Gamers shouting so loud they get their way, is it a good thing?

[Crops]

Now the above sounds great right? The fans getting the devs to change the game to how they want it to be. But here in lies the problem:
-Was it a majority vote from gamers?
-Was it just the fact that a small vocal group got it changed?

Even if it was only a minority that voted against the design, the majority of voters were against it.

To clarify; Say 2% of your audience doesn't like something and complains, and 1% responds to those complaints saying it does like the change.
In this (completely made up) scenario, 97% of the audience doesn't even care enough to join the discussion.
If keeping the new design disappoints more people than changing it does, you might as well change it. After all, it's just a character skin.

Now if a change has a much bigger impact on the game, I'd ignore cries from the internet as much as possible.
Unless it gets to the point where the majority of your audience probably won't buy your game anymore because Mario decided to slit Bowser's throat in his sleep, rape and dump Peach and start a free-roaming genocide adventure through the mushroom kingdom in the next installment.

Then again... Maybe that will net you a whole new audience to complain about the shade of red you use.

 

[ohgodalex]

Gamers are the ones buying the games. It stands to reason that devs would give them a reason to continue doing so.

 

[Moriarty70]

Now we all know what's going to happen when the game comes out. People are going to complain that it's too similar to the old one. Every argument about this will lead back to the lack of change in the character.

You can't please all the people all the time and you can't please internet EVER!

 

[Zaik]

Honestly, I think the Cole in that video was a placeholder to begin with. It was a totally different person, didn't even look slightly the same. Wasn't just the hair and the face and the clothes, he seemed scrawnier.

Anyway, on topic, it has it's place. Like, for example, the Blizzard(or should i say activision?) RealID thing? That had no place happening ever. There was not one single good thing that would have come of that, and plenty of bad. The whole internet exploded in unison. I was waiting for the Internet Hate Machine to pull a Project Chanology in Irvine, CA, but they backed down before anything serious happened i guess.

 

[Hiphophippo]

You can please individuals. You can never please the majority.

All you can do is do your best.

 

[Unrulyhandbag]

In general no I don't think they should.

It's not the gamers idea, story and presentation and they really don't get a say. don't like the idea of a game? then go buy someone else's, maybe they make one that you will like.

inevitably games makers will try to understand what gamers want, but to allow them to decide the specifics?

In this case though it's hard to care; they were asked "can we still have the old character design please?" and seeing as it's just a hair model, some textures and has absolutely no bearing on the game it's hard to see why they shouldn't. personally I wouldn't but....

 

[BlackWidower]

I find the problem would come if the fans wanted something, but the developers wanted to try something new, and the investors said, "the fans want this, so give it to them." Then you're sacrificing originality for pleasing the fans. I'm against the idea. I think trying something new is a good thing. But many fear new things because change killed their parents in a dark alley or something. Sad.

 

[titaniumChampion]

-Was it a majority vote from gamers? I don't know how many people were really against it, but maybe Sucker Punch could've had a contest similar to Gears of War.
-Ultimately was this design re-change best for the game? I think if the community is upset by something and has a legitimate concern, you should pay attention since they are the fan base and the success of the project is in their control.
-Do gamers really know better than the Devs? Not really. I think if designers want a level or gameplay mechanic to be a certain way, they have the right to do so. If there is something that is thrown in there that doesn't enhance gameplay or ruins it, then the community has the right to voice their concerns.
-Will the majority of gamers, your average joes the people who likely never had a say in the matter as they potentially dont read gaming sites be unkowingly adversely effected? I don't think so. Those that didn't know about the controversy probably didn't care or simply care for the gameplay. As Yahtzee put it, you could come up with about 70% of all games ever with a short brown haired guy.

Ultimately I don't think this change is that bad. Listening to your fan base is crucial for success. Game devs should take feedback from everywhere in hopes of making the game as good as it can be. There should always be limits to what you allow, but suggestions are always welcome.

 

[Lucane]

Well the Original reason Cole got such a drastic overhaul in the 1st place was because of focus groups "likely people saying they play games or at least Infamous" saying they didn't like Cole's voice and appearance in the 1st game (personally I thought it was great look,though I wish he had the yellow jacket from the cover and/or a varied choice of clothing the more good/evil you got but nothing major or you could switch or something)

So it's not bad they listened to it's audience again to alter Coles look to a more unique (by modern games: lead white male characters stanards.) instead of the one that looks like it's apart of the crowd in trying to stand-out while actually looking like everyone else.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

Gamers shouting so loud they get their way, is it a good thing?

The example that brought about this weeks discussion can be found here:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/102303-Sucker-Punch-Kills-InFamous-2s-New-Cole
In short the PS3 exclusive, Infamous 2, main character looked fairly different from in the first game. The fans, or some of them at least cried foul and the developer listened and has promised to change the design accordingly.

