Is Fan Voting becoming Toxic?

[KazeAizen]

Kind of right there in the title. Is fan voting becoming toxic? I ask this because of a Screwattack video that just went up declaring their "Worst game of 2013". 3rd was Sonic Lost World, 2nd was Final Fantasy All the Bravest, and the worst game of the year was.....Family Party 30 great games. Now I can't actually speak on the quality of these as I have not played a single one. However I doubt Sonic Lost World is as bad as this vote would imply and I do eventually intend to add it to my collection. Still all these games looked at least playable and complete. The game I expected to be at the top of the list was Ride to Hell Retribution. Now if anyone has seen even one review of this game they know just how bad it is and how unfinished it is. If I remember correctly the Spike VGA's also operated in part on a fan vote. This video though is evidence that fan voting is becoming more and more toxic.

By toxic I mean hurting our chances of being taken seriously. We have a Sonic game, Final Fantasy game, and Family game, two franchises and a genre that has garnered unprecedented hate from "hardcore" gamers in recent years. Now I know fan voting is fun and hoping your game comes out on top on things is great and all that, but if this literally is supposed to be Screwattack's worst game of the year I think its a poor choice. Sites either need to create new categories like the site's "official" games and the "fan" games or just block fans off from certain categories. I know this last part is a bit incomprehensible but I trust you guys will know what I'm trying to say at least. So what do you think? Do you think fan voting is becoming more toxic as gaming and gaming sites grow and do you think sites need to take steps to insure their credibility in the future?

 

[tippy2k2]

Most sites that I've seen do that; they have an "official" list and they have a "reader" list.

The problem with the Reader's list is that one of three things happen:

A. An outside force comes in and votes, screwing up the "purity" of the list. Whether that complaint has a leg to stand on or not completely depends on if you think it should be JUST the site in question or if everyone should. See our own GOTY vote to see the sheer amount of bitterness and vile that this can cause if you feel the pool has been tainted.

B. Your game of choice wins or loses and you lose your freaking mind because internet contests mean life and death. To the victor goes the fame, money, and woman and to the losers...a place worse than hell awaits you. See our very own GOTY vote to see the sheer amount of hatred some people seem to have for certain games. I swear, looking at some comments, whichever one wins is the most overrated piece of shit game that has ever been created by anyone ever and if you like that game, you deserve a fate worse than death.

C. 99% of us who just don't really care and get a nice chuckle watching the 1% lose their fucking minds

EDIT:
Not to mention that the majority will be people who haven't played any of the games and so they just vote for whatever. The biggest issue here is that MOST people will be in this boat because...well....games are freaking expensive (not to mention exclusives and whatnot).
/EDIT

Personally, as much as I enjoy watching the monkeys throwing feces at each other (I've got our GOTY thread open and refresh it every so often to see who throws the next piece of poo), I think that these contests just shouldn't exist. No matter what happens, people just become stupid amounts of bitter. As entertaining as I find it as an "old guard" user, it's a terrible impression for anyone new coming into the website.

 

[djoelie]

ehm, I got the sense it's more, do we think people are trolling by massively voting for games/franchises they dislike, not games with bad gameplay/story/whatever. And if so should sites keep this in mind and create both public choice awards and awards with professional judges, or take some other action against it. (Please correct me if I'm wrong @KazeAizen)

I think restricting categories people can choose from wouldn't be a good thing to do, but setting up separate categories for peoples choice & official/professional could be a good solution if it really happens that much.

Also, keeping in mind a sites demographic when looking at awards and such as a visitor is probably the best solution.
If people vote for something because they hate the franchise as opposed to when the game actually suck, it remains an opinion so you can't really argue with it, right?

 

[DudeistBelieve]

Actually just got done playing the demo of Sonic: Lost World on my 2DS, I don't see why everyone is saying it's a terrible game.

Mind you all, I've never played Super Mario Galaxy, but regardless, feels like a competent 3D sonic game.

