Poll: Spoilers: Good or Bad?

[DoPo]

I find it quite silly to argue that people should stop giving a shit about spoilers because it's 'scientifically proven' that they enjoy them (even if they know they don't).

I read that study. I laughed a bit, too. Here is the basics of what they did - they took several different kinds of stories and for each wrote a paragraph which essentially spoils the further plot but it wasn't obvious (it was written in the style of the story). Then they gave the stories to participants in the study to read (if they hadn't read the story) and they got about equal amounts of them to read a spoiled and a non-spoiled story, then the participants had to rate how much they liked the story from 1-10. The average marks were in favour of the spoiled stories.

Subjects significantly preferred spoiled over unspoiled stories in the case of both the ironic-twist stories (6.20 vs. 5.79), p = .013, Cohen?s d = 0.18, and the mysteries (7.29 vs. 6.60), p = .001, d = 0.34. The evocative stories were appreciated less overall, likely because of their more expressly literary aims, but subjects again significantly preferred spoiled over unspoiled versions (5.50 vs. 5.03), p = .019, d = 0.22.

And...that doesn't tell us much, in fact, as they averaged the values. It'd be good to know if there was strong disagreement at all and what part was it (50 people giving spoiled stories a 1 is significant data lost due to the conversion to average). Furthermore, it doesn't tell us anything about actual spoilers - the participants didn't know the spoiler paragraph was not part of the story.

So the article essentially boils down to "people who avoid spoilers are silly because they have a different opinion than I do."

Indeed.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

Apparently I must literally be the only one here who doesn't mind spoilers and loves learning from them rather than plugging my ears and waiting for that exact appointed time to play said game.

Spoilers don't spoil anything for me because I actually want to know about something and more of it from the spoiler itself.

 

[DanielBrown]

No, it doesn't really bother me. I prefer not knowing, but I mainly play games for the gameplays sake rather than the story. I have a tendency to forget the spoilers I've read too. The ending of RDR shocked me in spite of having read what was going to happen by accident.

Can't resist clicking

Spoiler

spoiler tags...

 

[DoPo]

which requires reading of the method (which apparently requires payment, so I'm not doing it), and not a single sentence from the abstract.

I've got access to the study (from my uni), I'll tell you the method - I've got part of it in my previous post but I'll elaborate:
- they got about 800 people (176 male, 643 female to be precise)
- then they tried the experiment three times with different types of stories - mystery, ones having ironic twist, and evocative literary stories.
- for each story, they had written a paragraph that essentially spoils the plot. They had two types of these - written as if part of the story or not - as an external source (actually, I missed that in my previous post)
- participants were given the stories to read (taking care not to give them one they had read before) and each read three stories - one unspoiled, one spoiled "externally" (with just the normal paragraph) and one spoiled "internally" (with the spoiler paragraph as part of the text)
- after reading the stories, they had to rate them from 1 to 10 as to how enjoyable the stories were. They also had a free response option alongside the rating.
- stories were distributed about equally among participants - each was rated by at least 30 people

And the results (with a bit of expansion)

For all three experiments, analyses of variance revealed a significant effect of condition. (In order to control for variability between stories, we analyzed the data by comparing different versions of the same story.) Subjects significantly preferred spoiled over unspoiled stories in the case of both the ironic-twist stories (6.20 vs. 5.79), p = .013, Cohen?s d = 0.18, and the mysteries (7.29 vs. 6.60), p = .001, d = 0.34. The evocative stories were appreciated less overall, likely because of their more expressly literary aims, but subjects again significantly preferred spoiled over unspoiled versions (5.50 vs. 5.03), p = .019, d = 0.22. Subjects also did not indicate in their free responses that they found these altered beginnings out of place or jarring.

Now with that said - you are correct, there appears to be no other study done on the matter. At least I didn't manage to find one. The author of the study, Jonathan D. Leavitt (there is also a second name listed - Nicholas J. S. Christenfeld but the study opens with only contact information about Mr Leavitt) seems to only have two other things published - "More on the medical consequences of nuclear war." and "Falls as childhood accidents: an increasing urban risk." Well, if it matters.

 

[Raikas]

I went with "other" because for me it depends.

If I'm looking at something and randomly wondering if it's fun I'll go out and try to be spoiled because I want to know as much as I can, and that includes plot points. But if the specific main things I've heard are "story-driven" and otherwise good reviews I'll try to stay unspoiled as much as possible.

In non-games, I generally like to have TV shows and serial comic books, but like to see movies and read stand-alone novels fresh. And I frequently read series out of order, so that's spoiling myself as well.

