taking every single critique of their project too seriously.

Brendan Deneen

Co-President and Co-Publisher, Ardden Entertainment LLC

Comic Book Writer, Flash Gordon and Phoenix / Founder, Macmillan Films

So Here IsThe Point

Dickens never would have made the mistake of incorporating his readers’ ideas throughout a novel’s chapters and then written a final chapter
completely at odds with all those ideas. The Mass Effect 3 mistake was to encourage player “revisions” to the storyline – but only as a gimmick
rather than committing to this new reality as an integral part of the evolution of the narrative. Any “narrative” today, to be commercially viable,
will have to be “written” for the full spectrum of storytelling demanded by the evolution of web production and distribution. Stories must be full
spectrum narratives, able to fit themselves to tellings as videogames, comics and graphic novels, traditional novels, feature film and television
and Internet productions (live action or animated).  And all these iterations of a core story will be subject to constant fan comment for revision
and extension. This is the brave new world that Dickens would have embraced as liberating rather than destructive of his authorship, the tool of
“reader” feedback having now become an instantaneous and continuous global information stream that will propel forward those who learn to navigate
it, and drown those who fear a “loss of control” in uncharted waters.

So is “authorship” doomed?

Hardly. The new technology driving instantaneous feedback and a greater demand for reader participation is simply forcing writers and visual
artist/creators in other art forms to face new realities and make tough decisions about how their artistic expression is going to be distributed to the planet.
Every time a painting or journal is posted on deviantART it has the potential to be experienced by a thousand times the number of people who had access
to anything written by Charles Dickens in his time. And be instantly commented upon by those people. Personal artistic expression and connection
has been liberated as never before. But the conundrum remains: No artist has to ever alter or revise an artwork, but then again, no artist has to
ever make a penny from his or her art. Writers, and all artists, must find the spot on that “art vs. pay” continuum where they are most comfortable
and functional. There can always be art for art’s sake, unintended for sale, but there is now a radical new way of becoming a successful and
world-popular commercial storyteller. And the new way heeds the feedback enabled by the new tech from word one.

The new paradigm of feedback-fed conception, production and distribution will take a while to establish itself on the still “Wild, Wild West”
Internet, but it will provide producers of content-driven stories with a real security in the commercial success of their properties – rather than
the increasing chaos they are currently falsely fearing. In the end “authorship” will always be bestowed upon the artist individual who most
commands respect as the one whose efforts most connect with us, the readers or viewers, regardless of any input from feedback or cuts by editors.
Writers need not fear a degradation of their work, nor their becoming mere typists transcribing the public’s wishes.

In the end, as always:

True talent and true vision will win out.

Deviant Artists AlreadyEmbracing the Futureof Storytelling

yuumei, alexiuss and vesner are creative, visual and narrative storytellers who, with well over a million
reads each for their stories on deviantART, enjoy an unprecedented relationship with their online audience. Their input is informed
by their status as artists already participating in storytelling’s new paradigm.

Writers have editors, but who says the editors can't be the audiences themselves? If I were writing a story mostly for my own
enjoyment, then I have no obligations to please the audience. However, if I am creating something with the main purpose of
marketing to the masses, then my work should reasonably meet their expectations, and the best way to do that would be to listen to their opinions.

Author/Creator of Knite & 1000 W0RDS

I believe in altering endings, as long as the fanbase demands it, but not in a way that the original book/game/title is heavily
edited, but rather in the way in which the 2nd story of the title continues. For example, if the protagonist dies in the 1st book,
he can be somehow brought back to life if the fanbase really really wants to read a 2nd book about him. Without this alteration,
one of the greatest books I've read called 'The Golden Calf' would not exist. Personally I'm very heavily influenced by critics and
fans, so if my work is lacking in some regard, I update it or try to improve on it.

People were disappointed with ME3's ending, not just because the developers promised something completely different, but because
players didn't just watch/play this story – they were an integral part of it up to that point. Every player who spent their time
playing all of the three games created a strong bond between themselves and Commander Shepard to a degree that, in a way, they all
became Commander Shepard. We all want to believe that our actions can change our fate and the fate of the world.

Dave Elliott and Jordan Greenhall are acute observers of the deviantART community and its impact.

Being in the comics industry, you are acutely aware of two things: 1) that every corporate character has a history
with certain aspects of that history carved in stone, and 2) these characters have a strong, ardent following that, if
you are going to change them, it had better be good, or you'll know about it via Twitter, Facebook, and deviantART. I
will no doubt face this myself 10 times over with "The Weirding Willows," which merges timelines and histories of more
than a dozen beloved, classic characters. Whilst being as respectful of the characters and their histories as possible,
I won't let that stand in the way of what I want to do with the possibilities represented. I'm looking forward to the
feedback I expect from this one.