 

[KazeAizen]

So basically:
"A vast majority of people don't have the same opinion as me, so they don't deserve to be taken seriously"

Why are you even allowed to post, seriously?

No. Its really not that at all. Objectively speaking though there are much worse games that have been made this year than what was on that final list and the fact that his is supposed to the sites "worst game of the year" its just disturbing that objectively worse games are not in the places of these three games.

 

[Eve Charm]

If they wanted this to be honest it's be Whatever number your looking for random "Sliver Dollar Games"

They usually have to do qualifiers like " This game sold X copies, reviewed by x people, number of people have to have voted for it to even be in the running"

 

[KazeAizen]

So basically:
"A vast majority of people don't have the same opinion as me, so they don't deserve to be taken seriously"

Why are you even allowed to post, seriously?

No. Its really not that at all. Objectively speaking though there are much worse games that have been made this year than what was on that final list and the fact that his is supposed to the sites "worst game of the year" its just disturbing that objectively worse games are not in the places of these three games.

declaring their "Worst game of 2013". 3rd was Sonic Lost World, 2nd was Final Fantasy All the Bravest, and the worst game of the year was.....Family Party 30 great games. Now I can't actually speak on the quality of these as I have not played a single one.

Soooo...... you have no idea what you're talking about yet you use "objectively".
Again, why are you allowed to post, this is the kind of thread I'd expect on the gamespot boards, not here.
Your entire thread is basically "Some video gaming site made a list of bad games I don't agree with(despite me not having played any of the games on their list), so they're toxic and they shouldn't be taken seriously"

Stop talking about stuff you admit you have no idea about.

Stop using the word toxic when you have no idea how it's used, and why.

Stop posting here.

No. I refuse to stop posting here. I know how its used. I'm not saying the site is toxic. I love Screwattack. I'm saying fan voting systems seem to be becoming more toxic and hurting sites credibility. Ok. So I said a contradictory statement. Like you haven't ever done that in your life before. From every single thing I've seen on these games there are much worse games that have come out this year and the fact that it is fan resentment of certain titles of genres rather than community agreement of what is actually bad is disturbing to me.

 

[Roxas1359]

Actually just got done playing the demo of Sonic: Lost World on my 2DS, I don't see why everyone is saying it's a terrible game.

Mind you all, I've never played Super Mario Galaxy, but regardless, feels like a competent 3D sonic game.

The 3DS version of Lost World is better than the Wii U version by a long shot. I've got both and the bosses in the Wii U version are pathetic, while the 3DS ones are actual bosses to which you can also fight them on harder difficulties as well.
The stages in the Wii U version are a bit better, and not as long as the 3DS ones, but I prefer the 3DS version over the Wii U version.

snip

Pretty much agree with your post entirely. Heck this one is very tame compared to the number of March Mayhem's I've been through. So many bans, so many bodies. XD
I mean hell, it's kinda sad how these things get bombed, but it's not surprising. I think some people are more upset because of how it's called "Reader's Choice" and the readers didn't really get to choose the winner and outside forces did. Although we can blame PubClub for Papers, Please being in this contest in the first place. If only we all voted for Aliens: Colonial Marines instead. XD

 

[KazeAizen]

ehm, I got the sense it's more, do we think people are trolling by massively voting for games/franchises they dislike, not games with bad gameplay/story/whatever. And if so should sites keep this in mind and create both public choice awards and awards with professional judges, or take some other action against it. (Please correct me if I'm wrong @KazeAizen)

I think restricting categories people can choose from wouldn't be a good thing to do, but setting up separate categories for peoples choice & official/professional could be a good solution if it really happens that much.

Also, keeping in mind a sites demographic when looking at awards and such as a visitor is probably the best solution.
If people vote for something because they hate the franchise as opposed to when the game actually suck, it remains an opinion so you can't really argue with it, right?

