Have gamers of today become prima donnas?

[Frybird]

As a whole, or as taken by the vocal minority (well, HOPEFULLY minority), Gamers on the internet are bitchy, unfair and highly inconsistent in thier judgement.

Gamers want innovation, but when a game comes around that does even the slightest thing different (See: Mirror's Edge, Beyond Good & Evil, Enslaved), no one will buy it. Instead, they ***** about how the game isn't THAT innovative, how the game mechanics aren't quite perfect (Guess what, MS Word 1.0 or Photoshop 1.0 weren't that perfect either) and how they don't get the value for thier money.
Instead, Titles like Call of Duty Black Ops sell like crazy...and even then gamers ***** about it for not being something new.

And even with games that gamers love, people actively search things to ***** about that "ruin" the game, and if the developers actually listen to the fans and patch up things, they probably ***** even more about it.

Just a few minutes ago i saw/read something about the cool AR Minigames included with the Nintendo 3Ds (look up the video, its gimmicky, but awesome), and all that readers could comment about is how long AR Game Concepts have been around and how lame Nintendo is etc..
I swear, if the entire mankind would behave like Gamers on the Internet, we'd still be riding around in horse carriages...

 

[Apollo45]

I don't think gamers have. You used the example of Dragon Age 2; you liked it, and that's cool. The fact of the matter is that many, many people didn't like it, for reasons that have been stated time and time again. It isn't a fact that it's a good game, because whether it's good or not is a matter of opinion. My personal opinion is that it's mediocre at best, but, again, that's my opinion. I can cite reasons why I believe so all day, and I'm entitled to those reasons just as you're entitled to yours.

Complimenting that, I don't think using one game as an example is very good evidence of gamers suddenly becoming ridiculously picky. Likewise, it's also unlikely that using a single game as en example is evidence of a company (DA2 and Bioware) bowing down to their "EA Overlords". As a community, we as gamers know what's been made to the quality that it should be and when it hasn't been. To stick with your example, I think that, whether or not you like it, you can agree that DA2 wasn't as good as it should have, or could have, been. And that's what the outburst was about.

To sum it up, there's a difference between being a prima donna and calling someone out on something. Complaining when a developer short changes us is a good thing; it keeps them honest.

 

[DolorousEdd]

In terms of substance and intensity of DA2, consider the prologue. Two people die, the Blight seems an inescapable threat. Yet the mourning is all stiff and formulaic, you don't know or care for the characters to begin with, the Blight seems more ricidulous and cartoonish than really threatening, your characters make silly super hero moves, and at the end we get saved by a granny with swinging hips. It's quite obviously crap.

 

[Smooth Operator]

On the internets people like to exaggerate, like Youtube noticed so long ago people will only ever rate something 1 or 5 stars, the same way people who liked DA2 even a little will go nuts announcing the best game ever made, and ones who didn't like it much will go into same extremes.

Then the big internets wars start, about elitists and console fanboys, and prima donnas,... because anyone who does not share our opinion should be burned at the stake!

My opinion: if DA1 with all it's content is a $60 game, then DA2 is worth $15 maybe $20, it is just not anywhere near the DA1 level.

 

[Silent Biohazard Solid]

These in particular are frequently reused maps, lackluster design structure, a disjointed main plot, excess junk loot due to the inability to equip your party, etc. If you compare what Guild War 2?s city offers to Kirkwall, the chastising is understandably, although your mileage may vary.

I'm not saying the game is perfect, but Dragon Age Origins had plenty of flaws as well. These included the (what I consider to be) outdated point and click style combat which was kind of clunky, and the graphics whch were incredibly sub-par for this generation. Especially since these are the same people that made Mass Effect, which looked and played great.

Point is, nothing is perfect. And honestly, I liked the 'disjointed' plot. It felt like playing three different plots, which actually made the game feel longer for me than Dragon Age Origins, which took me a long time, but frankly, it felt short because of lack of actual key events.
Same thing with Mass Effect, come to think of it. ME1, while it had one broad plot, it felt kind of short, since there were only a few key events. Whereas ME2 felt like it focused more on Companion missions, but actually felt longer because of how many there were.
But frankly, I think more games should have plots that are divided like Dragon Age 2. To have three major stories instead of like, a bunch of minor tasks under the umbrella of one giant story arc.