Author/Creator - Weirding Willows

It is no stretch to recognize that the nature of a civilization is tightly linked with its form of media.
It must be understood that we are undergoing a media transformation quite as substantial as the invention of written
language. As a consequence, we should expect social media (or, better, what will come to be known as Transmedia) to reshape
our world in deeply profound ways. This movement from center to edge, from author to community, from broadcast to interactivity,
is a fundamental. We will be seeing it literally everywhere, including art. Especially art - as we come to discover that one
of the core threads of this transition is a (real) aestheticization of life.

People who create to be consumed would care about pleasing the audience, people who are consumed by their creation quite frankly care only to please themselves.

Cake ID by StJoan

QuestionsFor the Reader

  1. As a visual artist, have you ever experienced being pressured to alter an artwork, either by a dealer to make it more “salable,” or by your watchers, critics, or friends?

    As a writer, have you ever experienced being pressured to change an important part of a story, either at a prospective publisher’s or editor’s insistence, or simply because of a reader’s impassioned entreaties?

    As a reader or viewer (of movies, TV shows, videogames, art, etc.) do you feel a sense of entitlement giving you the right to not only criticize but actually demand changes be made to a disappointing work?

  2. Do you feel this entitlement is based in your great investment of both money and time in the work? Or do you feel this entitlement is based in your great investment of your head and heart in a particularly resonant storyline?

  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?

  4. As an online reader of Knite, Romantically Apocalyptic, or Off-White, is there an increased value or special connection you experience in being able to connect with the authors of your favorite works-in-progress and contribute your feedback?

    Does the ability to offer comments, suggestions, criticisms, and encouragement bond you creatively to a property in a way eclipsing passive fandom?

    Does Fan art and Fan Fiction created around an online story with author/reader interactivity become more of an integral part of the property than traditional offline fan art tributes?

  5. If you played ME3, how did you feel about the ending? TMNT or TANT?

Add a Comment:
kronusnec Featured By Owner May 10, 2012
I'm a kind of a writer and I have experienced pressure from my sister to change some important parts of the story. I think it is realy important for an artist, especially in RPG area, to listen what readers have to say. When I finished ME3 I felt awfull. I died! Damn it, I realy died, because I WAS Commandor Sheppard. Sth I loved about Fable1 was that if you watched credits you could continue to play, although the campaign was finished. If ME3 had the same thing I would love BioWare. I wish they will make a patch with alternative ending where I survive, cause dieing sucks!
S-Raptor Featured By Owner May 7, 2012  Professional General Artist
Granted Star Trek has explored the "infinite universes created by every action" situation before, but the fact remains that if the filmmakers just wanted to do a reboot, why didn't they? They actually went out of their way to tell a story that purposely ran roughshod over pretty much every Star Trek series that had come before.

But, even excusing that, the movie was just badly written. A single exploding sun threatens the "entire universe" (in Spock's words)? Does that setup even sound the least bit similar to another Star Trek movie to anyone? And then a Romulan mining ship with advanced time travel capabilities? And I know Star Fleet has always been pretty lax when it comes to discipline, but turning over an entire ship to a bunch of recruits? Anyone who's ever been in the military knows that you could not run a star ship the way they did in that movie. And even if you manage to stop a really dangerous bad guy, you don't just skip over a bunch of ranks to be given command of a whole star ship. That would be like giving the grunt (no offense) who shot Osama Bin Laden command of an aircraft carrier.

And finally, if we are to believe that that future Spock is the same one from the other series, why is he so willing to just roll over and accept the changes that have been made to his past? Think about how many episodes of Star Trek were devoted to time travel and the need NOT to change the past, or at the very least to set things right before leaving. So, maybe from that stand point, this isn't the same Spock we know.
Ravenwoodwitch Featured By Owner May 4, 2012  Student
Hm...well don't I feel sheepish.

Sorry ><, I'm terrible at reading sarcasim in posts.
Abyss-of-Insanity Featured By Owner May 3, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
1. A&B. Whether as an off-hand murmur or a vehement protest every involuntary mishap is all to familiar when seen from a different perspective and made more memorable when you feel incapable of appeasing their demands.
C. The value of media-based entertainment is decided by making evaluations based upon experience with said entertainment. So it seems logical to concur that the ability to reach a verdict is justified in the hands of the consumer, but the consumer is liable to fault and typically lacks the skills to make solid revisions. In the end, no as a consumer we do not deserve such influence but as undeserving as we are we occasionally make a damn good time of it.
2. Responsibility all boils down to "I am a part of this" whether financially, emotionally or both.I believe that a consumer is allowed involvement directly proportional to contributions.
3. Highly situational. If the work is nonsensical then peer review is excusable, however if something tangible is at stake then constructive criticism is appreciated.
4. A&B Without a doubt the simple hope that you can even contact such venerable deities makes the immersion factor sky-rocket through the roof.
C. I think that user-generated content is'nt necessary but it's a welcome site seeing as how it can promote creativity not only in the community but perhaps the creator if she/he started perusing inspiration.
5. I have played ME3 but not to the end, but I have a general rough draft of what is to come. From the sounds of it gamers were terribly disappointed, with my irl survey topping out to1/7 gamers being slightly content with ME3's endings, and after some decent contemplation I decided ME3 wasn't worth my time until proven.
PaperMatt202 Featured By Owner Apr 30, 2012
I want to read this, but I haven't found the time to...
LEMOnz07 Featured By Owner Apr 30, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I hope that will actually happen. I want it to.

