Since when did it become unacceptable to expect better from a game?

[Samirat]

Guys, I totally understand that opinions regarding the quality of games are subjective - I mean, everybody seems to love this game except me, and I understand that everybody's opinion is different. That said, why were people disagreeing with my when I posted my subjective opinion?

This post has me confused. When did this happen? Why can't people disagree with opinions? If we all agreed with each other this forum would be a pretty stale place.

I think you may have missed the sarcasm.

Hint, hint.

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

To answer the title question: When your expectations exceed reality.

 

[Uncompetative]

...This thread is a discussion on why it's wrong for me to question why some areas of any game could not have been done better and/or differently. Why should I just be prepared to sit quietly, and accept the reviews and say nothing more for fear of being ripped limb from limb by those who take offence at the mere thought that someone may not agree with their view that a game is nothing but perfect?

You shouldn't. Indeed none of us should. We outnumber the reviewers, we are entitled to our opinions and we have actually paid for the games.

The crux of the problem is that professional reviewers are journalists. This prevents them from offering constructive criticism, such as offering up hypothetical creative solutions that may have fixed the flaws in the gameplay if they had been able to advise the developers. It is far too late!

Sometimes you can detect a murmur of 'concern' about framerate, or dodgy collision detection whilst the game is at Preview stage, but they are very careful not too show themselves up as not knowing a damn thing about what is and isn't possible with current team sizes, middleware and innovations in programming. This is because they cannot write code only text, unlike some people who frequent these forums.

So, I think, given that every game seems to be turned into an epic trilogy (and now Valve are trying to break sequels down into episodes), the audience should feel free to make suggestions on how to improve a series - and not 'writerly' subjects, like character development, dramatic pacing, art direction and atmosphere (i.e. graphics, sound and tactile feedback), but 'game designer' subjects like ergonomic control mappings and increasing replayability through greater nonlinearity. How should the Save system work? Checkpoints, quicksave, limited lives, time-rewind or some combination of these? How should Health work? Fatigue, shock, bleed-out, buddy resuscitate, health packs to collect when injured or collect and use when needed, segmented health bar, recharging shield, body armor, automatic first-aid, or attend to injury mini game when you've limped to cover? What happens in Multiplayer? Permadeath, fast/slow respawns coupled with brief invincibility, spectating, switching teams, or late-joining another match? There are so many options, did the developer pick the right one? What could they do better next time?

Sure, you're gonna sound like a wannabe game developer, but I feel a healthy discourse would at least inform our purchasing decisions.

 

[Bullfrog1983]

Okay, so yesterday I started a thread listing what I perceived as flaws in Valve's Half Life 2. I listed the weaknesses along with my reasoning for such. Some responses I found to be grown up and much appreciated and something to consider, but for the most part the responses I got seemed to be from 12 year old religious zealots who seemed appalled that I could even question some possible aspect of the game.

My question is why is it wrong to expect something more? Half Life 2 received that many rave reviews and I paid my hard earned dollars for a game that I personally found not meeting my expectations. It's a GOOD game, yes and I found some enjoyment, but there are other games I've played that I've enjoyed more (Deus Ex and System Shock 2 spring to mind as better games in the same genre and both are older than the game in question). That's my personal opinion and nothing more.

Now this is NOT, I repeat NOT! a discussion on Half Life 2. That is just the explanation for why I started this thread. This thread is a discussion on why it's wrong for me to question why some areas of any game could not have been done better and/or differently. Why should I just be prepared to sit quietly, and accept the reviews and say nothing more for fear of being ripped limb from limb by those who take offence at the mere thought that someone may not agree with their view that a game is nothing but perfect?

Well, you are entitled to your opinion. Unfortunately so are the people who do like the game with all its flaws and feel that it is a good use of their time to jump all over you for putting forth a thought out arguement.

That being said all those 12 year olds might actually be older people - now that literacy levels seem to be on the downslide in America and Canada (and other parts of the world.) They may just be unable to write down their counterpoints intelligently enough to argue with you so they will just repeat what others say to try and drown you out.

On the other hand, who says they aren't people paid by corporations to publicly tell you that the game is awesome just the way it is?