I don't think gamers have. You used the example of Dragon Age 2; you liked it, and that's cool. The fact of the matter is that many, many people didn't like it, for reasons that have been stated time and time again. It isn't a fact that it's a good game, because whether it's good or not is a matter of opinion. My personal opinion is that it's mediocre at best, but, again, that's my opinion. I can cite reasons why I believe so all day, and I'm entitled to those reasons just as you're entitled to yours.

Complimenting that, I don't think using one game as an example is very good evidence of gamers suddenly becoming ridiculously picky. Likewise, it's also unlikely that using a single game as en example is evidence of a company (DA2 and Bioware) bowing down to their "EA Overlords". As a community, we as gamers know what's been made to the quality that it should be and when it hasn't been. To stick with your example, I think that, whether or not you like it, you can agree that DA2 wasn't as good as it should have, or could have, been. And that's what the outburst was about.

Well, honestly, I didn't think Dragon Age Origins was all that amazing. And judging it by simple, "Bioware standards," it also should've been a lot better than it turned out. But that didn't change the fact that it was still a very enjoyable game. And the only reason why people didn't complain was because it had no actual precedent, and people didn't compare it to anything. I think for the most part, Dragon Age 2 improved on a LOT of DAO's flaws.
My main problem with DA2 was that the finale wasn't nearly as epic as in DAO. But again, that's just comparing the two games side by side, instead of judging DA2 on its own merits.

If Dragon Age Origins never existed, and DA2 as we know it was the first in the series, people would be eating it up right now.

 

[The Madman]

It's a double edged sword. On one hand yes, gamers tend to be a bitchy lot and if you've ever spent any time on any forums, lets say these ones, you're bound to have run across more than a little self-righteous whining where over entitled gamers cry about a game not appealing to them specifically or for changing some minutiae aspect of an otherwise fine experience. Especially so in gamings case since like it or not, it's a generally youth oriented market which means kids, lots and lots of kids. And if anyone knows how to conjure up a whine-storm, it's kids: especially teenage boys.

On the other hand, the industry 'needs' whiners, odd as it sounds. Developers need feedback about their games, and while in some cases it may seem over the top, if enough people are complaining then whether you agree or not, there's got to be some element of truth to it. You might have enjoyed Dragon Age 2, I haven't played it myself yet, but the reviews and the sales are showing a steep decline in interest right now. Like it or not and for better or worse, that's sending a signal to the developers and now it'll be up to them and publishers to decide how to respond. Same goes for any game or series, or even just consumerism in general. Gamers aren't the only whiny lot, you go onto any sort of hobby specific forum and you'll find people complaining and bitching like it's the bloody end of the world. That the nature of how it works.

Sp while annoying, it's also an essential part of the industry. The best you can do is that if it's getting to you just ignore it. Ignore it, take a break from gaming forums, chat about something else with friends, etc.

 

[Silent Biohazard Solid]

Sp while annoying, it's also an essential part of the industry. The best you can do is that if it's getting to you just ignore it. Ignore it, take a break from gaming forums, chat about something else with friends, etc.

What's getting to me is the thought that such an outcry could very well affect the future of the franchise. Like I said, what if EA deems it not profitable enough, and we don't get DA3?

I just think that people need to accept the positive along with the negative. That's a ridiculous statement, because the positive should come FIRST. What's good about this game? What's bad? People focus way too much on what's bad to even bother acknowledging the good. And that kind of criticism is NOT constructive.. It's.. Well, it's destructive, quite possibly in a literal meaning of the term, if this destroys the franchise.

 

[kingcom]

Fact: Dragon Age 2 is a good game.

Theres your problem right there.

If Dragon Age Origins never existed, and DA2 as we know it was the first in the series, people would be eating it up right now.

Possibly but thats a very difficult scenario to contemplate. Your still going to get the "not as good as Baldur's Gate" side of things.

 

[Zhukov]

Umm...

Where one person sees excessive whining another sees perfectly valid complaints. While I am enjoying Dragon Age 2, I can see why a lot of people are not.

Personally I would like to believe that the presence of so many complaints (for games in general, not just DA2) is a sign of an audience demanding quality from a rather stagnant industry.

Sadly, that's probably not the case though, since for every complaining forumite there are ten people either enjoying their games or not particularly caring that their games are crap.

Lastly, you really should have picked an example other then DA2. You've basically derailed you own thread right from the start.

 

[Apollo45]

Sp while annoying, it's also an essential part of the industry. The best you can do is that if it's getting to you just ignore it. Ignore it, take a break from gaming forums, chat about something else with friends, etc.

