Why do gamers hate games because of one "small" problem?

[Frankster]

What might be a small thing for you is a big deal to others.

Individual differences FTW

I know on my side, I consider the ending of a game/film to be rather important. Not neccesiraly a game breaker, but if neverwinter nights 2 lost major points with me for having an unsatisfying finale (my opinion only of course), why should mass effect 3 get a free pass?

Since we are on the topic it's not like I wasn't having some of my own niggles as I played the game (so many DERP moments that made me go wtf...I think lulziest was on citadel where badass kai leng who was all ready to take you and council on runs away into the keeper tunnel cos they knew bailey and his assistant was coming...God i laughed so hard at that idea) but I ignored them cos overall, I was enjoying the game and the positives outweighed the negatives heavily.

Then came the ending and...Yeh, call it a small thing if you want, I'm happy it didn't bother you.
But it bothered me :\

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

Lately I've noticed that there is a lot of controversy because of the game "mass effect 3"'s ending. And I see how everywhere I go, I hear of this and I get tired of seeing all this anger and frustration because of a good games ending or another small thing in a game like it's multiplayer.
I also take note of how the people say that because of the problem they blame the whole game or company because of it.
I wonder why people can't just accept that a game is good and leave it as it is without the need for a huge uproar for change.
So what do you guys thing of people critiquing a game based off a "small problem"?

Well, I would actually say that ME3's ending is one of the few occasions where it isn't just a small problem, but I think overall fans just have a tendency to be hyperbolic. When they say that they 'hate' something, or hate something because of a small part in it, most of them don't really mean it. They may dislike it, it may annoy them, but few of them will actually feel genuine hate. It's like the whole MW2 boycott thing on Steam, where about half the people who'd signed up to boycott were caught playing the game anyway.

and then we wonder why companies don't take our complaints seriously the one time we're being genuine... *le sigh

 

[V8 Ninja]

The Mass Effect 3 problem is exactly the same as the LOST problem; (A): People got too invested in the series, (B): The endings are truly terrible as people say they are, and (C): The creators disregarded the main attraction of why people enjoyed consuming the media (LOST = discovering the mystery, ME3 = having player engagement matter).

 

[marscentral]

Perhaps this analogy might put the ending in context:

Imagine your favourite sports team is playing in a competition. They have struggled through the groups and the semi-final stage. It's been close, but the team have been fantastic and each game a joy to watch. They're now at the final, there's a minute left and it's close, but you're winning. Then there's a blatant foul from the other team and they score. The referee allows it anyway, blows his whistle and they've now won.

It's a small thing, a minute in hours of competition. But tell me that wouldn't make the whole thing gutting, that it wouldn't spoil all the fun and joy you got up to that point. That would be the moment all the fans dwell on.

That's the Mass Effect 3 ending to me.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

It's not a small problem. It's like the ending to the Sopranos, but worse in that people had a very strong emotional investment in the characters they were interacting with. This, after dumping hours and hours into the series.

People who cannot see this are fucking blind.

Mass Effect 3's ending isn't a small problem. It's one of the most important aspects of a story-oriented trilogy that prides itself on player input, it fails completely on both of these aspects and, as such, sours the entire rest of the trilogy for people who care about these things.

I don't hate games for small problems.

A poor ending does not invalidate the hours and hours of fun times you've had. Yes, it sours it slightly, but if you dump all of the good stuff that the series has done out the window you're no better than the ending.

 

[thespyisdead]

for me, when it comes to a game, the final impressions it leaves on me is what breaks or makes a game for me. in this case, i was disappointed with the ending i got, as the final game of a trilogy has the weakest ending of the whole trilogy. if that happens, something IS wrong

 

[Ulquiorra4sama]

Gotta love how quickly it turned into a "Why ME3's ending was bad" kind of thread.

Anyways, i guess generally speaking there are just some "problems" that people can't overlook. I mean people who find their favourite games back on the N64/PS1 or even further back love games with faults (and some are pretty damn big faults too), but in my experience what makes a game good isyour ability to overlook the flaws.

I guess it can go both ways and sometimes you'll run into what some would call a small problem and it'll completely ruin the experience for you. Take the case of ME3 where you have some people who are able to look beyond the bad ending and appreciate that it was a great game, and then there are those who simply can't look past a bad ending and will be crying about it even after that free DLC gets released.

 

[wooty]

I generally say there is three stages this scenario.

1- Action, if the controls or gameplay are bad, then you can often adapt or adjust yourself to play it effectively.

2- Reaction, not liking something and moaning about it but still managing to play the game anyway.

3- Overreaction, (see anything regarding ME3). Its all well and good not liking the product, but going out of your way to make it seem like its directly affected your life is pretty sad.

 

[Vegosiux]

A poor ending does not invalidate the hours and hours of fun times you've had. Yes, it sours it slightly, but if you dump all of the good stuff that the series has done out the window you're no better than the ending.

To be completely honest, I am wondering just what makes the non-ending parts so great in the first place? I mean sure, it's seems to be about the Mass Effect quality we were used to, but it's noting exceptional, nothing that would outdo the first two without even trying. Actually, the Cerberus zerg rushes look strongly remniscient of parachuting mobsters in DA2. Which was, I might add, a really retarded thing to put in.

 

[Joccaren]

A poor ending does not invalidate the hours and hours of fun times you've had. Yes, it sours it slightly, but if you dump all of the good stuff that the series has done out the window you're no better than the ending.

What it does, however, is destroy any replay value for all games in the series. It retroactively screws things up. Many of us had planned on epic, long ME1, 2 and 3 Marathons, trying out different choices and getting different outcomes, enjoying making more Shepards and ending their journeys. Now, no.
The Catalyst destroyed the Reapers as an antagonist, and removed any reason to replay the ending. When I play the game, and get up to Tuchanka: "Should I save or cure the Genophage, what results will it have?" Answer: None. Space magic dun screw everything up.

