Let's Discuss: How reasonable is a reasonable videogame consumer?

[CaitSeith]

I got this question after watching Super Bunnyhop's video about how illegal bullshots are (game advertisement that's so shamelessly too good to be true that it doesn't fool anybody).


Short answer: no. Law dictates that if it isn't misleading for a reasonable consumer, then it isn't illegal. So, what about non-bullshots? What about game advertisement where you had no way to tell if it was truthful until you played the game itself? Does falling for those make you unreasonable? Is being informed the same as being reasonable? Or knowing little about games counts as being unreasonable? Is reasonable the same as average? Are most videogame consumers reasonable?

How do you define a reasonable videogame consumer in the first place?

Let's discuss.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Well here's the thing; those advertisements and promises are coming from the makers of the game. Its entirely reasonable to believe them, because they're the ones making the game. If the NMS people promised advanced multiplayer and character interaction...well we as the consumers don't really have anything to counter that promise, so we're kinda' left to believe it. At least a reasonable gamer would.

I think this clip from Colbert sums up my argument perfectly:
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/4lcqtx/the-colbert-report-vitaminwater-advertising-lawsuit

And I would argue a reasonable gamer would be someone who listens to the promises of the devs, and through a little bit of research and no insider knowledge can find no reason to disbelieve that which is promised. We don't all have friends who work in the industry or know how to get a hold of game journalists or get backroom access to Beta releases. Most of us have the Escapist, Reddit, Cheezeburger and occasionally IGN to find out shit about gaming news.

 

[CaitSeith]

Not feeding cupcakes to their dogs?

I mean, in the end the only way to know how a game will play is via it's state upon release, it's not a film where at worst they'll add CGI effects. Thus a reasonable consumer will just check reviews and first impressions. Maybe if a demo is extremely different than the final release there might be a case.

So a reasonable consumer wouldn't preorder? I think a lot of people who preorder consider themselves reasonable, don't you agree?

 

[CaitSeith]

Well here's the thing; those advertisements and promises are coming from the makers of the game. Its entirely reasonable to believe them, because they're the ones making the game. If the NMS people promised advanced multiplayer and character interaction...well we as the consumers don't really have anything to counter that promise, so we're kinda' left to believe it. At least a reasonable gamer would.

I think this clip from Colbert sums up my argument perfectly:
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/4lcqtx/the-colbert-report-vitaminwater-advertising-lawsuit

And I would argue a reasonable gamer would be someone who listens to the promises of the devs, and through a little bit of research and no insider knowledge can find no reason to disbelieve that which is promised. We don't all have friends who work in the industry or know how to get a hold of game journalists or get backroom access to Beta releases. Most of us have the Escapist, Reddit, Cheezeburger and occasionally IGN to find out shit about gaming news.

However game advertisement isn't for gamers only. It's for the mainstream audience too, mainstream audience that knows things less obvious like McDonalds advertising are unrepresentative. What makes developer's promises different than McDonalds?

PS: I still haven't watched your video, I'll edit my response once I do.

 

[Saelune]

Well here's the thing; those advertisements and promises are coming from the makers of the game. Its entirely reasonable to believe them, because they're the ones making the game. If the NMS people promised advanced multiplayer and character interaction...well we as the consumers don't really have anything to counter that promise, so we're kinda' left to believe it. At least a reasonable gamer would.

I think this clip from Colbert sums up my argument perfectly:
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/4lcqtx/the-colbert-report-vitaminwater-advertising-lawsuit

And I would argue a reasonable gamer would be someone who listens to the promises of the devs, and through a little bit of research and no insider knowledge can find no reason to disbelieve that which is promised. We don't all have friends who work in the industry or know how to get a hold of game journalists or get backroom access to Beta releases. Most of us have the Escapist, Reddit, Cheezeburger and occasionally IGN to find out shit about gaming news.

However game advertisement isn't for gamers only. It's for the mainstream audience too, mainstream audience that knows things less obvious like McDonalds advertising are unrepresentative. What makes developer's promises different than McDonalds?

PS: I still haven't watched your video, I'll edit my response once I do.

I dont think they are saying that. If a McDonald's commercial says a big mac has say, two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun, it should have those things.

 

[CaitSeith]

Well here's the thing; those advertisements and promises are coming from the makers of the game. Its entirely reasonable to believe them, because they're the ones making the game. If the NMS people promised advanced multiplayer and character interaction...well we as the consumers don't really have anything to counter that promise, so we're kinda' left to believe it. At least a reasonable gamer would.