I guess that people just don't like change. That's what it all boils down to.
Although, in BioWare's case, they weren't basing Mass Effect on anything because they pretty much made the universe from scratch (so did Bungie when they made Halo). But, it can still be applied to the Hulk movies, maybe the Spider-Man movie (the new one), and Michael Bay's TMNT. (Personally, I don't like his style.)
daChaosKitty Featured By Owner Apr 30, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Pretty much. Though, I view it as alternate, possibly parallel timeline. I mean, is there only one universe, or are there many created by the decisions made and actions taken?

A late response, but a response.
BerkiePA88 Featured By Owner Apr 30, 2012
from the Spider Man films starring Tobey Maguire.
BerkiePA88 Featured By Owner Apr 30, 2012

To sum up what I am proposing. A merger between Fans and Professional = one media product....instead of a bunch of different products and legal headaches. Even if the media product is not perfect when its completed, fans will understand.

The thing about movies adapting a comic is that comic books have a lot of different storylines with their issues, and when directors make a film they are most likely following a storyline from a comic that has happened. Although Spider Man with Andrew Garfield shows a spider biting Spidey and he gains these extroaidnary powers..this is a different experience from the spider mans starring Andrew Garfield.
NinaMarinaAcuatico Featured By Owner Apr 30, 2012
Wonderful article, it directly addresses the fuss that is going on around this issue.
In regaurd to question one, as a reader or viewer of videogames/movies and such, I do not feel entitled to demand changes to the plot. Unless given the choice, such as in the Mass Effect series. I do feel that they should have had much more varience in the outcomes according to what YOU choose, seeing as they seemingly give you the choice. If you are going to give the reader/viewer/gamer the choice to choose, the outcome should be adjusted accordingly.

Question four is interesting, for if the creator gives you the choice to directly affect the story or work of art, then I do feel more of an attachment to the work. But on the other hand if there is no hinting at being able to choose then I am content to take the work from the creator as is, for there has been much effort on the creators part to make it in the first place and I respect them in doing so.

And lastly question five. I played all of the Mass Effect games and thoroughly enjoyed the interactive game play, choosing the outcomes in playing the nice guy or a complete jerk, and the outcomes that result from those choices. I was throughly dissappointed when playing the ending of Mass Effect 3 in finding that pretty much no matter what I did the outcome was pretty much the same.

Thanks for giving such an amazing article on this dilicate issue and giving the readers a chance to voice their opinion.
McFoodleDoodles Featured By Owner Apr 29, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I had a dream about turtles last night... they weren't ninjas or aliens... they were zombies! Luckily, zombie turtles will never be a problem. They're just too slow.
..well, it's a weight off my mind anyway!
The-Psychic-Paligin Featured By Owner Apr 28, 2012
Woo i have th ebook now i just have to read it ;)
thelovebat Featured By Owner Apr 27, 2012
Very interesting article.
Slath Featured By Owner Apr 27, 2012  Student Digital Artist
Geeze can't believe it's already 20 days since I got your message ~
Sorry I didn't reply earlier. But anyway I think we came to a conclusion and agree in most points. I guess I just misinterpreted your first comment a little, sorry 'bout that. And btw I actually like One Piece a lot myself but the latest (like about 50) chapters were too freaky.... just for me ;)
yugijak Featured By Owner Apr 27, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
Nice to see someone who gets it! Or, rather, read the messages or whatever. :)

Anyway, I wanted to know what you thought of my Pokemon story that I have on, I go by Nicki Fowl. Please give me your opinion.
anistasya Featured By Owner Apr 26, 2012
That's definitely been true in everything I've written. Characters always take over in the end. It is their story after all ;)
KatrinaTheLamia Featured By Owner Apr 25, 2012  Professional General Artist
In full honesty, that could be a half ass attempt to do the PTSD, mental complex issues Marvel started having their super heros do in the 1980s.

