hue

[Revnak_v1legacy]

I think it's more of a sometimes kind of thing. Games have gotten consistently cheaper if you account for inflation. At the same time publishers can be massive douchebags sometimes with their DLC and DRM. EULA's are also a fucking nightmare. Yet, we are extremely disconnected from the difficulties of developing games and sometimes are quite clearly in the wrong. We don't understand that DLC can be both a blessing and a curse, and we expect everybody to act like Valve when they only get away with it because hats are so damn addictive. At times gamers are entitled, at times they aren't. The ME3 controversies show this quite clearly.

 

[Chemical Alia]

I don't play games that I don't like or don't think are worth my money. It's worked great for years.

But we did think it was worth it and except for the last 5 minutes it was. If they just change the ending the majority of us will be happy.

Huh? I have no idea what you're referring to.

 

[Adultism]

Once again, We pay to play content, We own a disk with content on it, but we don't own the content ourselves.

Just like we don't OWN a xbox360 we own the right to play it until we do something that warrants Microsoft disabling our system.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

Consumer is only always right if the producer wants their product to sell. If a developer lets out a game and consumers demand changes then the developer would be wise to make them if he is in it for the money. If however, he is just making a game for the love of it then he does not have to cave in to the demands.
It was big reason I liked Notch for making Minecraft how he liked it.

 

[DoPo]

Yes, people have the right to complain about a product but the owner(s) of the product have the right to ignore them.

Generally, I think that if you don't like a game, don't buy the game.If you don't like Coca-Cola, you don't buy Coke. If you don't like Volkswagen cars you don't buy Volkswagen cars. You don't ask them to change it. At least not in the same way some gamers voice their opinion.

You are not required to drop 60$ on it on day one without bothering to look at any reviews or anything. Shocking, I know. If you suspect you will not get satisfaction worth [cost of game] when buying a game, then maybe don't buy the game instead of complaining that you bought it and it wasn't worth the money.

Basically, I'm saying this.

I don't play games that I don't like or don't think are worth my money. It's worked great for years.

And I don't mean gamers shouldn't complain ever. You can voice your opinion, that is fine. Don't bombard the Internet with it. That, I think, is abusing the privilege.

 

[krellen]

Just like we don't OWN a xbox360 we own the right to play it until we do something that warrants Microsoft disabling our system.

Oh god, please tell me this is sarcasm. With some of the things I've seen said around here, especially on this particular topic, I just can't tell any more.

(Just in case it's not: I own my XBox, lock stock and barrel. The only thing Microsoft has a "right" to do is cut off my access to XBox Live.)

 

[HeatproofShAdOw]

Or if I have someone build me a house, and everything is absolutely perfect except for the fact that opening the bedroom door causes a spring-loaded boxing glove to punch me in the balls, am I being "entitled" if I think that part of the house needs some serious work before the whole thing is complete to my satisfaction?

I think you've taken this thing entirely out of context. It's one thing to talk about a games ending, yet you've gone off on a whole other tangent. It's their game, they're allowed to make the decisions they want to.

 

[Allar]

I think you've taken this thing entirely out of context. It's one thing to talk about a games ending, yet you've gone off on a whole other tangent. It's their game, they're allowed to make the decisions they want to.

This is true, I would submit however that the consumer is also within their rights to complain about the product if they found it unsatisfactory. Of course the developer can ignore them, that's their prerogative, but there's nothing inherently wrong about a gamer requesting a change be made to the game through DLC or a patch.

If people want to take the time to lobby with a developer for a specific kind of change then so be it. If the movement gains enough momentum and the developer believes it should give into those requests/demands (for reasons financial or otherwise) then the lobbying effort of the consumers was successful, if the developer decides against it then also fine, the disgruntled can vote with their wallet next time.

 

[Phlakes]

Holy fuck yes. All these developers, and that means every single person on the team, the artists, writers, programmers, level designers, QA, all of them, put years of their life into one product to entertain us, and what do we say? "Fuck all of you, the last five minutes of your game were disappointing so I'm never buying from you again, you betrayed your entire fanbase", and then we accuse them of hating their customers and being corrupted by the "evil" publishers. For the love of god, every name you see in the credits of a game is a person just like you, be a little fucking grateful once in a while.

 

[LilithSlave]

There are times when gamers act too entitled, and make a big deal out of the tiniest things that would make any reasonable developer alienated with their players.

Then there's a point where people SHOULD be entitled. Such as import gamers like me who have to import ridiculous amounts of games because they never get an English localization.

You have no idea how long it took to get Tales of Graces, and how ill the possibilities are for Tales of Xillia, especially if Graces doesn't sell insanely well. If you Dark Souls fans don't get your game for PC, you'll have just a taste of what us Tales of fans have been putting up with for years.

Speaking of which, go get Tales of Graces f right now if you can. It's an important purchase and title. And will do loads for supporting other important titles.

Why does this topic have so much Mass Effect in it? Time for Tales of Graces discussions, right now.

 

[Sagacious Zhu]

Gamers are not entitled to any additional content just like Bioware is not entitled to any future game sales. At this point, Bioware risks alienating their fanbase and potentially sabotaging any future customer loyalty. If I was a new gamer who just picked up ME3 for the first time (as the game was advertised) I wouldn't be inclined to buy another Bioware game after the shoddy, ramshackle ending and the incredibly poor response from Bioware.

See, Bioware can't damage control to save their lives. Their PR policy is one of brutal censorship on the forums and juvenile back talk to their critics. They're response of "la la la, not listening you dirty trolls!" has shielded the the writing team from any legitimate criticism, the Jennifer Hepler incident being the prime example of poor Bioware PR.

