Can fans really ever be pleased?
- Thread starter Pink Gregory
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I don't think so unless I manifested a second personalty that knew about this sight for 2 years longer then I did. Or you. Or both of us or whatever. Do you have a cat named Eddie?BreakfastMan said:Probably for the same reason I did: you heard it was much improved from the first one. In fact, are you sure you aren't me? Your thoughts on Mass Effect and your love of Iron Maiden make me suspect that you are.Eddie the head said:Not even then I didn't like the first Mass Effect. But I liked 2 and 3. In fact why did I pick up 2?BreakfastMan said:All fans can only ever be pleased by the first game in a series. Beyond that, all bets are off.
If your measure for a reasonable fan-base is one that's universally reasonable I think you are always going to be disappointed. Try to focus on the median, or the best of the bunch. Every demographic has idiots. Except the genius demographic. Anyway, try not to worry about the idiots.
And then I realized "All fans can" =/= 'Fans can', anyway.
I was going to argue that I don't just like the first game in every series. But then the very next thing that got brought up was Mass Effect, so I think I'll just let that one stand for now.Eddie the head said:Not even then I didn't like the first Mass Effect. But I liked 2 and 3. In fact why did I pick up 2?BreakfastMan said:All fans can only ever be pleased by the first game in a series. Beyond that, all bets are off.
And then I realized "All fans can" =/= 'Fans can', anyway.
fans are very difficult to please especially fanboys no matter what genre they might be fanboys of.
however there are a few exceptions. take for example call of duty fanboys. they are incredibly easy to please. no matter what shit activision and treyarch serve them every year they eat it like there's no tomorrow. lol
however there are a few exceptions. take for example call of duty fanboys. they are incredibly easy to please. no matter what shit activision and treyarch serve them every year they eat it like there's no tomorrow. lol
I am a big Halo fan, and I'm immensely pleased with Halo 4. I also had unfair high expections of Portal 2, and that game managed to surpass even that.
Then again, I don't view myself as a 'true Halo fan', and don't bring up Halo 2 everytime someone mentions the series, so I'm probably not the kind of fan this topic is about.
Then again, I don't view myself as a 'true Halo fan', and don't bring up Halo 2 everytime someone mentions the series, so I'm probably not the kind of fan this topic is about.
Yes, anyone who says otherwise is a mock-intellectual ass, or I am an alien.
Sequels that sated me 100%, even with how "impossibly high" my standards apparently are:
Mario 64
Castlevania:SotN
Breath of Fire 3
Super Smash Bros Brawl
Mega Man X2
Resident Evil 2
Mortal Kombat 3
Super Metroid
Resident Evil 4
Legend of Zelda: A link to the past
Granted, later sequels to these same games didn't quite scratch every itch, and some were just outright abysmal, but the point is that it IS possible to make fans happy. It just requires doing a good job and being enthusiastic while you do it. I wouldn't change a single thing about any of the games above, in fact I'd go as far as say they are perfect and everything I wanted them to be.
Sequels that sated me 100%, even with how "impossibly high" my standards apparently are:
Mario 64
Castlevania:SotN
Breath of Fire 3
Super Smash Bros Brawl
Mega Man X2
Resident Evil 2
Mortal Kombat 3
Super Metroid
Resident Evil 4
Legend of Zelda: A link to the past
Granted, later sequels to these same games didn't quite scratch every itch, and some were just outright abysmal, but the point is that it IS possible to make fans happy. It just requires doing a good job and being enthusiastic while you do it. I wouldn't change a single thing about any of the games above, in fact I'd go as far as say they are perfect and everything I wanted them to be.
Not yet I don't... You could be me from the future, who traveled back in time! :OEddie the head said:I don't think so unless I manifested a second personalty that knew about this sight for 2 years longer then I did. Or you. Or both of us or whatever. Do you have a cat named Eddie?BreakfastMan said:Probably for the same reason I did: you heard it was much improved from the first one. In fact, are you sure you aren't me? Your thoughts on Mass Effect and your love of Iron Maiden make me suspect that you are.Eddie the head said:Not even then I didn't like the first Mass Effect. But I liked 2 and 3. In fact why did I pick up 2?BreakfastMan said:All fans can only ever be pleased by the first game in a series. Beyond that, all bets are off.