Except they are confusing Tony Stark with Peter Parker. A common mistake... no... wait... "common mistake" isn't what I'm thinking of...
ravensartshack Featured By Owner Apr 24, 2012
I enjoyed reading this article so I wil be sharing this on facebook. I am writing my first novel and have been wondering how does one write for video games?
Mercurial-Mythic Featured By Owner Apr 23, 2012
My initial views (subject to change if I think about it in more depth later):

As a writer, I've been pressured to change some of my short stories by some of the people who've read them- actually, mostly by my mother, who continually tells me to "write about other topics, nobody likes reading about this subject, write something that there's a market for" (to paraphrase). It's not the individual plotlines that get complaints, it's the premise of what I write. Still, I write because it's important to me to get the information down and existing in the 'real world' outside of my head, not to sell. That would just be an extra perk. ;)

I think that as a reader of books, a watcher of TV shows, and a viewer of art, I don't really have a sense of entitlement about demanding changes- I mean, I think I can criticize things that I can support, like "the dialogue was slightly stilted", "such and such was kind of contrived/pulled out of nowhere", "x and y were inconsistant in a way not in fitting with the professed theme", that sort of thing, but ultimately a book is written for the writer, art is made for the maker, and TV shows have a central and main arc that is the vision of the creator which will probably come together at the end- if the show fails entirely, that's a different story (this coming from the perspective of a writer, a sort-of-artist, and someone who writes episodic plot arcs). While you can criticize the concrete, I don't think we have a right to demand anything of the basic plot or things like that. For the most part, I think this goes for movies too.
However, there is an exception- if the movie, TV show, or book is spun-off of an already established work (particularly a successful one), then I think the creator should listen to the fanbase, at least insofar as staying true to the source material goes. Because while in these cases the new creator probably does have their own vision of how things should go, it's based heavily off of someone else's, and it should respect that work as an important aspect of the 'franchise' or whatever. Also, in many cases spin-offs or new takes on old things (movies and TV, mostly, to my knowledge, though probably also videogames) have at least some motivation of monetary gain. If you're intent on selling to the fanbase, listening to what it considers the hallmarks of the 'story' or whatever you're reworking is probably a good idea- the same way that basic supply and demand works, by one person providing what other people want, or not selling anything.
As for videogames- while I freely admit that I do not have a large amount of experience in being quite so invested in them as others, I am of the opinion that they are created to sell, and thus created for the buyer, in the same "supply-and-demand" way as above. So, if you're making it for the buyer, listening to their demands and at least taking the strongest ones into account seems like it would be a good idea- unless you're honestly making the game for the sake of making it, with your own non-profit outfit and organization, not caring what other people think. Then it's really up to you whether or not you listen to the fans.

I think the entitlement, when it exists, is based a bit on the money invested in the work- a case of "we're buying it, so give us what we want"- in, again, the whole free-market sense. But I also think that, as stated above, some of the stuff being created is being created *for* the buyer. So we invest ourselves in it, the creator deliberately sets out to get us to invest ourselves in it, if only to sell out, and we have a stake in the outcomes. No work will please everyone (or if it does, there's mind control of the public being involved somehow), but if the creator sets out to get us 'invested', then in a sense she or he gives the public a little bit of the story- the same way that, in the market, 'investing' means getting a share and a say in a stock or something.
Again, particularly if the work is based on something pre-existing- whether it's a reboot of a beloved classic or if it's a sequel to a hit somethingorother- there is even more 'entitlement'. The new creator goes into it knowing that the fanbase has expectations, that they're *already* invested in the storylines, and that the expectations now fall on the new creator too. If the new creator is a fan of the original work themselves, they may have just such an attachment. The new work, being produced for the buyers and the public, shouldn't seek to break the fanbase- if the new creator is a fan, they wouldn't want such a thing to happen to the storyline from *their* perspective. It's a case of human understanding of the way emotional connections to the unreal go.

