The fanbase was generally REALLY GROSS about Mass Effect 3. Not so much the "change the ending" people, as they were frustrating from an artistic integrity sensibility, but those who spat bilious venom towards the staff of BioWare. I'll remind you that a ridiculous number of people were screaming hate speech at the game's primary writer about a month before the game released. Enough felt like it was enough.
You generally lose the ability to claim artistic integrity, when you show you have none.
When your game has as much DLC as ME3 art should never even be mentioned.
I have no idea what point you're trying to make with that statement?
He claimed ME3 ending hate was frustrating from a artistic point of view. I say artictistic integrity was was never part of that game.
My point was mostly to say that the ME3 issues were more with the people screaming hate speech towards BioWare and rating EA worse than Monsanto Bean Corporation (who infamously make an effort to monopolize bean distrubution in the States by any means necessary) and Bank of America's illegal foreclosure of homes. My point is that issuing death threats and hurling misogyny at the game's lead writer a month before the game's release was disgusting, and that set up a bad relationship between Mass Effect's more belligerent fanbase and the press.
But I'll take the bait. Let's talk art.
I don't think any of the DLC is absolutely core to the ME3 experience, though I think it enhances it more drastically than any DLC beforehand. I know that if I hadn't had Shadow Broker, I wouldn't love ME2 nearly as much as I do. I would never have gotten to spend time with Liara and keep that relationship meaningful throughout the franchise.
Things cost money. Unless you're arguing that all art should cost the same amount always, the "cost" of the item doesn't detract from the extreme amount of work the writers, artists, graphic designers, sound engineers, voice actors, gameplay designers, and further staff of BioWare put into making content worth playing.
You can dislike ME3, fine. But the DLC doesn't make the original game any less relevant, and they have by far created one of the most analyzed artworks in videogames. And not just for its business model, or outrage over DLC, but for the literally hundreds of well-written essays, blog posts, and podcasts discussing the game's narrative, ending, and themes, whether from the perspective of fury over disappointment or satisfaction.
But EVEN IF ME3's not up to your artistic standard (which seems to be set by quality rather than medium, but that's another tack to pull) it's artistically problematic because it sets a precedent where the video game fanbase can get outraged and demand the change of an ending, and then it succeeds. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing (it took them ten years to release a version of Blade Runner anybody cared about, and the LOTR extended editions are obviously well-loved) but it disturbed some of the press and the industry. It's worth noting that the obsessive use of phrases like "hold the line" made the entire movement seem more Asperger's-y and neurotic, perhaps revealing a bit too much about the video game fanbase for people to ever be comfortable.
It's worth noting that I adored ME3 by the end of the year, despite its flaws (which are significant and several.) But I can totally understand why people dislike the game and its business model. It's still art either way, though.
ME3 DLC is shit. The game is shit. The redo endings were shit. The way the gaming press acted about it was shit. It's all a shit sandwich and the consumer is asked to eat it and like it or they are entitled cry babies. Bioware is nothing. It's all EA and has been for years. Let it go. The Bioware that used to be doesn't exist.