I don't think so. Fans are people and people have different tastes. Even concerning the same thing, they like different aspects about it. Maybe you can make the majority of your fans happy, but not every single person.
For example, I call myself a fan of the Halo series because I like the setting, characters and the story (yes, I know the Halo universe is not that complex at some places). My boyfriend on the other hand plays it mostly for the multiplayer. So concerning the latter, if something gets changed in a bad way, I'm not that outraged like he will because I can still enjoy my singleplayer experience.
Buuuut it seems that we can both say the current Halo title is a good game. Which pleases me, because we can fangirl together about it.
Also, since when is fanboyism a bad thing? As long as it involves constructive criticism if somethings clearly out of place, and nobody gets insulted because he or she doesn't like X, it's OK in my point of view. Or maybe my definition is just a different one, whatever. :> People who don't get that are no true fans.
For example, I call myself a fan of the Halo series because I like the setting, characters and the story (yes, I know the Halo universe is not that complex at some places
). My boyfriend on the other hand plays it mostly for the multiplayer. So concerning the latter, if something gets changed in a bad way, I'm not that outraged like he will because I can still enjoy my singleplayer experience. Buuuut it seems that we can both say the current Halo title is a good game. Which pleases me, because we can fangirl together about it.
Also, since when is fanboyism a bad thing? As long as it involves constructive criticism if somethings clearly out of place, and nobody gets insulted because he or she doesn't like X, it's OK in my point of view. Or maybe my definition is just a different one, whatever. :> People who don't get that are no true fans.
I've been very pleased at how the Sonic franchise has been slowly, but surely, improving and instilling a little more confidence in Sonic Team. I still feel that the series is a ways away from achieving true greatness, but each game so far has proved that better games are around the corner.
Individuals yes, the vast majority/entirety of fans? No. There will be always be someone to disagree. Someone will always be unhappy no matter what you do. All you can do is make as many fans happy as possible and leave it at that.
Which is more or less what I wanted to say, except with a small addition for clarification.skywolfblue said:
I believe you can please most fans. I believe it's possible some fanbases may be legitimately unpleasable. Not saying it's true, just affording the possibility. But in terms of pleasing the fanbase, it depends on what you mean. You will never please ALL the fans, but you will be able to please most of them most of the time.
Someone who overlooks every merit and only notes all perceived slights and negatives probably isn't a fan, they're more likely to simply be haters and trolls trying to stir shit.
'A' fan can be pleased, as can many fans,
but fans (of a high profile item) can't all be pleased as there's no requirements to becoming a fan, so haters and trolls can class themselves as fans and claim their unhappiness.
Typically a true fan would only point out their loves flaws with the goal of having the flaws fixed, not to discredit.
You can find many examples of haters in the D3 meta-critic reviews, basically any red review is a hater; they may have once been a fan but now they hate the franchise blindly.
'A' fan can be pleased, as can many fans,
but fans (of a high profile item) can't all be pleased as there's no requirements to becoming a fan, so haters and trolls can class themselves as fans and claim their unhappiness.
Typically a true fan would only point out their loves flaws with the goal of having the flaws fixed, not to discredit.
You can find many examples of haters in the D3 meta-critic reviews, basically any red review is a hater; they may have once been a fan but now they hate the franchise blindly.
depends.
games: no. never, we always think it could have been better
movies: 50/50. either we start of happy leaving the theater and then we gradually get more disappointed. or we say the book was better
music: yes. here we are pretty much suck up to our favorite artist
book: we enjoy one book by the author and then try to judge the others as that one. we still like the books but we're not totally pleased
comics: ai ai ai ai ai. did you really just ask if comic book geeks ever become pleased with something?
games: no. never, we always think it could have been better
movies: 50/50. either we start of happy leaving the theater and then we gradually get more disappointed. or we say the book was better
music: yes. here we are pretty much suck up to our favorite artist
book: we enjoy one book by the author and then try to judge the others as that one. we still like the books but we're not totally pleased
comics: ai ai ai ai ai. did you really just ask if comic book geeks ever become pleased with something?
Yes, "true fans" "fanatics" however you want to put it can be and often are satisfied. It doesn't seem that way because satisfaction is the "end" of the cycle. I see this in my work all the time. This is the scenario; you put out a product that 100 people buy. 99 are completely satisfied with the product, and 1 is not. The question is "who do you hear back from?"