As a visual artist, a lot of what I do (which it occurs to me I have posted very, very little of on this site...) is done for my own sake- self expression and the leaking of Important Stuff into the real world. But when I have something that people really like, that's done for them, whether to sell or just to show, then yeah, what my audience thinks is really important. If they don't like it, I can't convey the subtleties I'm trying to get across, and I can't give them something profound to hold onto. The art for me is for me, and the art for them is most emphatically *for* them. There aren't too many points that I'd be unwilling to at least compromise on- the basic style, which I'd assume people are fine with if they like the art as a whole, and some of the implications of my work (I won't pass along messages I vehemently dissagree with, for example), are about it.
As a writer, it's a little bit complicated. A lot of my work is for me- I'm of the I-wrote-it-because-it-happened-it-happened-because-I-wrote-it perspective. The worlds I write often spring fully formed to mind. And, because I try to prortray me characters relatively consistantly (except the story with my author avatar as a main character, which will likely never be published or see any eyes but mine and my closest friends), I would assume that anyone invested in the story won't ask me to change that. Equally, if there's a big profound event or character trait that some people don't like, I'm not likely to be changing it just because people ask. It's probably integral to how I see the character, and the characters are *mine*. But if there's something that everyone objects to- a stray implication, something that they say really doesn't fit with the rest of the character's portrayal, that sort of thing- then I might consider changing it. If nothing else, the fact that other people are reading whatever it is and there are enough of them to form a coherent audience base would say that I have accepted that I'm giving part of the story to my audience, to borrow the time of or contemplate as they see fit. I figure that if the point is valid, I owe them that. Or, if they give me a suggestion about "write such and such story, for character development, it would fit them much better than such and such", then I'll probably take the suggestion because the character is mine, but some of the character's time is for the audience, to give them something, to spread a certain ideal or feeling or whatever. The audience, in that case, has a right to give me a kick in the pants and a startoff.
Of course, the fact that most of this is me saying "I'll take audience suggestions if I feel like it" is kind of unhelpful. But the thing is, the characters are mine entirely- I'm not trying to write characters that belong to other people (except in the story with my author avatar as the main character, but those bits would probably be edited out anyway). So I'm not intruding on already established territory and trying to make my mark on a small and established character interpretation. If I were, I would definitely welcome input from the fanbase, and especially from the original creator(s). The fans would have to have a well supported point, because fanon can get in the way of open-minded creativity sometimes, but their opinion should have some weight. The original creator should be someone with at least a certain "veto power" on the intrinsic aspects of the story and chracters. If it were my works being used as source material, there would be certain instrinsic aspects that I would be pretty much uncompromising on. People messing up those would be fairly heartbreaking for me. The original creators are the ones who 'own' the characters, and though there are aspects that are probably open to interpretation, the important essence of the character should be preserved. I figure that if I'd like people to give me that much, that doing the same for others is their just due.
An important thing to consider is that video games generally cost $60 at release, sight unseen.
For me, that's about a day's wages, spent on something I literally don't know if I'm going to love, hate, or fall asleep during.

Beyond that, when you've got an entry in an existing series, it needs to be consistent with what's come before. No matter who's writing, drafting, whatever. If the people making a thing can't or won't do that, they have no reason to complain if the people who loved the work before hate it now, and no reason to expect that a new audience will like it any better.

So, yeah, if you're expecting to make money off of a thing, you HAVE to keep in mind the expectations of the people you're planning to sell to.
Well said.
Karpyshyn wrote a story about fighting an eldritch abomination that no one else believes exists.
In ME3, Shepard didn't have to fight the Reapers: They were just looking for John Connor.
Thefastmaster Featured By Owner Apr 23, 2012
There isn't much to say by me except for one thing: For all those things they have done, Mass Effect 3 cannot be considered as art.
If it should be really the artistic vision from the creator of the story, he should be there till the end (and as we know the original writer wasn't).
If you want to keep your artistic vision, you stay true to the ending you have planned first (and as we know from the script leak the ending was completely different and good).
You stay true to the theme and the climat that the story had and don't introduce suddenly something at the end just like that, because you found no other way to explain things you just couldn't, because, there again, you are not the original creator.
As an artist you don't create something so important like a side character, that goes with you along the whole story and then cut it out and sell it only as an extra with the collectors edition. Either the story is finished with or without him. Imagine Rowling putting Ron just as an extra to the Harry Potter-Series with the words "He's nice to have, but not so important". These are not a true artist's words.
And you don't make something hush-hush like the face of someone like Tali, and just take one photoshoped stockimage without even looking closer at it or maybe putting some more work into it, and hoping no fan will find this image anywhere else.

As a conclusion, this isn't art, its just a product from a huge bunch from people just to please their fans (and making money) from the beginning on. Maybe some of them used their artistic vision, imagination and skill, but as a whole this is a product like a car or washmashine, and it came with some promises, that weren't true, and they knew it when telling them us, because this product was already finished. So yes, the customers have their right to demand something better in this case.
sasquatsch73 Featured By Owner Apr 23, 2012
we may disagree with some major aspects of an artform, storytelling and so on, but we should definitely respect the creators decisions and the artwork itself and let it as it has been intentionally created. We shall discuss about it, share thoughts, feelings, ideas, and why not giving a feedback....only for a better future.
sasquatsch73 Featured By Owner Apr 23, 2012
we may disagree with some major aspects of an artform, storytelling and so on, but we should definitely respect the creators decisions and the artwork itself and let it as it has been intentionally created. We shall discuss about it, share thoughts, feelings, ideas, and why not giving a feedback....only for a better future.
randomfun12 Featured By Owner Apr 23, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
In Harry Potter 6, Draco used "Expelliarmus" on Dumbledore and disarmed him, thereby making Draco the owner of the wand, because the wand's logic is that whoever disarms the owner becomes the next owner.