That was the gist of what I was saying. My issue with this is that the VGA's used the model of fans vote with I believe only some input from professionals and we see what that nets us. This particular one shows the extreme of what could happen if fans ran every contest like this. Personally I'd really like to see a video game equivalent of the oscars some day. A highly televised event honoring the best of the best in games with arbitrary gold statues. If fan voting rules stuff like that though any and all credibility is gone

 

[djoelie]

That was the gist of what I was saying. My issue with this is that the VGA's used the model of fans vote with I believe only some input from professionals and we see what that nets us. This particular one shows the extreme of what could happen if fans ran every contest like this. Personally I'd really like to see a video game equivalent of the oscars some day. A highly televised event honoring the best of the best in games with arbitrary gold statues. If fan voting rules stuff like that though any and all credibility is gone

I don't totally agree with you, I think a lot of highly televised events get kind of stuck up their own ass (after a while). Having said that, it would be nice to watch
What I mean is, awards (like the oscars) tend to focus on particular aspects or genres, whether it is just highly popular stuff or arthouse or drama. So you'd still see the same type of games win every year. Not that that's entirely useless, oscar winning films are usually good films, but if I don't like blockbusters for instance there's not much there for me.

But I get your point of fans massively voting for stuff, that also renders the awards kind of useless if you just want to know which games you should (or shouldn't) spend you're money on. Which brings me back to my main problem with awards, which is that (barring specific categories) it's mainly a huge popularity contest no matter who decides. But if they're here anyway I'd rather have the view of serious reviewers or people who're otherwise seriously engaged with games, as opposed to loads of fans who take the time to actually vote in the damn things. So yeah,I think I get your point.
imho if you actually want to know if a game's for you, game reviews or let's plays are a way better source of information.

As to the credibility thing, I guess that depends on how you see the awards. If you see them as an objective measurement of what games are good and what games are crap, than yes, it hurts the credibility of the site (at least for you). But if you see them like popularity contests like I do, no, it doesn't matter that much. Although it would be nice to know that it's the average opinion of the regular users of the site you're looking at. That way the information becomes useful again
I don't really believe in objective measurements of a subjective experience anyway, so whether its reviews or awards, it's mostly only relevant to know the opinions of people that tend to agree with me XD
or to take into consideration the differences between my usual opinions on games and theirs.

 

[KazeAizen]

Kind of right there in the title. Is fan voting becoming toxic? I ask this because of a Screwattack video that just went up declaring their "Worst game of 2013". 3rd was Sonic Lost World, 2nd was Final Fantasy All the Bravest, and the worst game of the year was.....Family Party 30 great games. Now I can't actually speak on the quality of these as I have not played a single one. However I doubt Sonic Lost World is as bad as this vote would imply and I do eventually intend to add it to my collection. Still all these games looked at least playable and complete. The game I expected to be at the top of the list was Ride to Hell Retribution. Now if anyone has seen even one review of this game they know just how bad it is and how unfinished it is. If I remember correctly the Spike VGA's also operated in part on a fan vote. This video though is evidence that fan voting is becoming more and more toxic.

By toxic I mean hurting our chances of being taken seriously. We have a Sonic game, Final Fantasy game, and Family game, two franchises and a genre that has garnered unprecedented hate from "hardcore" gamers in recent years. Now I know fan voting is fun and hoping your game comes out on top on things is great and all that, but if this literally is supposed to be Screwattack's worst game of the year I think its a poor choice. Sites either need to create new categories like the site's "official" games and the "fan" games or just block fans off from certain categories. I know this last part is a bit incomprehensible but I trust you guys will know what I'm trying to say at least. So what do you think? Do you think fan voting is becoming more toxic as gaming and gaming sites grow and do you think sites need to take steps to insure their credibility in the future?

Lol.

Have you considered the bewildering possibility that other people have opinions that differ from yours?