In a sample like that, you will only hear again from the dissatisfied customer. Industry studies (in my industry) find that for every 1 person who calls us with negative feedback there are anywhere from 100 to 1000 people who are satisfied with the exact same product. We're told to be positive about those negative calls because the more of them we receive, the larger our audience must be.
Now on forums and such the difference won't usually be as stark, but I do believe that for every posted naysayer there are at least 2 folks not commenting who are totally happy about the product. Videogame, tv show, or what have you. Looking at the forums over on IMDB one would get the impression that the NBC show "Revolution" was a steaming pile that people only watched to have something to ***** about. But are they right? No, E! just ranked it as one of this year's breakout successes. What you see in online forum negativity isn't rational criticism (for the most part.) It's people who couldn't keep a check on their expectations, people who have a persecution complex, juveniles who don't know any better (and that's not a shot at age, some young folk learn early and some old folk don't learn at all,) prima donnas, and people with low self esteem looking to fit in with the crowd of all of the above because they are the only ones participating.
And it gets worse over highly anticipated material. Using novels as an example; George RR Martin took 6 or 7 years to write his last 2 novels. By the time they came out expectations were huge. And which of his books were the most complained about and the least well received? The last two, and that's no coincidence and it has little to do with the overall quality of the product. But again for every person online whining about how "the series has gone downhill" two others go online and see all the vitriol and just don't bother getting involved. They just shut the book and find something to do while waiting for the next.
Or to use one last scenario, think back to all of the "customer survey" print outs on a receipt you've gotten. How many do you actually fill out? And one last question, are you more likely to fill one out if you are pleased with or dissatisfied with the service somehow? Most (and I'm no exception) may fill it out if we are happy with the service, but will almost always fill it out if something went wrong. It all goes back to "satisfaction is the end of the cycle" so yes fans can be and are more often than not pleased. If all the negativity depresses you (it does me sometimes) just remember that there are almost always more positive people than all of the negative shouters... you just don't hear them.
In a sample like that, you will only hear again from the dissatisfied customer. Industry studies (in my industry) find that for every 1 person who calls us with negative feedback there are anywhere from 100 to 1000 people who are satisfied with the exact same product. We're told to be positive about those negative calls because the more of them we receive, the larger our audience must be.
Now on forums and such the difference won't usually be as stark, but I do believe that for every posted naysayer there are at least 2 folks not commenting who are totally happy about the product. Videogame, tv show, or what have you. Looking at the forums over on IMDB one would get the impression that the NBC show "Revolution" was a steaming pile that people only watched to have something to ***** about. But are they right? No, E! just ranked it as one of this year's breakout successes. What you see in online forum negativity isn't rational criticism (for the most part.) It's people who couldn't keep a check on their expectations, people who have a persecution complex, juveniles who don't know any better (and that's not a shot at age, some young folk learn early and some old folk don't learn at all,) prima donnas, and people with low self esteem looking to fit in with the crowd of all of the above because they are the only ones participating.
And it gets worse over highly anticipated material. Using novels as an example; George RR Martin took 6 or 7 years to write his last 2 novels. By the time they came out expectations were huge. And which of his books were the most complained about and the least well received? The last two, and that's no coincidence and it has little to do with the overall quality of the product. But again for every person online whining about how "the series has gone downhill" two others go online and see all the vitriol and just don't bother getting involved. They just shut the book and find something to do while waiting for the next.
Or to use one last scenario, think back to all of the "customer survey" print outs on a receipt you've gotten. How many do you actually fill out? And one last question, are you more likely to fill one out if you are pleased with or dissatisfied with the service somehow? Most (and I'm no exception) may fill it out if we are happy with the service, but will almost always fill it out if something went wrong. It all goes back to "satisfaction is the end of the cycle" so yes fans can be and are more often than not pleased. If all the negativity depresses you (it does me sometimes) just remember that there are almost always more positive people than all of the negative shouters... you just don't hear them.
Funny you mention that, because most 'fans' of the Super Smash Bros. series hated Brawl. Going so far as to mess with it so that it basically becomes Melee with Brawl's engine and roster.xPixelatedx said:
Look up 'Project M' if you don't believe me.
Well as for Civ, V is the first in the series I've properly played. But I did spend an afternoon on IV and V mostly seems like a marked improvement to me.