Does Bioware have to change the ending? No. But the majority of Mass Effect fans are unhappy and Bioware cannot afford to stick their heads in the ground. If nothing else, they need to sit up, take notice and actually listen to what their fans have to say. Bioware is almost exclusively built on multi-serial franchises and they cannot afford to not listen to their fanbase.

PS: If EA PR is reading this, for the love of God, shut down the Twitter accounts. You're only digging yourselves deeper.

 

[Yopaz]

Yes, some of us are too entitled. Sure, I agree that we have the right to complain when a products isn't satisfactory, but we should leave it at that. When we start acting as if a developer/publisher is doing something to us personally, when we get pissed at a publisher for wanting to make money, then we are going too far. Don't tell me this doesn't happen, it does. Day 1 DLC and The ending of Mass Effect 3 are not personal attacks on our intelligence or freedom. Bioware wanted to stir things up with the ending and they did. Missions fucking accomplished.

So to summarize here. We have the right to complain, we have the right to choose what we buy. We should not take personal offense when a game disappoints.

 

[XandNobody]

Basically what we have here are refutations of the "entitlement" bullshit gaming media and devs/publishers are slinging around like howling monkeys.

Total Biscuit on entitlement (starts at 10:49): "Stop thinking you can't make demands. This is how capitalism works." [http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=0sYp-eggD1Q#t=649s]

This, a thousand times this. I was about to post this video, and you beat me to it, so kudos to you.

We are the consumers, if we can not make demands, then no one will. No one. I really hate the short post for this, but that is just a fact. Watch the video.

 

[LetalisK]

Are gamers acting entitled as a whole? No. Just every once in awhile a vocal minority of gamers raise their voice about some perceived transgression against them. Sometimes this is appropriate. Sometimes it's mind-numbingly retarded.

 

[salinv]

I think it sort of falls on both sides. There are plenty of times where people call others entitled because someone is bitching and moaning about something, which they have every right to do. But at the same time, there are some that come off as entitled when they pose an argument that effectively falls to "What, a company made something and dared to charge me money for it? The nerve!"

Though, I guess it must be said as well.. The customers of a product have the right to criticize the product, pose suggestions, and the like. They are paying money to use it, and if there is any semblance of a service involved (or a repeating purchase), the developers of the product should (as a good business practice) at least take the criticism and suggestions into consideration. BUT (oh no, the caveat!) when the customer crosses that line where they begin to demand, whether it is a change in something that currently exists, the addition of something extra, etc., etc... That is when the customer has crossed the line into the realm of entitlement. And this follows for every industry, every sector, not just games.

In fact, that is the definition of entitled - they feel they are entitled to something, they are making demands.

So, I guess you aren't entitled, unless your being entitled? Shit, there goes my sane argument.

 

[krellen]

For the love of god, every name you see in the credits of a game is a person just like you, be a little fucking grateful once in a while.

My gratitude is the $60 I give them for the game. Beyond that, I owe them Jack Shit.

If I give them $60 for a product, and that product is not the product they sold (it is not as described in previews, advertisements, or packaging), I have every legal right - and the moral obligation - to complain about it. I have been cheated, and I'll be damned if I'll just lay down and take it.

That's not entitlement. That's the foundation of consumer capitalism. It doesn't work any other way.

 

[Krantos]

No. Gamers are not acting entitled enough. They are spending money on a product that they are dissatisfied with. Gamers need to understand that they are the consumers, the consumers are always right, and that the way to change an industry is to vote with your wallet. Shame on anybody who complained about a product but still bought it.

QFFT.

Been saying this for a while. That's the real problem here. People come here and complain, but they still buy the games, which makes their complaints absolutely pointless.

Don't like the new direction a franchise has taken (coughDA2cough) don't buy the game.

 

[flames09]

We as consumers deserve a product that meets and surpasses are expectations, regardless whether it is an 'art' or not.

In this case the ending was sub-par for many people (looking from an outside perspective) and they were not satisfied, in fact after a while of reading and talking to some players of ME3, I think that BioWare or EA or whoever is doing it, is about to begging milking their franchises.

This is a path no man or woman would want a franchise to take, I don't think we can disagree on that.

That is my $3.56c

 

[Gunner 51]

Basically what we have here are refutations of the "entitlement" bullshit gaming media and devs/publishers are slinging around like howling monkeys.

Total Biscuit on entitlement (starts at 10:49): "Stop thinking you can't make demands. This is how capitalism works." [http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=0sYp-eggD1Q#t=649s]

This was one hell of an interesting video - so much so, I think I'll subscribe to this fellow's channel.

I've always been of a similar mindset. My take on gamer entitlement is that there are too many people defending the corporations - mostly because they cannot remember the time of bedroom coders and that corporate gaming is all they know. As such, they will defend the corporations even though the corporations - especially the publishers screw everyone over.

It's not over-entitled for a consumer to ask and expect their money's worth. It's not even bad business to strip large parts out of games and sell them on later on down the line - it's ripping people off. If they paid top bollock prices for a game, they should get the top bollock game that they paid for in the first place.

I call these bad business practices Kotickisms. (I totally trademark that name! XD)

The sad thing is, this doesn't stem down to a developer releasing a bad or incomplete game. It's the publishers barring them from releasing a good and complete game. The publishers have far too much power and they get away with it every time - because we gamers are complaining and grumbling to ourselves and not to a body like the Office of Fair Trading.

Corporations must accept and deliver upon their responsibilities to their development staff and the paying punters.