Yes yes. Of course their are differing opinions. You missed the point of what I was trying to say though. What I'm saying is that this is less of an official decision and more like a mass group of people with a hatred for these franchises and games voting to insure that these get a shitty reputation instead of voting for games like Colonial Marines and Ride to Hell which has pretty much gained universal derision from critics.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Fan voting has always been toxic. Anytime you gather a bunch of people on the internet and ask them what the best and worst games of the year are, bad things happen.

 

[Something Amyss]

The game I expected to be at the top of the list was Ride to Hell Retribution.

I've got to be honest, off the Escapist I've barely heard about this game. Maybe Screwattack covered it heavily, but I don't follow them much. My first reaction is "do they even know about it?"

Then I checked VG Chartz. RTHR is listed at selling 0.01 million units worldwide. Now, that doesn't include digital distribution, but I can't help but think a retail whimper like that might not get as much hate as games people are actually looking out for like Final Fantasy and Sonic (the latter admittedly only listing .31 million in sales worldwide, but that's still 31 times RTHR)

That seems simple and reasonable, actually. It doesn't matter who the best candidate is, most of the votes will be for a Democrat or a Republican[footnote]Assuming you're in the USA, which you must be, because the USA owns the internet[footnote]I'm kidding, of course[/footnote][/footnote].

Also, while you might not find Sonic to be that bad, other people aren't voting based on your estimation of quality. But I still think we shouldn't even have to get into "opinions, man!" to understand what's going on.

By toxic I mean hurting our chances of being taken seriously.

When Transformers movies are held up as box office tragedies, the equivalent of a Godzilla attack, the Holocaust, and 9-11 all at once? When Twilight and that Twilight bondage erotica fanfic get similar responses in literature? When Justin Bieber is for some reason the Antichrist rather than just some lackluster teen idol?

I have trouble thinking our fan polls will matter to anyone who doesn't already take issue with the gaming community.

A better question would be "is the word toxic being thrown around too much in the gaming community these days?" I swear, it's coming close to "innovation" and "immersion" in terms of overuse.

And hoenstly, I think death and rape threats and that sort of crap is probably higher on the list of "toxic" things that might hurt our rep.

I'm saying fan voting systems seem to be becoming more toxic and hurting sites credibility.

I'm just not sure how. Who cares that the fans picked the wrong game and holds it against the site?

As for the "stop posting here" thing, don't listen to them. But maybe think before you post something. For one, you seem to be getting awfully worked up, and for another you seem to be mentally tripping all over yourself to defend something that maybe shouldn't be defended in the first place. This looks like it's all an overreaction, and while I bear you no ill will for it, I do have to scratch my head at your defense of it.

"A vast majority of people don't have the same opinion as me, so they don't deserve to be taken seriously"

Or won't be taken seriously by high society. Which made me so sad my monocle nearly popped out.

B. Your game of choice wins or loses and you lose your freaking mind because internet contests mean life and death. To the victor goes the fame, money, and woman and to the losers...a place worse than hell awaits you. See our very own GOTY vote to see the sheer amount of hatred some people seem to have for certain games. I swear, looking at some comments, whichever one wins is the most overrated piece of shit game that has ever been created by anyone ever and if you like that game, you deserve a fate worse than death.

C. 99% of us who just don't really care and get a nice chuckle watching the 1% lose their fucking minds

I wish it was only 1%. But this is the same for gaming content in general. Have you watched people lose their minds when Yahtzee doesn't like [Game I Like]? It's worst when it's like, a Nintendo game, but even if it's a MMS, people will go nuts. We're a community of unreasonable responses and histrionics.

Then again, maybe it's not gaming, considering the reaction MovieBob gets. He is, however, on a gaming site and I don't normally see that level of antagonism for other movie critics on non-gaming sites.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Fan voting has always been toxic. Anytime you gather a bunch of people on the internet and ask them what the best and worst games of the year are, bad things happen.