As for games, or anything, in general, nope. If you change anything in a sequel people will complain. If you leave everything the same people will moan about lack of innovation. And no matter how thorough you are, there will always be one or two bugs, or a bit of substandard voice acting, or imbalances etc.
Even the closest to 'perfect' piece of media you can imagine would still not be to some people's tastes and would get the odd complaint.
As for games, or anything, in general, nope. If you change anything in a sequel people will complain. If you leave everything the same people will moan about lack of innovation. And no matter how thorough you are, there will always be one or two bugs, or a bit of substandard voice acting, or imbalances etc.
Even the closest to 'perfect' piece of media you can imagine would still not be to some people's tastes and would get the odd complaint.
Fans can never be pleased. In the older days of gaming, then yes, but these days the industry has grown larger, more diverse, and the internet provides a platform for everyones personal whims to be satisfied. When a favourite game series then deviates even slightly from this course, it is accused of losing touch with its consumer base or veering away from what it should really be.
Which of course, is bollocks.
Which of course, is bollocks.
I can think of a couple sequels that fans of the original universally liked, but I may have to go pretty far back in time.
The first two expansion packs to Civ4 were liked by fans of the original Civ4 (and even won over some Civ3 fans, who didn't like the vanilla civ 4).
Then there's sequels that are true classics like JA2, MOO2, BG2, HOMM3.
So you can please fans, provided your sequel doesn't cater to a different audience and you do a good job making it an improvement over the original.
The first two expansion packs to Civ4 were liked by fans of the original Civ4 (and even won over some Civ3 fans, who didn't like the vanilla civ 4).
Then there's sequels that are true classics like JA2, MOO2, BG2, HOMM3.
So you can please fans, provided your sequel doesn't cater to a different audience and you do a good job making it an improvement over the original.
"Hardcore" fans are obsessive. They feel as though their emotional investment lends itself to some form of ownership over a topic. This makes it "personal" when a game is released and they find themselves disappointed.
Then there is speculation. As soon as a title is announced fans of the title start to generate many ideas about the finished product, including dreams and wishes, long before it's in its finished state. This means most of the expectations of the game are pure fantasy and delusional.
Finally you have nostalgia. The oh so common argument that games were better when we were younger. In some respects that maybe true (there is something to say for simplicity), but I think people derive way too definitive conclusions from that. In the space of 20~ years there are only a dozen games that I still go back to play. A lot of the games I replay are less then a decade old. The rest, even games I have fond memories of, are outdated and tired.
That's a long time for only a handful of Iconic and still easily relevant titles...
Even going retro (for me, that would be playing games before my time), there are still only a handful of games I could add to that list, even if I increase the time span to 25+ years.
In some folks minds, they look at a nostalgic decade and see it as being a holy grail of creativity... then look at this moment and see Warfighter and go "what the fuck is this shit". They forget that in their Holy Grail of a decade we also had Daikatana, or ET, or Superman 64. They also forget the hundreds of throwaway mindnumbing titles that we only ever rented.
Fans are an unreliable source for gauging the quality of a game. I have effectively tuned out the rants of fans at this point.
Then there is speculation. As soon as a title is announced fans of the title start to generate many ideas about the finished product, including dreams and wishes, long before it's in its finished state. This means most of the expectations of the game are pure fantasy and delusional.
Finally you have nostalgia. The oh so common argument that games were better when we were younger. In some respects that maybe true (there is something to say for simplicity), but I think people derive way too definitive conclusions from that. In the space of 20~ years there are only a dozen games that I still go back to play. A lot of the games I replay are less then a decade old. The rest, even games I have fond memories of, are outdated and tired.
That's a long time for only a handful of Iconic and still easily relevant titles...
Even going retro (for me, that would be playing games before my time), there are still only a handful of games I could add to that list, even if I increase the time span to 25+ years.
In some folks minds, they look at a nostalgic decade and see it as being a holy grail of creativity... then look at this moment and see Warfighter and go "what the fuck is this shit". They forget that in their Holy Grail of a decade we also had Daikatana, or ET, or Superman 64. They also forget the hundreds of throwaway mindnumbing titles that we only ever rented.
Fans are an unreliable source for gauging the quality of a game. I have effectively tuned out the rants of fans at this point.