 

[SecondPrize]

I think there's a middle ground between "spoilers are the devil" and "Nah, they're cool."
I really hope that fuckstick on /v/ was lying about The Last of us. I'll play a spoiled game anyways for the experience but why learn major plot points before you get to them in game?

 

[ninjaRiv]

I hate spoilers. But I know some people like spoilers. That's fine, go ahead and like them. But I don't like being told my enjoyment will be increased thanks tot hem. "Here, let me spoil the ending for you! You'll thank me!!!"

Is it so hard to just be nice and not say a fucking word? Ask someone if they want to hear a spoiler or just put a warning in the post? No, it's not. It's not hard to say "Spoiler alert" at all. It's not hard to ask if you WANT to hear a spoiler.

It more bothers me that people seem to think spoilers aren't a big to them so it must not be a big deal to everyone. I've been avoiding everything Doctor Who related since the news broke out about his name. Fuck that, I don't want to know. I enjoy working things out. I enjoy the mystery. "Studies show spoiler increase enjoyment." Fucking studies, man. Studies don't mean shit.

Rant over.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

depends on what it is really. If you "spoil" something that's a plot point rather than a plot twist, I don't think it would ruin anything. For example, if I say "In Farcry 3 you're like this overprivilaged white boy and then you have to become a killing machine to save your overprivilaged white friends, and then you kind of freak them out because after you save them they realize you're not like them anymore" you're probably going to be more interested in hearing the awkward conversations between the prissy blonde girl who just wants to go home to her serority and the guy who just murdered 50 people with his bare hands to save her. If anything it piques your interest and it doesn't "ruin" anything.

On the other hand, knowing the ending of the sixth sense completely nullifies the ending of the sixth sense.

 

[Agayek]

The answer to this is, as is the case with most things, "it depends".

Stories that have plot twists and the like (like say, Psycho or Knights of the Old Republic) are absolutely lessened by spoilers.

Other stories, not so much. For example, there's basically nothing in the entire Mass Effect trilogy that is meaningfully impacted by knowing about it ahead of time.

It all comes down to the work in question. Some can get by with spoilers just fine, as the execution is the important thing. Others use the surprise as one of their big, impactful moments, and taking away that surprise ruins the experience completely.

 

[AkaDad]

Spoilers are bad and anyone who spoils things should feel bad.

 

[Not Lord Atkin]

oh, and another thing. The main issue is not whether spoilers are good or not. They are spoilers. Some people don't mind them at all and others hate them - as I said, it's purely a matter of preference. Therefore I believe it's common courtesy to refrain from using spoilers where possible or at the very least let people know you are about to use them beforehand in order to cater to those who want to avoid them. I can't see just how being mindful of other people by way of a simple spoiler warning subtracts from the value of discussion on any way - that's a point the article tries to make but fails to give a sufficient explanation (In other words, the author pulls the 'point' out of his/her ass). Not to mention that implying that everyone should learn to not mind spoilers because the author doesn't is an extremely arrogant thing to do.

 

[floppylobster]

But he knows that nobody listens to science so he quotes Alfred Hitchcock, who anecdotally denounces protecting spoilers. Woops, I guess I shouldn't have spoiled the article for you.

He takes that Hitchcock quote completely out of context and it in no way supports his argument. Hitchcock famously defended spoilers for all his worth for Psycho (see the quote below) -

"To keep audiences in the dark about his film?s freaky plot twists, Hitchcock instructed his minions to buy all remaining copies of Robert Bloch?s Psycho novel. The director also ordered cast and crew to take an oath: ?I promise I shall not divulge the plot of Psycho.?"

In the quote he uses about the bomb Hitchcock is famously talking about suspense. He says it's more interesting for us an audience to participate in a scene if we know a bomb is about to go off (rather than have it go off as a surprise at the end of the scene). HOWEVER, if we knew the bomb was going to go off and who was going to be killed or affected then that would be a spoiler and the scene would once again lose all its energy.

The argument here is only over what should be considered a spoiler. For example (SPOILERS FOR EMPIRE STRIKES BACK)

Spoiler

(1) That Vader is Luke's father is a huge spoiler that would ruin a big reveal that makes the film very enjoyable. (2) The fact that Luke faces off against Vader at the end of the film might be considered a spoiler by someone very anal, but for most it is an interesting part of the story that would entice some viewers to watch it to find out what happens - and then be surprised by the twist - therefore not a spoiler)

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

What's the point of a game dev releasing a deep and intricate game world if players are just going to take the easy way out and jump to the Wiki page? Of course spoilers massively reduce the impact and enjoyment of a game. By removing the exploration and discovery elements of a given game, gamers who employ spoilers effectively remove >50% of a game's appeal and lifespan. Never understood it, myself.