Pretty much.
Never does the community arrive at any sort of consensus on what "best" games are.
Maybe, RARELY, do they agree on Worst though, but even that requires the game to attain some level of notoriety and infamy. A LOT of awful, AWFUL games just fly under the radar all the time.

Exposure drives fandoms, and fandoms drive the polls, and as "fan" is derived from "fanatic" it's best to not put much stock in those at all unless it's your job or something.

(And looking through the topic, yes, it is totally possible for a game to be Objectively Better/Worse than another game.
But that comes down to things like functionality and code stability; being able to play or possibly beat the game, not just raw appeal.)

 

[Something Amyss]

You missed the point of what I was trying to say though.

If anyone's missed what you're trying to say, then it is because you muddled it by changing directions multiple times. You have brought up this very issue, so people will address it.

What I'm saying is that this is less of an official decision and more like a mass group of people with a hatred for these franchises and games voting to insure that these get a shitty reputation instead of voting for games like Colonial Marines and Ride to Hell which has pretty much gained universal derision from critics.

Aliens: colonial Marines has better review aggregates than FF ATB at the very least. Yeah, it's worse than Sonic, but not all that drastically and that shouldn't take away from FF in any way.

And you know what? Ride to Hell and ACM were both nominated for worst multiplat game of 2013 (along with CODog Ops) and guess what? RTH won! It's the worst multiplat game of the year!

Now that I've looked it up, I'm confused. You're mad that Sonic Lost Worlds was nominated over ACM for Wii U's worst title? Was ACM even on Wii U? I've done enough research on this, I can't be bothered to look anymore. I don't even know what FFATB was nominated/won for, but it was probably iOS specific.

Did you not do the research, or are you actively misrepresenting Screw Attack? Because I just watched the videos, and they say you're wrong.

Edit: Okay, saw the worst game overall. Most of my statement stands, though. It's not even like these games were ignored or whatever. They just didn't win the overall?

 

[HorrendusOne]

I love how this thread goes straight to "opinion" debates, (everyone has one aka their worthless)

Then goes to personal attacks.

Avoids any logical discussion on the logic of what is objectively a poorly made game, and that this is the only thing worth reading in this thread. --v

Fan voting has always been toxic. Anytime you gather a bunch of people on the internet and ask them what the best and worst games of the year are, bad things happen.

Pretty much.
Never does the community arrive at any sort of consensus on what "best" games are.
Maybe, RARELY, do they agree on Worst though, but even that requires the game to attain some level of notoriety and infamy. A LOT of awful, AWFUL games just fly under the radar all the time.

Exposure drives fandoms, and fandoms drive the polls, and as "fan" is derived from "fanatic" it's best to not put much stock in those at all unless it's your job or something.

(And looking through the topic, yes, it is totally possible for a game to be Objectively Better/Worse than another game.
But that comes down to things like functionality and code stability; being able to play or possibly beat the game, not just raw appeal.)

 

[Easton Dark]

Maybe it's not toxic. Maybe those are the most disappointing games this year for a lot of people. When's the last Sonic game that got praised? Final Fantasy? Fans of those titles may be waiting decades and are handed shit every year. No doubt when a game is still shit to a fan of the franchise, it'd be the worst of the year.

Or maybe people think they are just not fun in every aspect. I think Dragon Age: Origins is the worst game of 2009. Many people disagree with me. Am I wrong? Am I being toxic to gaming's image? Nothing about that game is good to me, ergo it's the worst of the year. At least with incomplete games it can be funny.

It's fan opinion. It's always a factor.

 

[DementedSheep]

You will always be able to find a worse game. Thing is if the game is very obviously broken and/or not heavily marketed most people will either not know about it at all or have avoided it. If you've not wasted money on it or played it you probably don't care about it or know it well enough to vote for it.

A question like that is always going to end up being "which game disappointed the most people" because people don't know every game in existence and are more likely to think of and vote for something they personally were pissed about rather than the actual worst game.