Remember when in Harry Potter 7, Ron, Hermione and Harry were all trapped at Malfoy Manor with Draco, Lucius, Bellatrix and the other Death Eaters. Then Dobby came along and saved them from the dungeon and Apparated them out of there. However before Dobby getting them out of there, Harry had a fight with Draco and took his wand off him. The wand thought this was a form of disarmament, and so, using the wand's logic, Harry became the next owner since Draco was the previous one and he disarmed him. So when Voldemort tried to kill Harry with the Elder Wand, it wouldn't kill Harry because Voldy hadn't disarmed Harry, and so Harry survived the Killing Curse.

Hope that Explains it.
Stejae81 Featured By Owner Apr 23, 2012
The TMNT storyline had already been testing by far too many guest artists during the first run in the 80s. The creators went on extended hiatus and the publisher allowed one guest artist after another to try their hand. The art was fine, and the different interpretations were alright, but they were not canon, they did not advance the storyline, and eventually the series was cancelled presumably because fans got tired of not having the art and story that originally drew them in. Whether my presumption is true or not for other fans, it was for me. Every time I'd read an interview with Eastman and Laird, they'd hint at returning to the title, and then it wouldn't happen. Then Donatello became a cyborg, and Raphael got blinded in one eye...what?
JazzsLyric Featured By Owner Apr 23, 2012
I can understand an artist wanting the freedom to self express their take on an art form already done. But to take a story that has a crystal clear cannon rule (such as in TMNT with them being Mutants) and throwing that out the window, you are not only insulting a fan base that has existed for a few decades or more but you also are out right spitting in the face of the original creators. Bay has already made it clear that he will do what he wants with other artist creations when he totally ripped up the TF universe by seriously altering core personalities of major characters. The only way to keep Micheal Bay and others from destroying well know and loved stories and characters is probably to boycott. Though that won't totally help when others who have no knowledge of the history of said stories or character will partake of them regardless. Point being anyone who supported the comical destruction of classic eighties tv shows with movies that were beyond stupid with the extra humor ( ie: Dukes of Hazard, Starsky and Hutch, etc.) While some are to young to remember the original form and might enjoy the new form, alas those of who do remember will ask why good stories were destroyed in the name of the hollywood cash cow when they could have done just as well or better keeping truer to the original form. Some of these remakes (whether they be of old movies and tv shows or books) are down right insulting in their degradation if said stories.
AquilaSol Featured By Owner Apr 23, 2012  Professional General Artist
As a writer, I've had readers request a change of endings and details quite often. I do not always do exactly as they ask, but their opinions are certainly included in my considerations.

For example, a character which dies in a specific chapter, but turns out to be quite loved amongst readers. While they may ask for me to change the scene entirely and let him/her live, whilst I find my version to fit better in my story, I would consider changing it to put the character in a comatose state until a later chapter. Not only does this please the readers and gives them a feeling of being included in the process, it also opens up new venues for me to consider.

Sometimes, a reader has an idea you did not, which turns out to be exactly the pointer to where you wanted to go.
matt-adlard Featured By Owner Apr 23, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I think in all things a balance must be found between both the consumer and the creator. This is seen no more so than in fan art and its ilk. However if you have a solid foundation of say TMNT and you are going to make changes then look at the source material and learn from it so that if you do follow the third option its with DNA from the first two concepts of original and fan based works and theories.

Sorry didn't proof read before clicking
matt-adlard Featured By Owner Apr 23, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I think in all things a balance must be found between both the consumer and the creator. This is seen no more so than in fan art and its ilk. However if you have a solid foundation of say TMNT and you are going to make changes then look at the source material and learn from it so that if you do fret the third option its with dan from the first two concepts of original and fan based works and theories.
S-Raptor Featured By Owner Apr 23, 2012  Professional General Artist
Short explanation: the Romulans altered the "past" before Spock got to the "present" of the movie, thus erasing the "future" that we all knew.
LEMOnz07 Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I agree and I understand where you're coming from.

The last part, I think maybe. This whole commotion is big; people change their ideas all the time, either small corrections or massive revamps. Take Spider-Man 3 for example. Most people didn't like it (I did though.), so many people hated it enough for Sony decided to reboot the series. I don't know if the Hulk (2003) movie was re-booted for the same reason though.
azumitaiko Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012
You're very welcome. Always listen to fans; because you might find something in there you really like. But never let it hinder your plans for your vision. It'll be your downfall.
haroldcabezas Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012
theavatarhouse Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
i know everyone can't like every feature in a game. but after i paid for da:o not once but twice, ps3 and pc.

it would have been nice if they wouldn't have ignored my cry for help. when i went on the forums to try and find some way to get the game stable for more then 10 mins. i wasn't asking for the world, just advice or some decency to listen when i asked over and over. 2 years later i got help from someone on youtube.

