Poll: Poll:Unreasonable Demands

[hyperdrachen]

I think we are well past due to step back and question what we are entitled to. Somewhere along the line many of us decided we were the center of the universe and that the works of every artists had both a duty, and a understood intent, to faithfully represent our lives.

I am directly referring to the hubub around Dragon Age 2. Or as the screaming masses might dub it, "The game that was so gay it infringed upon the rights of straight gamers", unless of course it was "The game that woefully underserved it's homosexual audience".

To address the first group. "Unwanted sexual interest is not something new, nor something you are entitled to see stamped out entirely. You are however entitled to reject that interest(see every girl that ever turned you down for tips). Being heterosexual does not entitle you to never meet a homosexual. It certainly doesn't entitle you to subject an artists characters and story to your design by committee, the very thing holding creativity back in big budget movies and games.

As for those complaining about the lack of service to the homosexual community, I remind you that this game has no duty to stroke your ego. It is not the character being reduced to absurdity that has created a problem, it is that you have reduced yourself to absurdity. Just as the heterosexual gamer that dissociates with the narrative at the first sign of homosexuality, you in turn kneejerk associate, and in turn feel insulted by, an unflattering example of a homosexual. If a fictional character that shares your sexuality = you, then what does it do to your psychology when a real person that shares your sexuality commits a crime? Are you now a criminal, when he goes to trial should he get extra punished for poorly representing the homosexual community?

Both of these groups have developed an unreasonable sense of entitlement to the content of another's art. The difference is the heterosexual gamer is doing it from being accustom to a media that mostly caters to him, where the homosexual gamer believes the artists has a duty to make up for the years of homosexuality being a big no-no, or at times, a big joke, in games.

Catering to either of you just creates pandering design by committee characters and I hope the industry ignores you. You'll likely keep buying the games anyway since "being offended" is the only way you seem to feel important.

 

[veloper]

Nope, but we're not obligated to play the game.
People saying why they won't buy a game X can be useful.

 

[funguy2121]

I was going to celebrate the 100% hell-no. Then I saw that only OP and me have voted so far.

I don't think consumer feedback should receive too much attention. Fanboys do more damage than good. Mostly they want more of the same anyway.

A good artist knows what he/she is doing. Let them do it. The bigwigs who know nothing about games, however, also need to stay out of it and let the creators do their jobs.

 

[Lokithrsourcerer]

artists job is pretty much the opposite

art should be though provoking and/or challenging(that doest mean it has to be offensive or shocking either can be effective) not impotent and derivative.

be it painting theatre film or games.

 

[Axolotl]

So people should just shut up and not voice their opinions?

 

[Lokithrsourcerer]

So people should just shut up and not voice their opinions?

no they shouldn't but but a lot of people need to remember they are just opinions

 

[Continuity]

The nature of art is that the artist give us what they create, if we like it we admire/buy it. Gamers are certainly not in the business of commissioning games, though I suppose you could say that we are to some extent though market forces.

Bottom line, its very important that devs have freedom to create and to innovate, we cant be stifling that and still expect to get great new games.

Edit: and as for DA2... well its very clear that Bioware has dropped the ball by forgetting that a sizeable portion of their audience are the homophobic, entitled fucks that we otherwise refer to as adolescent boys.

 

[hyperdrachen]

So people should just shut up and not voice their opinions?

I never said anything about anyone shutting up, I hope these opinions are ignored, as the caustic opinions that they are, and not treated as some legitimate gripe of a social movement.

 

[hyperdrachen]

Nope, but we're not obligated to play the game.
People saying why they won't buy a game X can be useful.

This is true, but there's a big difference between feedback based tweaks to balance and game design, and fascist controls over the story one tells, or the characters one creates.

 

[Zhukov]

No.

I don't even particularly like being pandered to.

Apparently damn every game developer - yes, including the good ones - seems to think that I just want to enact an endless parade of transparently juvenile alpha-male power fantasies. Y'know, forcing big brawny enemies to swallow streams of hot lead while nearby females swoon at my sheer awesomeness and so on.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but it's a guilty pleasure at best and it gets old after the twentieth iteration. Sometimes I want to play something like Mirror's Edge or Ico or Amnesia.

Besides, as far as pandering goes, most games are still weak sauce. You want to pander to me? Then make a game where I engage in intelligent philosophical debate with a harem of enthusiastically naked lesbians while flying a spaceship.

 

[veloper]

Nope, but we're not obligated to play the game.
People saying why they won't buy a game X can be useful.

This is true, but there's a big difference between feedback based tweaks to balance and game design, and fascist controls over the story one tells, or the characters one creates.

Even the aggregate of alot of feedback may tell you something and I consider a really low metacritic user score a warning.

Still reasoned criticism with a focus on gameplay is preferable ofcourse and I trust some sources to reflect my own tastes in games somewhat.

 

[aba1]

artists job is pretty much the opposite

art should be though provoking and/or challenging(that doest mean it has to be offensive or shocking either can be effective) not impotent and derivative.

be it painting theatre film or games.

art is actually a persons thought or ideas conveyed through a creative outlet

the ideas or thoughts dont need to be interesting at all just generally if you want people to be interested the idea should be interesting

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I say both groups, and indeed all extremely vocal whiny gamers need a good smack upside the head with a 2X4. That's assuming, of course, that you can FIND their head because it's buried so far up their ass. If it were me, I'd extend a generous middle finger to both groups and make whatever the fuck I want.