What's getting to me is the thought that such an outcry could very well affect the future of the franchise. Like I said, what if EA deems it not profitable enough, and we don't get DA3?

I just think that people need to accept the positive along with the negative. That's a ridiculous statement, because the positive should come FIRST. What's good about this game? What's bad? People focus way too much on what's bad to even bother acknowledging the good. And that kind of criticism is NOT constructive.. It's.. Well, it's destructive, quite possibly in a literal meaning of the term, if this destroys the franchise.

The problem with that thought process is that if they shovel shit at us, we end up looking at the good parts of that shit and they end up just feeding us more shit. If EA doesn't give us DA3, it'll be because they made DA2 in to something that too many people disliked. Essentially, blame EA for making games that don't appeal to the target audience of the last game, not the consumers for calling them out on it.

I think enough people have focused on what was good before saying what was bad. I, for one, really tried to like DA2. I tried to focus on the good, but it was the repeating dungeons and the other flaws that distracted me so much from said 'good' that I have to consider the game mediocre. If we don't point out the flaws, then games will only continue to get worse.

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

So you get people who throw down the controller and quit less than half an hour in, give the game a >5.0, and complain about it.

I'm all for pacing and such. That's great, it's what makes so many great games great. Would Half-Life 2 has been as great without the stroll through the condemned City 17 at the start? Hell no. It would have been without atmosphere. So yes - pacing is good.

But if a game is shit at the beginning...? I feel I am well within my grounds to judge the game based on that and move on to something actually worth my time. It's true our Robot Chicken-generation brains have become accustomed to bite-sized chunks, but there's a difference between building up to bigger better things, and just being downright crap.

Disclaimer: haven't played Dragon Age II at all, I'm referring to other games with the "pacing is different to being plain old bad" analogy

 

[Silent Biohazard Solid]

Fact: Dragon Age 2 is a good game.

Theres your problem right there.

By core definition of the word, it's a good game.
I've tried arguing good game, bad game before. Trying to say, "This game sucks," only to get a response, "It's gott solid, polished gameplay. It's got great graphics. It's a good game."

So if I'm gonna say "fine" to that, then Dragon Age 2 is a good game. If you wanna argue that it's a bad game, then so is Mario Galaxy, and Dead Space, and Halo.

If Dragon Age Origins never existed, and DA2 as we know it was the first in the series, people would be eating it up right now.

Possibly but thats a very difficult scenario to contemplate. Your still going to get the "not as good as Baldur's Gate" side of things.

You're gonna have to refresh my memory. Is that something they also said about Dragon Age Origins? I don't exactly remember the comments about it, at the time when it first came out. I do remember constantly hearing about how amazing it was, though.

 

[kingcom]

What's getting to me is the thought that such an outcry could very well affect the future of the franchise. Like I said, what if EA deems it not profitable enough, and we don't get DA3?

I just think that people need to accept the positive along with the negative. That's a ridiculous statement, because the positive should come FIRST. What's good about this game? What's bad? People focus way too much on what's bad to even bother acknowledging the good. And that kind of criticism is NOT constructive.. It's.. Well, it's destructive, quite possibly in a literal meaning of the term, if this destroys the franchise.

Many games fail to continue a franchise, I wouldn't mind games only coming out with a new franchise (thats a whole different debat though). People will focus on what they take most stock in.

Personally I didn't find the story very gratifying. I understand what they were trying to to, both in the 'take how a table top story is run and put that into a video game' and with the whole 'lets establish historical scenarios rather than simply pinpoint events for Big World Changing Event.' Maybe it will mean theres a great final game but for DA2 it didn't really have anywhere near a payoff and I didn't leave the game wanting more as I did with DA:O. Plus the frustration I had with combat made most of the game a chore.

You know what the important thing to take out of that was? ITS MY OPINION, not fact. Someone else can love it (much as I disagree with you). I know (based on their track record) they can do better, atleast when working with the areas I care about. Someone people cant stand having a main character not being voice, I hate it (really sucks me out of the game). This doesn't make me a prima donna, this just means I have personal tastes.

 

[The Madman]

Sp while annoying, it's also an essential part of the industry. The best you can do is that if it's getting to you just ignore it. Ignore it, take a break from gaming forums, chat about something else with friends, etc.

What's getting to me is the thought that such an outcry could very well affect the future of the franchise. Like I said, what if EA deems it not profitable enough, and we don't get DA3?

