Poll: Are gamers today too self entitiled?
- Thread starter Dragoon
- Start date
Recommended Videos
"Believe it or not, opinions formed through ignorance are still wrong." How correct you are, sir.Monoochrom said:
By your notion that I am an idiot, you are a fool for arguing with me. "Never argue with an idiot, because they'll drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience."
Yes, a lecture. A two-sided lecture, in which neither person will ever concede to the other. If you thought, even for a minute, I would turn around and agree...then I think we need to rethink who the idiot is, lol.Monoochrom said:
I don't know about the OP's examples but being a 30 year old life long gamer I more look at the cross-platform route we've gone as showing a sense of entitlement. First was an animosity towards non traditional gaming market. Second,I understand it's mostly happened because the industry shift towards big budget blockbuster gaming, but for the gamers that can't afford to have both systems there's certainly a demand to be able to play every game on their console of choice.
I'd let it slide but we've seen things get worse recently with how certain gamers want to see Nintendo get out of the console market and only make games so they can play Mario/Zelda/Metroid/etc on their Playstation/Xbox. And even worse than that, is the segment that doesn't even want to see a new Sony/Microsoft console released because they may not be able to afford a new console and would rather see the industry completely stagnate for everyone than be left behind on the growing curve.
I'd let it slide but we've seen things get worse recently with how certain gamers want to see Nintendo get out of the console market and only make games so they can play Mario/Zelda/Metroid/etc on their Playstation/Xbox. And even worse than that, is the segment that doesn't even want to see a new Sony/Microsoft console released because they may not be able to afford a new console and would rather see the industry completely stagnate for everyone than be left behind on the growing curve.
This is basically it, but I would like to add one other fact:Sutter Cane said:
asking for change in a work as feedback = fine
I think even more than the word entitled "demanding" is more harmful. You see, terrorists issue demands. Governments issue demands. The word is about asserting authority and ownership.
Instead of "demanding" changes, we should ask for changes. We can ask Bioware to change the ending and its their last word if they want to change the ending, which doesn't break artistic integrity since the creator wanted to change their own work.
"Demanding" just gives the impression of holding a gun to Bioware and forcing them to do something they don't want, thus destroying their artistic integrity.
In the GFWL debacle, the potential customers are just telling them they won't buy their product due to certain circumstances, they aren't "demanding" or forcing the publisher to do what they want, that's just bullying, they are saying: "You have X in your game, sorry we don't want that if you want our money" and that's fair.
Yeah, I won't buy any Bioware products after Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age 2.Monoochrom said:
Still if you want change you have to act like an "Your ending sucked ass, you should change it" and then if Bioware wants to change their ending they can to.
What apparently most people did was the following. They gave feedback and tried to force Bioware to change the ending even if they planned to do it after they received a lot of negative feedback.
You chose to buy it. You bought something without knowing how it ends. That doesn't change the fact you bought it of your own accord. (yes, I get that knowing the end to a game defeats the point of playing it)Monoochrom said:
False advertisement laws apply to objective functionality being missing (such as the "4G" in the name iPad 4G when they sold it in Austrailia). False advertisement laws do not apply to subjective opinions about the content of something.
People don't demand that movies change their endings if they don't like them. People don't demand that artists repaint something they bought from them. People don't demand music artists change their songs because they don't like them.
What people need to do is sack the fuck up and take responsibility for their purchases. How much money you pay for something doesn't mean you're allowed to get whatever you want. You'd like to think so, and I get it, I really do (your money is valuable to you, it's valuable to all of us), but no one told you to pay for it. No one forced you to. You have all the resources in the world to find out about a product these days before buying it.
You take the dive, you put your money in, and you take the risk. While I haven't yet played Mass Effect 3, I can safely say there is a huge amount of risk for me because of how popular the series is and how acclaimed it's been, and how I'm well aware that the trilogy comes to an end, therefore I expect bombshells to be dropped on me. I did this with the Harry Potter series, and I have no issue doing it with ME3 when it comes out.
At the end of the day, it is your choice to pay for something. Unless the terms of the purchase specifically state that you are going to get exactly what you want, it's a one-way deal. You're provided with the content, not the other way around. No matter how much you stick your fingers in your ears and say "the customer is always right", that doesn't change the fact that you made the decision to pay for it. If your feelings truly are "our money is what makes the industry spin, so we're important", show them this by returning the fucking game.
No, for the most part. Admittedly, small sects of the gaming community are rather self-entitled, but I think a lot of the concerns that come up are legitimate. In an interactive medium, I think it's only fitting that the consumers should share their input. (Politely, of course).
Oh... well... that's embarrassing on my part. ^_^;Shadowkire said:
I was under the impression from what I heard about Retake Mass Effect that they were more of the vindictive little idiots that tend to be most popular among the gaming stereotype in popular media. If RME is that sincere and surprisingly generous and sensible among most gamer-formed communities to protest a wrongdoing by the gaming publishers, I'm surprised that it's gotten such a bad rap by some people, especially some of the Escapist columnists.
