Term for the mindset of 'they made it accessable, so now it sucks'?

[Uratoh]

To describe it more, the sudden 'defensiveness' of 'how hard it used to be' to do something in video games (I suppose it would apply to real life, too, but the internet's speed etc makes it more noticible), the most recent being, Diablo 3's anniversery 'double legendary drop rate' buff is apparently going to be made permanant, due to it being considered more 'fun'. cue outrage from people who spent weeks, months farming over and over about how this will 'ruin' the game because it trivializes acquiring the things they had to put in more effort for...

This is not judgeing them for being upset that things are now 'easier', I've felt it myself sometimes (especially playing WoW since vanilla), I'm just wondering...is there a term for this kind of reaction/etc?

 

[ThatQuietGuy]

Appealing to the lowest common denominator works for a term I guess, the people who are going to try and grind out the rarest items in Diablo are probably the minority of die hard fans.

 

[Evonisia]

It's a mixture of jealousy and nostalgia. Jealous that those evil new players have the audacity to have more options in a modern system which is the more sensible option. Nostalgia because you remember all the "good" times you had grinding for whatever it was you got.

For WoW in particular, the Legendary Cloak questline should be reason enough to show that this attitude is bullshit. Hopefully nobody will be angry if that gets easier to obtain.

 

[josemlopes]

Meh, just call it "typical internet backlash".

Something being made more accessable or easy isnt bad on it self as long as it keeps the same level of depth and gives the option to play it as hard as it was. I like playing Gears Of War on Insane, I dont want them to tone it down because not every grandmother can finish the game on Insane, that is what the easier difficulty is there for. I also dont mind if there are multiple difficulties, there was that whole Dark Souls 2 thing when details were few where we thought that there could be a seperate easy mode, I really didnt mind that, for me the perfect balance would be a slider that ranged from incredibly easy, almost plays by itself to balls shit insane hard that only some random devoted as fuck asian kid managed to beat it once while on acids.

The difficulty is mostly fun when in balance with the player, not when its a lot harder or easy then what he can handle (the easy can be fun if the player is in the mood for something more chill) so having a wide range of difficulties would let the player find the one that suits him the most and would let him be able to beat the game while needing to put some effort into it.

The accessable part is something that is usually victim of the developer sacrificing certain aspects of the game in favor of making it available for a wider range of players, if the developer is really good at what he does he will manage to find a way of not making sacrifices to the game while making it more accessable.

 

[DoPo]

Diablo 3's anniversery 'double legendary drop rate' buff is apparently going to be made permanant, due to it being considered more 'fun'. cue outrage from people who spent weeks, months farming over and over about how this will 'ruin' the game because it trivializes acquiring the things they had to put in more effort for...

While I do not completely agree with that reaction, it is important to note that the change does not actually make it "more accessible" - that term implies something different, the drop rate change straight up changes the game to be easier. Another thing important to note for this is that the change is irreversible. I'd just pick up an older internet shit storm - Dark Souls 2, if DS2 had been "dumbed down" as many a person feared it would, then DS would still be the exact same game as before. Now, by contrast, Diablo 3 can never go back to anything else than its current state. If you liked something in a previous version - well, you're out of luck. If you like the new changes - you may still be out of luck, as there is no guarantee they are not going to changed, too.

Simply put, I do not think D3 is a good example of the mindset you're talking about.

Other than that, I do not think there is a specific term for it. And I do not acknowledge the E word as something anybody should even use.

 

[NBSRDan]

It's called being territorial and not wanting to share what you've claimed as solely yours.

 

[Ten Foot Bunny]

I've always thought of it as elitism or e-peening. It basically means "We're the hardcore crowd and we deserve to take ownership of every type of game. The rest of you peons go play Angry Birds or something."

Often times I see what some people call "dumbing down" as rational decisions that make the games far more enjoyable, not necessarily more accessible. There's a faction of people who describe themselves as Elder Scrolls fans of the hardcore ilk and who bemoan the addition of quest markers to the series. Often, these are the same people who even consider taking fast transport as an easy way out. It baffles my mind that they'd rather go back to the Morrowind system of running your ass out into the wilderness to locate places. That wasn't too hard to do with the map, but still kind of grating on the nerves after a while. And towns without silt striders? You had to do serious walking every time you wanted to visit.

I'd like to point out that Morrowind is still my fave game in the series, but I welcomed the elimination of that nuisance travel system that acted as a time sink in a game that was already well-rounded and had no shortage of fun stuff to do.