I just think that people need to accept the positive along with the negative. That's a ridiculous statement, because the positive should come FIRST. What's good about this game? What's bad? People focus way too much on what's bad to even bother acknowledging the good. And that kind of criticism is NOT constructive.. It's.. Well, it's destructive, quite possibly in a literal meaning of the term, if this destroys the franchise.

Possibly. Or alternatively the developers will try to create and expand an experience more similar to that of the games, ahem, successful origins.

For better or worse negative feedback is not only inevitable from any product, but also essential otherwise there's no urge to drive a series forward nor to listen to the games fans. It's up to the publishers and developers to react accordingly, and sometimes they react just as irrationally as the fans, while other times that negative feedback in harnessed and a better product in the result. Just look at games like The Witcher and how its developers responded to criticism. Or even Two Worlds, which turned a miserable excuse for a game into a half decent series thanks to the first games reception and how the developers and publisher chose to reply.

Could DA3 be cancelled? I don't know. Possibly, and that would indeed suck. But again there's also the possibility for the series to improve thanks to it, with Bioware seeking to better emulate what the market wants and what was proven successful in the past and the publishers giving them more time to do so as well. All depends on the response from the developers/publishers themselves, gamers are having their say, now it's their turn.

Annoying to read or not, whiny gamers and negative criticism have their place.

 

[kingcom]

By core definition of the word, it's a good game.
I've tried arguing good game, bad game before. Trying to say, "This game sucks," only to get a response, "It's gott solid, polished gameplay. It's got great graphics. It's a good game."

So if I'm gonna say "fine" to that, then Dragon Age 2 is a good game. If you wanna argue that it's a bad game, then so is Mario Galaxy, and Dead Space, and Halo.

To you, Dragon Age 2 is a good game. To me it is not, there is no arguement you can make to persuade my own personal opinion, nor can I do the same to you. Therfore your claim of "fact" on a subjective issue cannot be applied (though I would agree Mario Galaxy, Dead Space and Halo are bad games but those are also just opinions).

You're gonna have to refresh my memory. Is that something they also said about Dragon Age Origins? I don't exactly remember the comments about it, at the time when it first came out. I do remember constantly hearing about how amazing it was, though.

Yes, I was one who still prefers Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 over Dragon Age Origins. I had fun with it but it was not a better game. It was an amazing game from people who had never tried an rpg like that, ones without a voiced main character, with detailed lines of dialogue, with party banter etc. There was a bit of an uproar about the "Spiritual Successor" part but it blew over fairly quickly.

 

[Zhukov]

Fact: Dragon Age 2 is a good game.

"Good" is a subjective term. Its application depends on your perception of the subject.

Allow me to demonstrate:
Fact: Dragon Age 2 is the worst game ever.
Fact: E.T. for the Atari 2600 is the best game ever.

Prove me wrong.

As I said previously, I am enjoying DA2. But I would never seek to present my subjective opinion as objective fact. Especially not by saying "Fact: [my opinion]". To be blunt, it's a ridiculous way of making an argument.

 

[Silent Biohazard Solid]

The problem with that thought process is that if they shovel shit at us, we end up looking at the good parts of that shit and they end up just feeding us more shit. If EA doesn't give us DA3, it'll be because they made DA2 in to something that too many people disliked. Essentially, blame EA for making games that don't appeal to the target audience of the last game, not the consumers for calling them out on it.

I think enough people have focused on what was good before saying what was bad. I, for one, really tried to like DA2. I tried to focus on the good, but it was the repeating dungeons and the other flaws that distracted me so much from said 'good' that I have to consider the game mediocre. If we don't point out the flaws, then games will only continue to get worse.

Well, I don't know what to say to that. I'm just gonna go ahead and call myself a more positive person. Because, yes, I did notice said flaws, the repeating dungeons and whatnot. But it was the other way around for me. The good parts of it distracted me from the flaws.

Which leads me to believe that it all comes down to the storyline, rather than gameplay. I enjoyed the storyline a lot, all three 'disjointed' parts of it, which kept me entertained.
I suspect that was not the case for you, which resulted in you not enjoying the game as much.



But don't get me wrong. I'm not saying, "Don't point out the flaws." Yes, the developers/publishers need to know the negatives. All I'm saying is, don't let said flaws ruin the experience for you.
Look at Fallout 3, or New Vegas. How often does it freeze up? And yet, that doesn't change the fact that both are still wonderful games and well wroth the $60 I paid for each. Same goes for DA2.