I think this clip from Colbert sums up my argument perfectly:
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/4lcqtx/the-colbert-report-vitaminwater-advertising-lawsuit

And I would argue a reasonable gamer would be someone who listens to the promises of the devs, and through a little bit of research and no insider knowledge can find no reason to disbelieve that which is promised. We don't all have friends who work in the industry or know how to get a hold of game journalists or get backroom access to Beta releases. Most of us have the Escapist, Reddit, Cheezeburger and occasionally IGN to find out shit about gaming news.

Sorry to bother you, but do you know other place I can find the video? The one in your link isn't available in my region.

 

[CaitSeith]

Not feeding cupcakes to their dogs?

I mean, in the end the only way to know how a game will play is via it's state upon release, it's not a film where at worst they'll add CGI effects. Thus a reasonable consumer will just check reviews and first impressions. Maybe if a demo is extremely different than the final release there might be a case.

So a reasonable consumer wouldn't preorder? I think a lot of people who preorder consider themselves reasonable, don't you agree?

In most cases it really isn't a very reasonable thing to do though. Publishers also seem aware of this, why otherwise include preorder bonuses? Those are just a incentive to bother. Digital won't disappear, it's unlikely for stores to be out of stock for any game that's had any marketing campaign to speak of and Amazon can have the thing delivered to your house by the next morning. So, the only real benefit other then those incentives is for those people who want the game on release, don't want to or can't go digital and don't want to leave the house.

So, basically, people mostly do it for reasons beyond a simple interest in buying the game as such. It's because it will be cheaper that way, maybe it will include some kind of dlc etc.

Do you think people who preorder for the DLC or bonuses and end up being disappointed with the game itself are being unreasonable?

 

[CaitSeith]

Well here's the thing; those advertisements and promises are coming from the makers of the game. Its entirely reasonable to believe them, because they're the ones making the game. If the NMS people promised advanced multiplayer and character interaction...well we as the consumers don't really have anything to counter that promise, so we're kinda' left to believe it. At least a reasonable gamer would.

I think this clip from Colbert sums up my argument perfectly:
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/4lcqtx/the-colbert-report-vitaminwater-advertising-lawsuit

And I would argue a reasonable gamer would be someone who listens to the promises of the devs, and through a little bit of research and no insider knowledge can find no reason to disbelieve that which is promised. We don't all have friends who work in the industry or know how to get a hold of game journalists or get backroom access to Beta releases. Most of us have the Escapist, Reddit, Cheezeburger and occasionally IGN to find out shit about gaming news.

However game advertisement isn't for gamers only. It's for the mainstream audience too, mainstream audience that knows things less obvious like McDonalds advertising are unrepresentative. What makes developer's promises different than McDonalds?

PS: I still haven't watched your video, I'll edit my response once I do.

I dont think they are saying that. If a McDonald's commercial says a big mac has say, two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun, it should have those things.

If you watch the video, the each of the ingredients that are shown as the jingle mentions. Do the real Big Macs actually look like that? No. Is it unreasonable to expect them to look like that? Experience says yes, food advertising presentation is faked all the time, and one learns not to expect to look the same. Why isn't unreasonable when it comes to game advertising when features announced before release are dropped frequently and the looks of the previews are different to the final product (even before NMS)?

 

[Saelune]

Well here's the thing; those advertisements and promises are coming from the makers of the game. Its entirely reasonable to believe them, because they're the ones making the game. If the NMS people promised advanced multiplayer and character interaction...well we as the consumers don't really have anything to counter that promise, so we're kinda' left to believe it. At least a reasonable gamer would.

I think this clip from Colbert sums up my argument perfectly:
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/4lcqtx/the-colbert-report-vitaminwater-advertising-lawsuit

And I would argue a reasonable gamer would be someone who listens to the promises of the devs, and through a little bit of research and no insider knowledge can find no reason to disbelieve that which is promised. We don't all have friends who work in the industry or know how to get a hold of game journalists or get backroom access to Beta releases. Most of us have the Escapist, Reddit, Cheezeburger and occasionally IGN to find out shit about gaming news.

However game advertisement isn't for gamers only. It's for the mainstream audience too, mainstream audience that knows things less obvious like McDonalds advertising are unrepresentative. What makes developer's promises different than McDonalds?

PS: I still haven't watched your video, I'll edit my response once I do.

I dont think they are saying that. If a McDonald's commercial says a big mac has say, two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun, it should have those things.

If you watch the video, the each of the ingredients that are shown as the jingle mentions. Do the real Big Macs actually look like that? No. Is it unreasonable to expect them to look like that? Experience says yes, food advertising presentation is faked all the time, and one learns not to expect to look the same. Why isn't unreasonable when it comes to game advertising when features announced before release are dropped frequently and the looks of the previews are different to the final product (even before NMS)?