 

[Woodsey]

It's inexcusably obnoxious to just blurt stuff out. The amount of pre-release exposure that films and especially games get now is ridiculous. I can see you getting more out of a work if you've know what's coming because it's easier to see how things fit into place, but you can get that from a second viewing or play through. You can't unspoil plot.

 

[DoPo]

It's inexcusably obnoxious to just blurt stuff out. The amount of pre-release exposure that films and especially games get now is ridiculous. I can see you getting more out of a work if you've know what's coming because it's easier to see how things fit into place, but you can get that from a second viewing or play through. You can't unspoil plot.

You've got an important point there - large amount of exposure of media. I've had some...really, really bad ones. Movies, especially, which outright tell you what's supposed to be an important plot point in the very description they also give you. 'Twas a few years back, though - still in the age of VHS I've had this happen on multiple occasions - I would go to the video rental and try and pick out a movie. The small blurb at the back of the case would tell me something really exciting, so I'd take the movie and after watching it, it turns out that was the entire plot. Like literally. Some people just stumble around on the screen trying to figure out what I already know - there is nothing to anticipate, noting to expect, nothing to keep me excited.

Now with a relatively "normal" movie (that still relies on some element to be revealed by the characters) that's bad enough, but here is something that actually happened (sort of, I'm making up scenario that followed what happened): the back of the box says "Two teenagers stumble upon a McGuffin shrouded in mystery only to find out it came from hell itself" (or whatever but make it 3-4 sentences in total) and...that's the entirety of the movie - two teenagers find a McGuffin, stuff happens, they find it's from hell, they act shocked, movie ends at that point. What the fuck? Or a movie where the plot revolves about catching the murderer and the blurb would have "X tries to find the mysterious murderer but he/she should have kept a closer eye on his/her friends". And you get, like...two or three friends with only one having more than 2 minutes of screen time - WHO COULD IT BE? Of course, the whole shtick of the movie is that the friend is the killer, but actually knowing it makes watching it just tedious and frustrating.

 

[Rheinmetall]

Interesting introduction.
I guess it depends on the spoiler. Usually I don't care about spoilers, simply because by the time I will play the game I will have already forgotten them. However there was one case of a spoiler that annoyed me. In the comments section under a review video of Bioshock Infinite a mean person had typed one line with caps lock so that it will catch your eye immediately containing info about the ending of the game. I haven't played the game so far and one of the reasons is that I got mad with this incident. That brat stole away from me one half of the experience I would get by playing the game without knowing the end. It's a kind of information that just ruins it all. I know that I'm going to enjoy the game either way, because it's a good one, but that thing just pisses me off.

 

[tippy2k2]

I absolutely positively can not stand spoilers in just about any way, shape, or form. It goes so far that I have chosen to quit playing games I liked because someone spoiled it.

For myself, if something gets spoiler, ALL I can think about is that spoiler. While I'm playing, all I can think about is how I shouldn't get too attached to X character because they're going to die or wondering when that big set piece that everyone keeps gushing on about is going to happen.

So yes IGN writer, they are a big deal and I would appreciate if you'd kindly shut the hell up about how I shouldn't care if something is spoiled. You've got one questionable study, a quote from Hitchcock that you've completely butchered the meaning of, and a "chill out and talk about the game that you haven't played yet" frame of mind.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Give me the choice.

As long as you put up the magic words 'SPOILER WARNING' I'm content.

It also depends on the nature of the spoiler, for example giving away the plot and twists of Bioshock Infinite shortly after release would be a dick move, but pre-release material about the 'skyhook' mechanic isn't that bad.

It's just that most advertising doesn't seem to know the difference.

 

[Windcaler]

Generally I avoid spoilers as much as I can. The very first time I had someone spoil something for me was when I was in the army. I was watching the sixth sense and my roommate came in, talked to me a minute and then he spoiled the ending but I didn't really realize that till the very end of the movie. To this day I think I would have appreciated it a lot more if I hadn't known the big twist at the end.

The same goes for games. If someone had told me about Sovreign in Mass effect or that the protagonist in Knights of the old republic was really Reven I don't think I would have enjoyed those games as much. Those plot twists were actually more immersive to the rising mystery of both games. The whole thing about mysteries is they cease to be compelling or interesting once you've solved them. Hell the main reason why Im so interested in Dark souls lore is because there are just a ton of unanswered questions and speculation from the community makes those questions more interesting

That said the only way I could be sure whether or not a spoiler would make a piece of entertainment more or less entertaining is if I could look into both timelines and my reaction to that. Obviously we don't have that kind of technology

I also doubt the legitimacy of that study but even if it is legitimate and being used appropriately for his point Im sure that theres a portion of the test group that proved the opposite so I doubt its conclusion is true for everyone