so bioware couldn't care enough to fix their game. i had no idea how it would run on my computer. and over 2 years i have pumped over 1,000$ into trying to fix this mess, and in between buying the game and getting help from youtube. bioware didn't give two shits. and i'm not ungrateful for the help, i nearly cried seeing the game run smoothly for the first time since i started playing it. i never thought i would see that game run decently ever on anything i owned.

it's good that software and mods exist but it shouldn't come to the consumer having no choice but to fix their product. and the bad thing is i do enjoy the game, and i was doing everything i could find to get it to run long enough to actually enjoy it. all that happened was i lost the better part of 2 years time.

as a result i don't give input to game companies, i don't ever expect them to listen, regardless of what company or how big the company is. i don't waste my time anymore. because i have no doubt i can solve a problem in a game before bioware would bother to reply to the topic.
sky-commander Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
i say if you have an emotional attachment to something (like ME3) and a majority are unstisfied then a change should be made but if only the minority are complaining then let them. art is all great to interpret but if you are selling it you do need to adapt (again like ME3) to your market or you will fail. that is economics 101, right below supply and demand
HeirXOfXShadows Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
thanx, i guess people got their way and now they probably feel even more entitled cuz they gave them what they wanted
maylin86 Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I like what you said about how you deal with making your webcomic. I've also seen comics, shows and games that were very popular without the audience having a chance for input until they came out and were finished being viewed by the public.

As for the webcomic, I have also considered starting one but I didn't want the ideas, reasons or stories I would want to create to go straight out the window due to what the viewers want to see. But I also feel bad keeping the story all to myself or what other artists consider being selfish.

I grew up learning it's good to write your own stories to keep the viewer on their toes so that they can't figure out what's going on until the very end. I like this method myself just because I like being surprised whether the ending was good, bad or left hanging. I don't like the idea of viewers having so much input that they may know what's going on every step of the way, I feel too much input would defeat me creating a story I want to share. Your strategy of giving a little just so the viewers come back for more to see is a perfect balance. I think I feel better about how to go about creating a comic now. Thanks for your input in this journal entry. =) :la:
marcuszoner Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
o, I am still confused on this matter. Was the disarming the one during dueling practice? or was it some other time?
QuirkyDigit Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012
We all know that it's generally a vocal minority who gets heard, and very seldom do they represent the opinions of the majority of fans. I have yet to play ME3, but I plan to (just been too busy recently) and whether I enjoy the ending or not I will accept it for what it is, and move on with my life. Having rewrites after the fact is insulting to the people who enjoyed it or were at least satisfied (which may well be the majority of players) and it's a huge additional expense for the developer which is frankly unjustified unless they release it as DLC which would just cause more whining. George Lucas went back and tried to 'fix' Star Wars and look how that turned out...
When your child throws a tantrum do you give them exactly what they want? I certainly hope not, and to me this is one big tantrum. If you don't like it don't play it, it's that simple.
BerkiePA88 Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012
The concept is the same, but what I am considering is on a grand scale. Ideally you will give feedback on a world. Professionals take that feedback consider it if its good they will keep it. If its bad they will try to comprise with you..

They make the game. You purchase the game. You identify your idea or feedback that you gave to the professional, and if you feel that the idea could be modified. You go back online and make changes, and when the storyline continues either for a sequel game or a comic book extension your changes will be included.

The difference between beta versions and my idea is that the communication is transparent, and a actual game maker will know you and your ideas, and use it. So basically you will have more influence and control to story elements and if you want more control and influence you may have to pay in like microtransacations. its a working concept that I have in my head.

Also, typically game developers do beta versions so they could test and check for bugs. More specifically, say if you had a character idea for Fable. Game developers like it. They use it. Character is popular, and they want to do comics now. Do you think you will have the opportunity for feedback in the comic book? Probably not.
soulartist28 Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012
I realize that fans can get emotionally involved in fiction and fantasy. Still, those who voice their displeasure about certain creative decisions have much too much time on their hands.

On the flip side. If you want to please your audience, then that's a decision too, as long as you do it on purpose—not out of fear.
deviantART muro drawing Comment Drawing
JuanJRC Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012
ok this is a very clear subject that affect comsumers and producers and is very sad that so few people are reading this becouse to get an opinion from an audience you have to capture his atention, the future of storytelling is a very serious issue becouse it mold the way we live and see the world. There are less people who read every single day and unlees there is like a video version of this online there is no more we can do to have and insight in what this acticle drive us to. So we are only end with answers that are limited to say no or yes becouse of the lack of opinion and I think 3068 comments doenst reflect nothing,I will show this article to my friends and family to inform them about this becouse they care and there opinion will made a more clear path for me, Im very curious about what the outcome will be about this issue. sorry for my bad english im a student from peru and there is so little i can do about this important theme but i can and i will do what i can so the voice of the people can be heard and not just fill the pocket of the film and videogame industries with money becouse they believe they have to make something to sell them something to transcend.
Daakusutepsu Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012
I think the fans are 'entitled' as some refer to us. If a game or movie isn't quite up to the standards I'm expecting or I don't believe it is worth its opening price, I either won't pay for it at all, download it for free or severely discounted price, or turn my nose up at it. If automobiles were designed each year to only come with a 5-gallon tanks and people expressed their opinions and those opinions were ignored, the market for 5-gallon cars would disappear and the Government would have to spend our hard earned tax dollars on another buy out that the idiotic big industry doesn't deserve because they didn't listen to their market demographic.