Now the above sounds great right? The fans getting the devs to change the game to how they want it to be. But here in lies the problem:
-Was it a majority vote from gamers?
-Was it just the fact that a small vocal group got it changed?
-Ultimately was this design re-change best for the game?
-Do gamers really know better than the Devs?
-Will the majority of gamers, your average joes the people who likely never had a say in the matter as they potentially dont read gaming sites be unkowingly adversely effected?

Gamers ***** about the games they love ALL the time. Should Devs really listen? And if so to what degree?

Discuss!

Deeply ironic example, there; you really couldn't have it more backwards. The devs were listening to a vocal subset of fans when they changed Cole in the first place. By listening to other fans and changing Cole back, they're realigning the character with his original design.

Anyways, the answer to the question "Should devs listen to gamers?" is pretty obvious: if the devs are wrong, yes - and if the devs are right, no. Seems like a stupid solution, but it's definitely the correct one. Context is everything in these matters; there is no catch-all ruling on this one.

I think SuckerPunch! was mistaken in allowing purely subjective complaints to radically shift Cole's appearance and disposition. I also think Bethesda was mistaken in failing to address the many valid complaints regarding combat in their ES series.

The difference between a good dev and a great dev is knowing when to act on the feedback, and doing so in a way that serves the game and your fans simultaneously.

 

[Nigh Invulnerable]

Man, it's just a character model. I'm slightly mind boggled that people would complain about this. Just play the game and enjoy it. I personally get tired of people whining about minor aspects of games that devs listen to and change. If it's something significant, like a certain weapon or attack being horrendously overpowered that needs a change for game balance I can grasp that.

 

[Treeinthewoods]

For the little nitpicky things like a character skin it's not a bad idea to listen to the crowd, just be sure that it actually is a crowd not one lonely weirdo. For the major stuff, that would be like an author asking the public for feedback on how they should write their book. That would be silly and it insults the profession.

 

[Kagim]

On cosmetic things fine, whatever, i honestly didn't care about how Cole looked.

However when it comes to things like actual game mechanics they should tread carefully.

If Blizzard listened to the vocal minority for WoW WotLK would have Naxxramas at Heroic Lich King difficulty as normal, and it would require you clear every boss 25 times before your allowed to move on to the EoE. Which would require it was cleared 30 times. So on and so forth.

An entire old worlds zone of quests wouldn't even increase you by a single level thus forcing players to grind the same area for sixty hours.

level 1-10 would take three days of straight grinding.

No gear would drop except in raids, and only one if you down the last boss.

Dungeons would be a minimum for 15 players, raids 100.

Then, once this happens, and all the casual players quit. What was originally the small minority and is now the only players, would cry that the game is to hard.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

I find it strange how people are complaining that people were complaining. The new Cole looked awful and didn't even seem like the same Cole from the first game. Devs should listen to their fans, because when you alienate your fanbase for money, you make quick enemies out of everyone.

 

[inFAMOUSCowZ]

i just thought he looked too much like drake from uncharted, now if we could only do somethingabout that voice.....

 

[SonicWaffle]

People who ***** loudest and longest get what they want. Way of the world. I've heard people complain about games that won't be out for years to come, and they are already making pronouncements about how awesome it will be/how much it will suck.

The fact of the matter is, if developers don't listen and fuck up, we blame them for not listening to us. If they do listen, and the vocal minority convinces them to fuck it up, we still blame them for listening to the wrong people. Lose/lose scenario.

*COUGH*!religious and parents. *COUGH* religious and parents.

Sorry, I'm confused. Are you saying that;

- I have religious parents?
- You have religious parents?
- The developers have religious parents?
- I am a religious parent?
- Using some sort of very strained metaphor for...actually, no, I can't even see how that's a metaphor for anything.

 

[RadiusXd]

People who ***** loudest and longest get what they want. Way of the world. I've heard people complain about games that won't be out for years to come, and they are already making pronouncements about how awesome it will be/how much it will suck.

The fact of the matter is, if developers don't listen and fuck up, we blame them for not listening to us. If they do listen, and the vocal minority convinces them to fuck it up, we still blame them for listening to the wrong people. Lose/lose scenario.

*COUGH*!religious and parents. *COUGH* religious and parents.

Sorry, I'm confused. Are you saying that;

- I have religious parents?
- You have religious parents?
- The developers have religious parents?
- I am a religious parent?
- Using some sort of very strained metaphor for...actually, no, I can't even see how that's a metaphor for anything.

no, my point was these two groups make the most raquet about things till they get their way, or at least they try.
its quite annoying when they actually do, when they are in the extreme minority of course, it's like giving a kid having a tantrum exactly what they want.

 

[TerranReaper]

It's a double-edged sword, sometimes they know what's the right thing to do, sometimes not. I say a certain group should be designated in which they would know better.