Yeah, we had enjoyment in the past for stuff, but that's not what people want. If we could all live off past enjoyment, we'd sit around all day instead of doing stuff because we'd had good times in the past. We want future enjoyment, and any hope of getting that from the Mass Effect franchise was destroyed with the ending.

 

[gigastar]

As much as id hate to admit it Mass Effect 3's one problem is anything but small.

As has been mentioned on the thread, the conclusion throws away just about all the biuldup from the previous 2 games and the first 97% of ME3. Then theres several other problems which that article on gamefront (which im sure someone will post a link to eventually) which details the lore and philosophical problems as well as the open-endedness of this conclusion.

Obviously it was a rushed ending, but this fact seems to be glossed over by just about everyone who cares about it. I only noticed because i never really cared.

 

[Fishyash]

"Small problems" have been dealbreakers for me lately. I don't feel willing to pay full price knowing beforehand that I am going to deal with things I don't want. It's kind of worse when I don't know, pay full price and then have to deal with some nitpicks that piss me off because it makes me feel like I have been burned. I have to be pretty damn hyped for a game that will make me purchase at full price despite a couple of flaws. Otherwise I am either not going to purchase it or wait until it goes on sale/buy used (if I buy a console game).

I think the main reason I don't buy things is because it would imply that such practices are fine for me. I tend to draw a line at some point.

It is a small problem. Using the "I had a very strong emotional investment into the characters" isn't a valid point. So the fuck what? It's the end of the trilogy, you won't be playing as them again. What does it matter how it ends? Either way you will cease playing as them.

Honestly, even if it's not a problem in your eyes, it IS a problem in Bioware/EA's eyes. If the ending is bad, consumers don't want to do anything with that product anymore, and that means they won't be buying DLC. The bad ending is an issue if someone cares about the series, because there's a pretty good chance that such a person would have bought the special edition, and was going to purchase all the DLC that would have come up while they are replaying the game.

If it wasn't for DLC plans, this ending would definitely be a small issue, but honestly, if an ending left a sour taste in my mouth I would NOT be buying future DLC.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

A poor ending does not invalidate the hours and hours of fun times you've had. Yes, it sours it slightly, but if you dump all of the good stuff that the series has done out the window you're no better than the ending.

What it does, however, is destroy any replay value for all games in the series. It retroactively screws things up. Many of us had planned on epic, long ME1, 2 and 3 Marathons, trying out different choices and getting different outcomes, enjoying making more Shepards and ending their journeys. Now, no.
The Catalyst destroyed the Reapers as an antagonist, and removed any reason to replay the ending. When I play the game, and get up to Tuchanka: "Should I save or cure the Genophage, what results will it have?" Answer: None. Space magic dun screw everything up.

Yeah, we had enjoyment in the past for stuff, but that's not what people want. If we could all live off past enjoyment, we'd sit around all day instead of doing stuff because we'd had good times in the past. We want future enjoyment, and any hope of getting that from the Mass Effect franchise was destroyed with the ending.

It's almost like I'm at a farm, there's strawmen everywhere in here. I said it doesn't invalidate your experience, not that you have to live off past enjoyment.

A poor ending does not invalidate the hours and hours of fun times you've had. Yes, it sours it slightly, but if you dump all of the good stuff that the series has done out the window you're no better than the ending.

To be completely honest, I am wondering just what makes the non-ending parts so great in the first place? I mean sure, it's seems to be about the Mass Effect quality we were used to, but it's noting exceptional, nothing that would outdo the first two without even trying. Actually, the Cerberus zerg rushes look strongly remniscient of parachuting mobsters in DA2. Which was, I might add, a really retarded thing to put in.

I didn't particularly like Mass Effect either, I found the gameplay to be dull and uninspired. However, these people did enjoy this game. At least they used to, which is a ridiculous concept in itself. As I said, a bad ending shouldn't invalidate the experience of the journey for them.

 

[DEAD34345]

All of these fans complaining about the game don't hate it, if they did they'd just sigh and move on. If anything, the outcry shows how much they loved the series apart from those last few moments, there's people in outright denial over the whole thing for god's sake. These people are complaining precisely because they love the game, and there's only one small part completely screwing up the whole experience.

Also, completely screwing up the ending of a trilogy is in no way a small problem. This ending is bad in a way I didn't even think was possible. It actually manages to make the earlier games (and the rest of the third game) worse. A sudden cut to black 10 minutes before the end would have been far better than this.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Because, at least in the case of Mass Effect 3, people were just looking for something to hate Bioware for after Dragon Age 2 and TOR. Bioware did not disappoint.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

It's not a small problem. It's like the ending to the Sopranos, but worse in that people had a very strong emotional investment in the characters they were interacting with. This, after dumping hours and hours into the series.

People who cannot see this are fucking blind.

Mass Effect 3's ending isn't a small problem. It's one of the most important aspects of a story-oriented trilogy that prides itself on player input, it fails completely on both of these aspects and, as such, sours the entire rest of the trilogy for people who care about these things.

I don't hate games for small problems.

A poor ending does not invalidate the hours and hours of fun times you've had. Yes, it sours it slightly, but if you dump all of the good stuff that the series has done out the window you're no better than the ending.

The fuck are you on about? I'm "bad" because I can't bring myself to play games which ultimately feel hollow and pointless thanks to the ending?

And by the way, you don't get to decide exactly how slight, or considerable, the damage to the franchise in other people's opinions is.

You're ignoring everything that's led up to the ending. What does that sound like again? Oh right. The ending.