So no, I don't see "accessible" as synonymous with "suck" and I also don't understand that mentality.

 

[Redd the Sock]

I call it an opinion. Some of us just feel there's more value in something you have to earn through effort than in having it handed to you, and others that think it isn't fun if they aren't an instant badass.

 

[Something Amyss]

Hipster?

I mean, it's basically outrage that other people can enjoy it, which is more or less the hipster stereotype when it comes to art/entertainment.

 

[BarbaricGoose]

I call it an opinion. Some of us just feel there's more value in something you have to earn through effort than in having it handed to you, and others that think it isn't fun if they aren't an instant badass.

THere is a huge amount of middle ground between something difficult or slow being made slightly easier, or slightly less of a grind, and the game turning you into an instant badass, or just handing it to you.

It's elitism, as said earlier. The people who have hours upon hours of time to dedicate to earning something don't want anyone else to be able to get it. So they moan when the difficulty, or minimum time investment gets nerfed, even slightly, as now other people will be able to get it, and they'll feel less special or unique (even though they were neither of those things to begin with--let's be honest.)

I can't think of a single time where one of these nerfs made it feel like anything was just being handed to me. People throw around those phrases too liberally. Can you think of a single time something has felt like it was actually handed to you? Excluding the obvious pay-to-win sorta game where you can just buy the best... things.

 

[NiPah]

Depends, if the new drop rates take away from their enjoyment, then by all means they have the right to complain.

I'm not going to sit here calling them names, people like different things and when a game company changes an aspect of a game they have every right to complain.

Some people enjoy the prestige of accomplishing a certain thing in a game, be that through achievements, fastest times, or powerful in game awards. Honestly I'm not one of those people, but I can definitely understand where they're coming from. If Microsoft all of the sudden made Xbox 1 game achievements worth 50x more I wouldn't give a toss, but I wouldn't call the people who complained elitist hipsters, that would just be childish.

 

[DementedSheep]

I dunno, 'opinion'? are you looking for an insulting term or what? the 'they made it accessible, so now it sucks' thing isn't always about stopping other people from enjoying something (occasionally it is but how common is that really? most of this seems to come from misrepresenting the other side). A lot people play games for the challenge and the sense of accomplishment for beating something. Maybe they actually liked the old 'inaccessible' system or it was more felxiable when you got the hang of it so being made 'accessible' actually dose harm their enjoyment. In your example if an item that took a lot of effort to get suddenly becomes easy to get it can make the achievement of getting it feel trivialised and like a waste of their time. It takes away it's value as a 'status symbol' which is often much of the reason why they put the large amount of effort in to get it the fist place and though I'm not particularly bothered by this personally some people are. I don't really see why its so wrong to want something to commemorate your efforts. People like to get little rewards and having rare items is just another way of competing with others.

 

[Olas]

How about puritan? Believing something sacred has been spoiled by making it more fun and inclusive rather than strict and punishing. It's been said that fandoms are like religions in a lot of ways, so casuals are like people who claim to be of a religion, but don't attend church often and don't live the faith.

 

[Redd the Sock]

I call it an opinion. Some of us just feel there's more value in something you have to earn through effort than in having it handed to you, and others that think it isn't fun if they aren't an instant badass.

THere is a huge amount of middle ground between something difficult or slow being made slightly easier, or slightly less of a grind, and the game turning you into an instant badass, or just handing it to you.

It's elitism, as said earlier. The people who have hours upon hours of time to dedicate to earning something don't want anyone else to be able to get it. So they moan when the difficulty, or minimum time investment gets nerfed, even slightly, as now other people will be able to get it, and they'll feel less special or unique (even though they were neither of those things to begin with--let's be honest.)

I can't think of a single time where one of these nerfs made it feel like anything was just being handed to me. People throw around those phrases too liberally. Can you think of a single time something has felt like it was actually handed to you? Excluding the obvious pay-to-win sorta game where you can just buy the best... things.

While it didn't get me as I didn't play the game, one example I can think of is the MMO Star Wars Galaxies. The Jedi class had be designated a reward for those that put in a lot of time and effort making it something for prestige. Accessibility and more instant gratification demands later and Jedi came with the push of a button when selecting your class.