Although, I seriously doubt the Government will offer video game or movie companies buyouts even though, those media industries consistently earn more per year than pretty much any other domestic product and they're infinitely more economical to export than cars, textiles, and other crap we send to other countries.

So if the people paying for your crap aren't satisfied with it before it is released, only the fanboys will pay for it... and fanboys usually don't equal a large enough market share to make back what you pay into the product.

As a digital artist, if there's no one out there who wants to see or buy my product, then I'm only a hobby artist, and I don't want to be an artist whose work is only viewed by the artist.
Vali-Ent Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012
These two issues are not the same at all. Once a game is completed, it's done; if you were disappointed by the ending, then wait for the next installment.

However, if a rumor of the direction of a project disappoints before it could even be experienced, it should send a message to the producers to get on the ball. If it has a disappointing ending is in material when the story itself isn't even the same.
nazia-fnb Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012  Student Digital Artist
"I cannot see their passion in this work..." I totally agree with each and everything you commented on ME3 here... the devs at Bioware are now just an extension of EA's commercial minded bullies... after they joined EA, their games' quality hit rock bottom... :(
Moonsetta Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
Whether companies care or not about the audience, I don't know either. Truthfully, after they've bought the rights, they can do whatever they want, they don't HAVE to care if we like or not. People will flock to it just because of the recognized name. Then once you buy it and find you don't like it, they don't have to care either because you've already paid them.

Then rights are sold again and people flock to the name again, hoping this next person will do better. You see it/read it and then hate it again. What do they care? You've already paid them. Rights are sold again and it cycles onward.

1. As an artist. No, I’m not much of an artist anyways.

As a writer yes, but not to rewrite directly, but rather make alternate endings or spin-offs based on similar ideas and time lines.

As a reader or viewer? Yes, I’m the consumer purchasing these books and paying to see these movies, if they want my money the creation better either please me or piss me off. I’m fine with either. It’s when they, out of the blue, contradict facts that I spent years trying to accept as cannon that makes me lose interest. I'm thankful that I don't get caught up in that cycle.

2. As a writer I feel it’s more based on analyzing the psychology of the audience and possessing a willingness to compromise, as well as an ability to be vague while alluding to the old beloved concepts and new designs as well. It’s like I can look at my target audience and say, "You like the old, you like the new-let’s have everyone meet in the middle."

Though it means more work for me personally as the author in the end, it gives me a neutral stance to where I can ravel off new and old tales, as well as please opposite sides of a debate or argument.

3. Yes, I would make changes for my audience. They make me popular, they spread my name, they inflate my ego and pay me. While I will write what they want, I never swerve from my own personal ideas. I simply write them both. More work on my part, but it helps me keep an appreciation for original cannons and feed ideas to the newer generation in unison. In fact, in many situations I find a way to blend the old, new and my ideas that leaves all sides satisfied.

4. Hmm, I don’t think I could answer that without contradicting myself.

5. ME3. I’ve never been a big fan but I’ve played it and I’ve heard uproar here and there and everywhere too. Whether the fans being angry will make them buy the next incarnation with the same name in hope that someone heard their voices or are simply warming up to new ideas, I can’t be sure.

As for TMNT, I’m going to shy away from commenting since I’m bound to be biased based on my past devotion to the fandom.
RyeSye Featured By Owner Apr 21, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Extremely informative. Will hang onto this
HS11 Featured By Owner Apr 21, 2012  Professional Filmographer
Working in the film industry you usually tend to have your story then screenplay read by a different groups pf persons connected to you or the project, sometimes chnages do happen and sometimes not, depends what stage the project is and the story you're telling. However, for fanbased movie franchise, comics, games etc, I can see the difficulty between fans and the makers of those projects - once has to find a balance. However, sometimes too many cooks spoil the broth saying comes into mind, and I think you the filmamker, game creator has to stick to their guns. HS.
biggabang Featured By Owner Apr 21, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
not much of a gamer, but I can add this to this storyline. A quote by Henry Ford: "If I built what the people wanted, I would have built them a faster horse"
Add a Comment:

:icontechgnotic: More from techgnotic

Featured in Collections

Journals by HallowGazer

News and Journals by trevg

Journal News by NekoLiliah

More from DeviantArt


Submitted on
April 3, 2012
Submitted with Writer


628,545 (10 today)
2,387 (who?)