 

[aba1]

So people should just shut up and not voice their opinions?

the point is that a person shouldn't have to express themselves based on what everyone else wants to see and if it bothers all these people so much why don't they all get together and make there own game and fix all these problems themselves its one thing to disagree its another to cry n make a big stink over something that ultamently doesn't even effect them

if everyone changes everytime anyone disagrees they would quickly lose what it is that makes them a individual

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I don't think that developers are beholden to the will of gamers, but at the same time I know that gamers have the right to criticize developers and their games, and that developers really should listen in many cases, or risk a huge lose in sales (this is a business after all).

I mean sure, developers are artists, and artists don't have to conform to standards set out by their fans, or society, and are actually supposed to push boundaries and be unique, but at the same time, game developers are basically in the business of wish fulfillment, and if they are only catering to the wishes of a minority they shouldn't be insulted by dwindling sales and a disregard of their product by a portion of the community.

 

[joebthegreat]

They're obligated to cater to me if they expect me to buy it.

Just like a waiter is obligated to cater to me if he expects me to eat at his restaurant.

Not like I'm saying that EVERYONE needs to cater to me and handle everything I do, but I'm going to give my money to the person who is catering to what I want over somebody catering to something different. That artist can cater to that different group, but there's no way in hell you can expect me to support it.

An example. I love well polished historical 4X games. I don't expect the developers of CoD to cater to that. I do expect Paradox as a developer to cater to that, and if they fail my expectations I'll take my 4X gaming somewhere else or wait for a better product while playing their older games instead.

 

[Lawbringer]

No, I'm with the majority - - in fact the 100% majority here. I think an artist should be able to produce whatever they wish. As long as they provide reasonable opportunity for people to see what they are buying before they do so and there are no lies as to its content, then they have done all they are obliged to do.

If people pay for the product and complain, they are also free do to so. Should the artist decide to continue their work it is their choice whether to follow their fans' wishes or go their own path - there are risks with either strategy, but that is why we live in a society where just about every niche interest group is catered for.

Let us take Dragon Age 2 (the current hot bed of debate) as an example. It took Dragon Age: Origins and changed a *lot* about it. It is clearly a sequel, but very different from the original. Some changes I liked...some I didn't. This will be the opinion of most of the (reasonable) critics of the game. It is up to Bioware to take the criticism (for both good or ill) and decide to what extent they choose to cater to the demands of their fanbase.

I, for one, welcome artists experimenting if it eventually ends up a perfectly (yes, I know not everyone will have the same definition of perfect) rounded game that will leave most people thinking:
'By jove, but that was a damned good use of my £30!'

Spoiler: Geeky Star Trek example

After all - would Jean Luc Picard, Riker and Data have ever existed had the creators of Star Trek thought 'Well, a star Trek in the more distant future with an English Captain is pretty different from The Original Series. Nah...change sucks! Perhaps we should just stick to the same formula and give Shatner eleven more series instead?'

 

[ThePerfectionist]

Snip

Besides, as far as pandering goes, most games are still weak sauce. You want to pander to me? Then make a game where I engage in intelligent philosophical debate with a harem of enthusiastically naked lesbians while flying a spaceship.

Fuck, I'd play that and I'm not even attracted to lesbians.

It's a little bit insane to suggest that a developer should make a game solely catered to MY needs or wants, but if you generally suggest that developers should cater to their audience, the answer is yes. That's how industries work. Justin Beiber's target audience is 13-year-old girls, so he sings irritatingly catchy pop songs with stupidly shallow and romantic lyrics. (wouldn't have brought him up at all if my favourite webcomic artist wasn't suffering through 30 days of listening to nothing but him. Good luck, Thunt!)

With regards to DA2, I think both complaints are equally ridiculous. I don't play DA2 for sex. There are plenty of online flash games I could play for sex if I wanted to. I play DA2 for the reason I play most Bioware games; an excellent standard of storytelling and writing (if a bit lackluster in combat, but I'll happily trade that). If the developers wanted to make it so that every character in the game wanted to fuck me, that's their decision. If every character wanted to fuck everyone else but me, that's also their decision. I wouldn't really side with either of those, but the point is sex is NOT the obligation. Sex is a sidebar, and Bioware are perfectly entitled to design all of their additions to the Action/RPG formula (*shudder* I hate saying that phrase) however the hell they see fit. I came for the story and the world. They gave me what I paid for.

Seriously, that's like going to someone's house for a delicious Italian dinner and claiming that the music they play in their living room isn't your favourite genre. It's their fucking house. They promised you dinner, you got dinner. Leave their music alone.

 

[irani_che]

alot of people say no
most artists refuse to bend away from what they believe, to show what they want, unconstrained and free.

these people are called the unemployed and impoverished.

"he who pays the piper calls the tune"

an artist should make something I like or i wont buy it. I will try dragonage out, if the gameplay and large size make up for the overdone homosexulaity, clunky combat and the story strays from the bioware mould i will purchase the game. If not then screw them