I think its unreasonable to expect us to be ok with things as they are because we're used to it. Just because we expect commercials to lie to us, doesnt mean its ok. But I am in favor of far stricter false advertising laws.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

People would be reasonable if they were patient, didn't purchase day one or pre-order based on hype and advertisemnt. How about the movie industry? Do we see cinema goers get all mad because a trailer badly misrepresented the film? If you jump in blind faith towards the very mechanisms designed to make you believe in the product no matter what, then you have to be aware of your responsibility and be prepared for disappointment while making sure that your purchase - which is entirely entertainment based, not anywhere near the necessities of everyday survival - can be either soaked up or dealt with on a calm level. The advertisement industry lies. It lies a lot. And there are always methods of retrieving at the least some cash back from an impulse spend.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Well here's the thing; those advertisements and promises are coming from the makers of the game. Its entirely reasonable to believe them, because they're the ones making the game. If the NMS people promised advanced multiplayer and character interaction...well we as the consumers don't really have anything to counter that promise, so we're kinda' left to believe it. At least a reasonable gamer would.

I think this clip from Colbert sums up my argument perfectly:
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/4lcqtx/the-colbert-report-vitaminwater-advertising-lawsuit

And I would argue a reasonable gamer would be someone who listens to the promises of the devs, and through a little bit of research and no insider knowledge can find no reason to disbelieve that which is promised. We don't all have friends who work in the industry or know how to get a hold of game journalists or get backroom access to Beta releases. Most of us have the Escapist, Reddit, Cheezeburger and occasionally IGN to find out shit about gaming news.

Sorry to bother you, but do you know other place I can find the video? The one in your link isn't available in my region.

I can't seem to find it on YouTube, but it's an old Colbert Report clip. Its Colbert quoting Coke Cola that no reasonable consumer would think Vitamin Water had vitamins in it or that VW is healthy despite the bottle saying drinking VW promotes healthy living.

 

[Lufia Erim]

The only responsible video game players are those who research a game beforehand. Now if a feature promised in a game is present but not to your liking, thats just too bad, you should have done your homework, you cannot please everyone.

However, if a feature that was promised is NOT in the game, that is false advertising. Let's say i buy a game and the devs explicitly said, there is multiplayer but there isn't multiplayer IN ANY FORM, then that is on the devs. Regardless of if i researched the game or not.

I'll give two examples. Take Dark souls and No mans sky.

If i say Dark souls has multiplayer and my friend goes out and buys Dark souls expecting couch co-op, and realises that there isn't any he will be pissed. Is it my fault? No, because Dark souls does have multiplayer in the form of summoning other player or havig other player invading other people games. In this scenario, the fault is on him for not researching.

Now if i say No Mans Sky has multiplayer, and my friend goes out and buys No mans sky only to realize there is no multiplayer in any way, shape of form.He has the right to be pissed regardless of if he researched it or not. In this case it's entirely my fault because i blatantly lied knowing full well there isn't any multiplayer.

Thats the difference.

 

[Lufia Erim]

Im making another post because i want to go on a slight tangent. But i predict that AAA publishers are going to start putting disclaimers in their full retail price games. Labeling them as Beta builds, and that the game may not be have all the features on release. That more features "may" be added.

Basically steam early access, but for AAA blockbusters.

I predict they will use this to cover their asses, and while some games will add features down the line, i am positive others will not if they think they made enough money or it's not profitable enough.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

There's a big difference between a McDonald's cheeseburger and a video game. With the McDonald's cheeseburger you still more or less get what's on the menu, it just doesn't look as pretty. With a video game the difference can mean almost an entirely different product.

 

[Lufia Erim]

Im making another post because i want to go on a slight tangent. But i predict that AAA publishers are going to start putting disclaimers in their full retail price games. Labeling them as Beta builds, and that the game may not be have all the features on release. That more features "may" be added.

Basically steam early access, but for AAA blockbusters.

I predict they will use this to cover their asses, and while some games will add features down the line, i am positive others will not if they think they made enough money or it's not profitable enough.

REALLY doubt it after No Man's Sky, the backlash of it was something that no company will want to risk.

Thats exactly why i think this though. The problem is the Sean murray lied about the features of the game. I feel like if the game was advertised as being a beta build with some sort o disclaimer, people would have been a little more accepting or at the very least he wouldn't be under investigation for false advertising. He would have an instant out, saying it's on it way, the game is a beta build and there are more features to come. That the game is not a representation of the final build. Regardless if its true or not.