That's the thing. It is elitism, but no one's ever told me why that's bad in a way that doesn't sound whiney. "Wahh, someone has something nice that they put a lot of time and effort in to get. I want it too without all that icky work. How dare those big meanies not share the reward they worked so hard for." It would be one thing if in a legitimate need to casualize something that had been excessive at first some reward or acknowledgement to those that jumped through the excessive hoop, but instead we seek to invalidate their efforts, if not vilify them as "extreme efforts of people with no life."

As unimportant as gaming is, I don't respond well to an idea equivalent to everyone getting the same participation trophy. Work, rest or play, it's not a value I adhere to.

 

[zehydra]

Well, to some degree, making something accessible in this sense to as wide of an audience as possible will entail some "dumbing it down". There's really no way around that, and it's true for virtually all forms of media.

There's no term for the kind of attitude you're thinking about though. Except maybe the horrid term, "hipster"

 

[RandV80]

I call it an opinion. Some of us just feel there's more value in something you have to earn through effort than in having it handed to you, and others that think it isn't fun if they aren't an instant badass.

Yeah pretty much. There usually isn't a right or wrong way to design things, but rather it comes down to a matter of personal preference. Content density is a good example of this, whether you're looking at loot drop frequencies in Diablo or just a matter of how far apart 'stuff' is in an Elder Scrolls game. If the developers had the ability to provide the gamer with an adjustment slider for these sorts of things in all their games, you will end up with results spanning the entire range of options. As this is typical unfeasible for a developer, in theory they will usually try to find the best average medium and go with that.

Where a problem arises, is what if pushing the scale too far one way or the other makes the game unenjoyable or a certain group of players? Here's where you would hope specialization steps in. One developer makes a game that pleases one group, another makes a game that hits the spot for the other. But the problem, publishers tend to only be interested when they can make all the money (paraphrasing Jim Sterling here). They want to hit the highest market each time so you end up with a homogenization of similar titles. People on the other end of the spectrum can find themselves left with... practically nothing. It should be no wonder that a game like Dark Souls, which became successful by hitting an under appreciated gaming niche (a difficult & punishing RPG), are worried that there one toy will get taken away and it turns into something easier/simpler like Kingdoms of Amalur to appeal to the 'masses'.

And if you're one for the mass appeal type approach I wouldn't scoff at these people, chances are you have a niche interest in something that could get taken away. Like I couldn't help but laugh at someone somewhere else who was exactly like this, liked to champion the homogenization of stuff and ridicule people who were more into the niche stuff. Then Disney announces that the Star Wars Expanded Universe is no longer canon, and he blows a complete fit. Sounded a lot like a Fallout 2 fan 'crying' about Fallout 3.

 

[gargantual]

Meh. its hard to come up with a word for that. If games are are about easy access, then they're on the fast track to being future skinner boxes, when pattern and system mastery has no value. Some things have to be incentive driven and skill tree driven, to be democratic system in a game. Otherwise certain perks just become a contest of who gets there or exploits which power first. Higher skill gaps and even experienced folks can mess up, leaving opportunity for others.

how quick to we want the whole game to be over because it's simple?

 

[RandV80]

Another thing I think is relevant is Magic The Gathering's
player profiling [http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr11b]. There are three basic type of gamers they've found:

Timmy - the power gamer, likes to dominate
Johnny - the creative gamer, likes to build
Spike - the tournament player, likes to win

And the people at Wizards of the Coast try to make cards that appeal to all 3 types. When I used to play I was most definitely a Johnny, I liked building decks as much as I liked playing, and this extends heavily into my RPG gaming preferences. Seems like the vast majority of MMORPG's though I'm an afterthought as they're only interested in catering to Timmy and Spikes. That's basically Blizzard in a nut shell, and because Blizzard got so big there's barely an MMO I can play. The one that hit the 'Johnny' spot the best I've ever found was Guild Wars.

 

[loc978]

"Pissed off niche market?"

...then again, I'm one of those who still uses the term "dumbed down" for the shift you describe. Not that the whole market has gone that way, just a lot of major franchises. The niche is still basically the same size as it ever was, there is now simply a much larger market on top of that consisting of d-*ahem* ...universally accessible... games.

 

[Salus]

Come on, we can come up with a term for this.

Grindkill (v)

1. To remove some or all of the grind in a video game, esp. to the detriment of the game: "The devs grindkilled their own game." "The patch is the first in a series of grindkilling changes to the gameplay."

Rugpulling (v)

1. To devalue effort invested in a video game by modifying the gameplay to be easier: "The hardcore playerbase is hoping they are not going to be the victims of a rugpull when the expansion comes out."