To you, Dragon Age 2 is a good game. To me it is not, there is no arguement you can make to persuade my own personal opinion, nor can I do the same to you. Therfore your claim of "fact" on a subjective issue cannot be applied (though I would agree Mario Galaxy, Dead Space and Halo are bad games but those are also just opinions).

The only problem with that logic is that, while it's an opinion... To say, "Something is bad" or to say, "I don't like it" are two different things.

When someone says, "This is bad, or this is wrong," it's like saying it shouldn't be done. "This game is bad, because you can't control the camera in it," or "This game is bad because it has really long cinematics." If you don't like it, it's fine. But to say it's bad is like saying it shouldn't exist. And I don't believe in that.

I like dialogue in games, I generally don't like silent hero games. I also generally don't like first person shooters. But that doesn't mean that Bioshock shouldn't exist. It just means that it's not for me.

I just don't think Dragon Age 2 did SO MANY things differently that the fans of the original just outright turn their backs on it. And again, this thread had turned into a Dragon Age discussion, but it does apply to other games. Like Devil May Cry 2, which is also considered to be a black sheep of the franchise. But frankly, is it as bad as people say it is? Naw. It's not terrible like people say. It's just not AS good as the first, and does that mean it's not enjoyable?

As I said previously, I am enjoying DA2. But I would never seek to present my subjective opinion as objective fact. Especially not by saying "Fact: [my opinion]". To be blunt, it's a ridiculous way of making an argument.

I wasn't being subjective though. I was judging it like a robot. Like I said, Dragon Age 2 is a good game like Resident Evil 4 is a good game. I hate Resident Evil 4 with a passion, but I'm not gonna say, "It's a bad game," because it was well designed. From a robotic point of view of what defines a good game, they're both good games. Same with Mario Galaxy, same with Dead Space, but I'm not gonna touch them with a 10 foot pole.

 

[kingcom]

The only problem with that logic is that, while it's an opinion... To say, "Something is bad" or to say, "I don't like it" are two different things.

When you are talking about a subjective issue, they mean the same things.

When someone says, "This is bad, or this is wrong," it's like saying it shouldn't be done. "This game is bad, because you can't control the camera in it," or "This game is bad because it has really long cinematics." If you don't like it, it's fine. But to say it's bad is like saying it shouldn't exist. And I don't believe in that.

Saying it doesn't exist? I dont think many people mean that when they say that is bad. They say they got little to no enjoyment out of that. Bad and Good are incredibly broad statements particularly when you are takling about subjective issues.

I just don't think Dragon Age 2 did SO MANY things differently that the fans of the original just outright turn their backs on it. And again, this thread had turned into a Dragon Age discussion, but it does apply to other games. Like Devil May Cry 2, which is also considered to be a black sheep of the franchise. But frankly, is it as bad as people say it is? Naw. It's not terrible like people say. It's just not AS good as the first, and does that mean it's not enjoyable?

I think it did make so many things that someone like me would like the first and dislike the second. It seems like your trying to say that my opinion isnt as valid about the subject? Am I just misinterpreting?

 

[ThongBonerstorm]

I think part of the problem is that now players have seen what is possible and are more expectant of it. Sure 20 years ago players were more happy with what they got each year; simply because no one had seem anything better.

It's like looking at cars 30 years ago. most people bought cars because they worked, they drove, they didn't break down and sometimes even had a heater! Now imagine what you would say if, when you went to get a new car, it didn't come with air-conditioning or a CD player, that'd be kinda BS, because now you know what you're missing out on.

 

[Silent Biohazard Solid]

Saying it doesn't exist? I dont think many people mean that when they say that is bad. They say they got little to no enjoyment out of that. Bad and Good are incredibly broad statements particularly when you are takling about subjective issues.

Well, I've met some people who meant it exactly like that. "It shouldn't be this way," basically is what they said. Like, there's only one way games SHOULD be.

I think it did make so many things that someone like me would like the first and dislike the second. It seems like your trying to say that my opinion isnt as valid about the subject? Am I just misinterpreting?

I'm just giving my opinion on your opinion. Don't take it personally. I just honestly think that a lot of these negative things that people complain about in DA2 are unjustified. Well, no, it's not even like that. I just don't think it's justified to say, "I lost all respect for Bioware," or "I'm happy it's not selling well," all because of DA2's flaws.