Sorry on my end. I was ill-informed of RME, and I really should look into those things a bit more before saying something next time.
My mistake, that part of my post was directed at the population in general not specifically you. I should have made that clearer seeing as I did quote you after all.Monoochrom said:
And ending is not a function. A video game has no functions apart from "working". The content is not in any way, shape, or form, a "functional misinterpretation". This is not a program. It does not accomplish anything other than entertaining you with fiction.
Oh, right. It couldn't have possibly been a director's cut, it of course must have been people not liking it.
That's not the art I was referring to and you damn well know it.
Bullshit, bullshit, and more unrelated bullshit. No one ever tells a songwriter "I don't like the way your song is written please rewrite it". Meeting the expectations of profanity standards that radio stations and tv channels have is not the same, the orginal is always available.
Remixes have nothing to do with people asking a content creator to redo something they didn't like.
Then protip: let someone else play it all the way through, and then spoil the ending for yourself, and then you won't have that problem! Those are your options. You take the risk of not knowing how it ends when you sunk money into it, so as I said, take some goddamn responsibility for it.
Incorrect, nor the amount or the fact your are the person paying entitles you to jack fucking squat. There are no guarantees of content with video games; there never have been and never will. If you don't like the literary decisions of the story writers, that's your goddamn problem, not theirs. I am proud that Bioware is standing up and defending their ending, whatever it was.No, actually you don't get it. It's not the Amount of Money that makes me entitled to whatever I want, it's the fact that I am the one who is paying. Also, sure people tell me to pay for things, otherwise I could just pirate everything and speak openly of it. I know of course that's not what you meant
The customer is not entitled to a goddamn thing. Don't buy the goddamn game, or if you do, don't ***** at the content creator after. It's just that simple.
By "all the resources in the world", I mean the millions of different outlets and people you can talk to before making a purchase. The simple concept you are failing to grasp is risk. With any content-based product, you of course will not know if it's "worth the money", but it's irrelevant as to whether or not it's worth the money. What is relevant is if it worth playing to you, and as I said before, you have many, many ways of finding out.
Oh but it is. Buy it, or don't. If you do buy it, respect the fact you are not in charge of how the story goes and shut the fuck up (not directed at you personally). That is where the entitlement comes in. People somehow seem to think that the money they pay for a game entitles them to whatever literary content they desire.
Which is just batshit retarded. We live in a free market; the games industry is not based around communism. They don't cave to people who think what they make should be different.
? A point that seems to be lost on you?
Wishful thinking. Developers are proud of the things they create. If making games was a democratic affair, this would be fine. Seeing as we don't have council meetings open to the public for game development, it's the developer that hands the content to the player, and player that consumes it. Profit is absolutely irrevelent in this discussion.
You can beat your chest as much as you want, rile up your fellow gaming brethren as much as you wish, but saying "we pay money so if we don't you won't get money and you'll go broke NAH NAH NAH DO AS WE SAY" as though it means a damn thing is utterly infantile.
Bioware didn't cave in, because no developer (except Valve, seeing as 99% of their games are all mods anyway) wants to be seen as a company that is run by whiny consumers. They stride down the road of art and storytelling and they make no excuses for it, and for that, as I said, I am proud of them.
It's unbeilevable relevent. They make the content and give it you you. You do not make the content and give it to them. You either accept the fact that some things in your life are not meant to be in your control or you don't buy it.
I'm very, very glad you're not a lawyer than, because it seems you are highly confused as to what false advertising is.
I can't comment on this because I absolutely hated Demon Souls (not because of the challenge of the game, that was fine) and wish to have no part in anything to do with the sequel.
I just don't get you. You're fighting so aggressively about Mass Effect 3 but you don't own it. Most of what I've been saying about entitlement is revolving around that yet you can't seem to decide whether you're arguing about ME3 or not.Monoochrom said:
It's not a fucking vaccum cleaner that said it would clean wood floors and then did not clean wood floors. For it to legally be "false advertising" it must have charged consumers for an ability or function and then failed to deliver on that function. We use this to protect consumers against faulty or cheaply made products from causing people to waste their money.
Applying it to games is batshit retarded, but by all means, do continue to take it in that direction. It's a rosy future for us all when we take game developers to court over their choices in storytelling.
But they were picking a fight. They were picking a fight *they thought they could win*. DLC was coming anyway. Poor game endings had been changed before. I know a few histrionic observers thought this was the Ragnarok that would settle the game/art dispute once and for all, but it wasn't. And if we're all being honest with ourselves, Bioware was probably planning on releasing expository DLC in the first place, which is why they made that ending so fucking inscrutable. They just won't be charging for it now.Scrumpmonkey said:
Now you tell me...if you and I baked up 400 cupcakes and sent them to EA, with "Origin", "Bullfrog", "Westwood" and "Pandemic" written on them, do you think EA would stop treating its developers poorly?
That's what people mean when they say "pick your battles" you know. They mean pick battles that you're likely to win. It's not a reference to noble, futile last stands. It's a reference to selective cowardice.
Look out! The slope we're standing on is incredibly slippery!LiquidSolstice said: