Bitmob_vb_ Bitmob is now a part of VentureBeat
Separator

Passionate gamers are not entitled crybabies

Me04
Friday, April 13, 2012
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom Layton Shumway

This seems to be the hot-button issue in the 'Mob lately. We've already featured a couple of articles on one side of the argument. Chris takes the other -- vehemently. 

Dark Souls

Want a new ending to Mass Effect 3? Entitled.

How about wanting the extra characters already on the Street Fighter X Tekken disc, instead of having to buy an unlock key? Entitled.

Or what about wanting the removal of Games for Windows LIVE from the PC version of Dark Souls? Apparently, entitled.

These are the most recent three of many instances where certain individuals have tarred others, sometimes numbering in their thousands, as overgrown manchildren who make too many demands over the products and services they buy.

And it's really starting to get on my nerves.

 

Mass Effect 3

Now, don't get me wrong. I could point to many different evils in the gaming community -- sexism, homophobia, racism -- that I'd choose to eradicate before the "entitlement" issue. But wedged somewhere between naughty words and the hate-filled diatribes that pollute forums and voice channels are the "gamers are entitled" bleaters. And henceforth, I want anyone who spews that platitude to go and fuck themselves.

Yes, I said it: It's a platitude. It's so platitudinous that it's the gaming community's equivalent to Godwin's law; the longer a debate goes on, the probability that someone uses the gamer entitlement argument becomes 100 percent.

And what do platitudes add to the debate? Precisely hog shit. When you call someone, or a group, entitled, what exactly are you saying to them? That they're spoiled children making unreasonable demands?

Street Fighter x Tekken

To make that assertion is, quite frankly, insulting. I don't see how people are acting like entitled brats just because they're passionate enough about their hobby to want better products. And don't forget that many recent cases, the complaints have come after they've paid good money for the games.

Even so, that doesn't mean the complaints about Games for Windows LIVE on Dark Souls for PC, just because it isn't out yet, are any less valid, because the people who want to buy the game are the ones sounding off.

Now, people who pirate games because "they're too expensive and full of DRM" (the two common excuses) have an entitlement issue. After all, most pirates just want stuff (even pay-what-you-want bundles) for free and will use any excuse they can think of. And people who grief female players because of their gender, under the pretense that it's a "man's game," are acting like entitled dick-wavers.

So why are genuine fans -- who support the games industry by continually giving it money and engaging in (mostly) respectful discussion with players of all genders, races and sexual orientation -- being lumped in with pirates and pigs, for the simple fact that they have grievances about something they paid for and want the companies responsible to rectify it?

Being entitled, when looking at it in its negative context, is the belief that the world revolves around you at the expense of others. I can't see why having legitimate grievances and asking the companies selling us these titles to give us a fair deal or a better product is in any way, shape or form equivalent to being an egotistical and spoiled manbaby.

These days, the only reason I see the gamer-entitlement argument being thrown about is because some people disagree with others. Fine. Disagree. I don't necessarily agree with all the issues people have with Dark Souls on PC, Mass Effect 3's ending, or Street Fighter X Tekken's on-disc DLC -- and in the future, I may say that some of the things people are asking for are misguided -- but I can empathize with their complaints, which are all made in good faith.

When in such a situation, I'd prefer to engage them in proper discourse, tell them why I disagree and try to persuade them to my view. What I wouldn't do is label them as selfish brats and move along. Whenever anyone does that, it simply cheapens or prematurely ends the debate. Nothing is added, no points are made and none are debunked. Its sole consequence is the death of discourse, and that's precisely the last thing this fast-moving industry facing an uncertain future needs right now.

Chris believes he is going to take a fair bit of flak for this, so direct it at his Twitter account right here: @akwinters.

 
Tags: Mass Effect 3, Street Fighter X Tekken, Dark Souls
Problem? Report this post
CHRIS WINTERS' SPONSOR
Related Stories
 
Comments (39)
Add a new comment
Default_picture
Tim Faulkner
April 13, 2012
(This comment was deleted)
100media_imag0065
Ed Grabowski
April 13, 2012

Can we ban this guy yet? Obviously he doesn't understand the respectful community Bitmob has worked hard trying to build. Seriously Bitmob, don't let this site become just another one of the 6 bajillion troll feasts that kids like this Faulkner child visit everyday to use language they heard daddy use once.

Faulkner replying to try and convince me he isn't a child in 3...2...1...

Me04
Chris Winters
April 13, 2012

Banning him is obviously at the discretion of the Bitmob staff, but I'm not really opposed to the language he used, or the fact that he's attacking me. I wrote this article kind of expecting these kinds of responses, and styled it appropritely combatitive because of it.

What I will say is that he's completely missed the point. I'm not expressing my own personal opinion on these issues, I'm merely saying that resorting to a puerile "entitled" argument really adds nothing to the discourse surrounding our hobby. Calling someone an entitled manchild isn't going to sway them to your opinion, and whilst no one is ever going to agree entirely on anything, the best we can do in this industry is exchange ideas, grievances and solutions so that the industry matures.

Photo_on_2010-08-03_at_16
Pete Davison
April 13, 2012

Applause to you for writing this, Chris, though you're sure going to take some flak for it as we've already seen above.

I hate the word "entitled" and all its variants. I'm not even convinced that most people who are using it really know what they are saying.

I won't get any further into this as it's likely to become a slanging match if the response above is anything to go by, but props to you, Chris. More people on this side of the fence need to speak out -- particularly against the rather poor attitude certain members of the press have been displaying towards the community.

Me04
Chris Winters
April 13, 2012

Thanks! I think the attitude of some people in the press has been getting on my nerves a bit. I mean, of course they're entitled (hah) to their own opinion, and admittedly the press have been engaging in the debate more than simply using a hollow attack on gamers, but reading any number of forums in the wake of the ME3 debacle has shown a growing amount of distrust towards game journalists.

I don't necessarily feel it's well founded, since I do genuinely think that, being passionate gamers themselves, most journalists are first and foremost on the side of gamers, but a lot of the community are starting to not believe that, and it's pretty sad.

100media_imag0065
Ed Grabowski
April 13, 2012

Agreed. What I have noticed is that almost every single big gaming site/magazine like IGN, Gameinformer, X-Play, Gamespot, etc, always seem to take the side of the industry. ESPECIALLY IGN.

When gamers get upset that publishers are clearly removing content from games and selling it later as DLC, we get called entitled.

When gamers get upset at the clearly evil Online Pass Scam and voice their disgust, they call us entitled.

When we get upset that digital versions of retail games costs $10 to $40 MORE than the cost of the actual product at a store, they call us entitled.

When we get upset over overpriced DLC, or manipualtive DLC, they call us entitled.

When we get upset with the games we love, or when we are lied to, or manipualted in any way by publishers, they all call us entitled for opening our mouths. I used to look at gaming journalists as just regular guys and gals who love games. However, over the years, more and more I am seeing them take the side of the publishers almost always.

I can't tell you how many times in podcasts, or blogs, or articles, or in interviews I hear the editors and writers and reviewers at these sites call gamers entitled for almost any complaint they have. You know something has gone horribly, horribly wrong when these "gamers" who are supposed to be on our side are defending online passes, on disk DLC, manipulative advertising, overpriced downloadable retail games, and anything at all that gamers don't like.

I don't look at them as gamers anymore. I look at most of them as part of the system. Part of the problem. Its a damn shame, but it is true. They don't care about most of this stuff because most of them don't have to pay for games. Why care about all of these things that cost us regular folk a ton of cash, when they can just get all of these games for free?

Default_picture
harvey hill
April 14, 2012

I agree with you, it was surprising to me the number of journalists and high profile commenters sided rather agressively against players. One of my preferred sites ran a lengthy article and featured alot of the personalities on the site voice displeasure with the ME3 controversy, basicly dismissing those upset as entitled. Unrelated to most current complaints, I decided to not re-subscribe to EGM when my sub ran out because I was tired of the editorials usually siding with the industry instead of the consumer on issues. I am usually able to understand why companies do what they do and I am fine with it, like DLC on disc. But it seems like games journalists like you say have become more and more an arm of the industry.

Default_picture
Carlos Alexandre
April 13, 2012

I agree with some of these (the SFxT issue) and not others (the ME3 ending). This makes my response a resounding "Hello."

Default_picture
Matthew Antezana
April 13, 2012
Finally. It's about time someone wrote this. Seriously, all we've heard for weeks is elitist "sophisticated" artistic types telling us "U DON'T UNDERSANDZ ARTISTIC INTEGRITY U IZ A BABEE F*CK U" and we see it continued above. I like to think I am a pretty reasonable person. But apparently my opinions make me borderline illiterate according to our artist friend above a bunch of bloggers and some video game journalists.
Aj_newfoundland_avatar
A.J. Minotti
April 13, 2012

Well said, Chris. It's a damn shame that so many in the games journalism field share this opinion. Partiularly when it comes to the Mass Effect ending. I don't think anyone ever said that the tone of the ending is the problem. The ending just feels incomplete, unclear, contrived, and unfinished. This is especially true when compared to the rest of the game. But then one idiot tries to report to the FTC, and suddenly EVERY gamer is an entitled brat that disrespects art.

And as you said, it's not like I could vote against Mass Effect with my dollars. It was the end of an experience that I've spent hundreds of hours and dollars on already. What other course of action do I have to express my distaste?

The industry is turning a dangerous corner. In the world of twitter and smaller devs with instant access to their fans, I fear the bigger studios risk falling out of touch. And if the journalists, part of our voice in the industry, take the side of the bigger publishers while making fun of a vocal minority, things may get ugly fast.

Default_picture
J.C. Wigriff
April 13, 2012

There is a line between vocal dissatisfaction, and entitled whining. Many gamers are quick to grab the pitchforks and torches over not getting their way. While I don't know what percentage these individuals actually represent, but they are everywhere. 

Some companies, like Capcom, blatantly disrespect their consumers through shady business practices, and nickel-and-diming them to death. I have no problem with people being outspoken about this sort of mistreatment (3rd version of MvC3 on the way, anyone?), but some of the responsibility does fall upon the consumer to -- at some point -- stop complaining and act. It's sort of like not voting, and then bitching about your elected officials policies. If you are constantly being mistreated by a company, just boycott them.

Some complaining just seems terribly misguided though. Recently I have seen people complaining about Dark Souls coming to the PC with additions. I will simply regurgitate the same thing I said on n4g:

"I am not only an avid Dark Souls fan, but I am a contributor and admin on the Dark Souls wiki, and have been playing it on PS3 since day one. 

PS3/360 will likely see these additions as pay-for DLC; it's unlikely that we will be left out. 

PC owners deserve these additions for free, because they did wait an entire year to play this game. Often, the same thing happens the other way around; a PC game will be ported to consoles later on with additions as an incentive to play. I never see PC gamers bitching about that."

Disagreements are fine, and wanting companies to fix shoddy game mechanics is fine. When Skyrim came out, it was practically unplayable on the PS3, and needed a patch. Even the developers said they understood why people were pissed.

When you start demanding that a company change their games STORY post-game though, that is taking things a bit too far. 

It's impossible to make truly blanketed statements as to what is entitled, and what isn't. The problem does exist though, and needs to be acknowledged.
 
You were spot on about pirates though. ;) Good article. 
Default_picture
harvey hill
April 14, 2012

A company is not an artist, it has no definite creative vision beyond that which is supplied by the people working there, the "STORY" is often the combination of numerous writers work, lead by a lead writer in terms of direction. During the course of development the story is altered and changed countless times not because an individual writer wants it, but because of business decisions and gameplay decisions.

This is even more pronounced in the case of a multipart series, where the lead writer and individual writers are at times changed during the series development.

In short, in a big development studio working on a game published by a major company, the story has already been changed, based on QA, focus groups, and even by outspoken fans who want certain aspects added.  There was a very vocal group who wanted more same sex romance options in ME3, they got them in ME3, did that ruin the artistic integrity of the story? Karpyshyns original ending to the series was replaced with what we got in ME3, does that ruin the artistic integrity?

I don't expect them to change the ending, and the free DLC they are offering this summer won't do that. Doesn't mean someone should just sit quiet in the corner and take it if they don't want to. Afterall, how does a developer learn and improve without feedback. If it is passionate feedback, so be it.

Also, how does one demand they change their story pre-game when they don't know it yet? Of course any issue with the story will only come up post-game.

Default_picture
J.C. Wigriff
April 14, 2012

That is not much different than the process most Hollywood budget movies take. There might initially be one writer, or multiple writers, but the story will inevitably be altered by others. Sometimes changes are made for the sake of brevity, or because of technical limitations. Sometimes they are made because of time restraints, or budget restrictions. Decisions are made by a multitude of people, and few directors have full artistic control over a movie -- and even when they do, they still generally work as a team to bring something to life.

So by your rationale, filmmakers have no creative vision. 

To your last statement: My point is that asking to have the story altered at all is ridiculous beyond the point of absurdity. If there are horrible glitches or balance issues in a game; if the mechanics are broken, then yes, demanding a change from the company is perfectly understandable. Saying, "I don't like the way that story ended. It isn't what I expected, or what I wanted, and I want you to change the story you wrote," is ridiculous beyond the point of absurdity to me. 

Sometimes stories just suck. Sometimes you will buy something, and not like it. You might be invested in a book series, and be four books in, and the fifth book is godawful. Do you demand the author change it? No. You voice your opinion, and tread cautiously when buying books from that author in the future. 

If your favorite band comes out with a new album, and it sounds like it was written by chimpanzees with traumatic brain injuries, do you demand they write new songs? No. You're just careful about buying their music in the future. 

If in the aforementioned cases, you received a book with a broken spine, or a CD that was broken upon arrival, you would have every right to complain - those are flaws of functionality, like glitches in a game. That is understandable to expect compensation for, but not the content itself. 

Lolface
Matthew Anfuso
April 13, 2012

I think there has been a gross misappropriation of the word "entitled". Anyone who has a complaint or speaks out about the industry is automatically labeled as a whiny entitled child. It's like we're back in the early 2000s when anyone who didn't like what the government was doing was automatically labeled "Un-American".

Jon_ore
Jonathan Ore
April 13, 2012

I think that gaming's de-facto home on the internet has polarized the discussion to make it seem far worse than what most even-minded people actually think. The loudest proponents on one side call the other side entitled whiny babies, and the other cries accusations of false advertising and says anyone who disagrees with them clearly knows nothing about video games.

It's a symptom of the online discussion format and it's *very* interesting that the gamer entitlement argument arises just at the same time Gawker's Joel Johnson called most comments on his own network sites garbage.

Really, there are arguments for and against in each of the most-cited incidents of gamer "entitlement." I think the best thing that can be done to help the dialogue is just to invite more even-handed people to not yell about it over the internet. How exactly we do that, though, it another - much greater - challenge.

Default_picture
Dammy Onafowokan
April 13, 2012

Couldn't agree more with this. The term "entitled" is bandied around so much, that everytime I hear it, it makes my ears bleed. They might as well say: "I don't agree with you, therefore, you're a baby". Nope, I'm an avid gamer who does not appreciate getting nicked and dimed and getting sold short on my gaming experience. Truth be told, the fact that the Prothean squadmate was a DLC character was actually more upsetting to me than the ending. Tons of "artistic integrity" in selling a character that has deep roots in the fiction as day one DLC. Yup, I see the vision clearly now....the vision is to squeeze every last dime out of a loyal fanbase.  Can't wait for Mass Effect 4: "Normandy is Day 1 DLC. Without the Normandy Pack, your intergallactic crew will be stuck taking an interstellar cab!"

Default_picture
John Michael
April 14, 2012

Man... thanks for this. I wrote a bit about Mass Effect 3 some weeks back, and was very careful to add (a couple of times) that I was not entitled to anything. I knew anyone reading it think that I felt entitled to have something more than what it got.

There was a time when I was sick of hearing about Roger Ebert and video games, now I'm sick of hearing about the erroneous sentiment that impassioned gamers are entitled whiners. Again, thanks for writing this, Chris. I'm glad this made it to the front page.

Default_picture
Carlos Alexandre
April 14, 2012

 

So this reply is going to be a tad less neutral than my last.
 
I'm an avid gamer, aspiring screenwriter/novelist, and wannabe game designer. I'm also rather opinionated, as you'll see if you click my name and check out what I've written on Bitmob. So my interests are varied, involve both gaming and storytelling, and I feel quite strongly about them.
 
So here it is:
 
Complaining about paying for something and not getting access to everything on the thing you paid for (i.e., the SFxT disc) without paying even more money is not "entitlement." It's a valid complaint. At best, it's a complex issue and game designers need to address it before gamers start speaking with their money en masse. For now, don't buy SFxT. Play Skullgirls. It's way, way better.
 
Complaining about a story, regardless of the medium it's told in (game, movie, novel, etc.), not ending in a way you feel is sound, or otherwise not living up to your (hopefully reasonable) expectations, isn't "entitlement." It's simply part of being an audience member. You will have opinions about the merits and drawbacks of any story, and voicing them is okay... provided you respect that others have the right to pick those opinions apart, should they be poorly constructed.
 
Demanding that a finished story be changed is not "entitlement." It's just really, really dumb. If Square Enix gave me the rights to all things Chrono, I'd retcon all of Cross... but I wouldn't recall all the discs and replace them with ones containing a different narrative. Chrono Cross may be a giant pile of trash (shameless plug: I wrote an article about it on this very site, check it out), but its story is a whole, complete entity. Should Chrono Trigger be rebooted, the old canon isn't destroyed; it's simply a different canon. Demanding it change to meet your subjective tastes is the height of folly, and no storyteller with even the slightest shred of self-respect will agree to such a demand.
 
Finally, any complaint, criticism, or demand you may have is best advised to be thoughtfully constructed, lest it be subject to rightful ridicule.
 
Zat eez all. this reply is going to be a tad less neutral than my last.
 
I'm an avid gamer, aspiring screenwriter/novelist, and wannabe game designer. I'm also rather opinionated, as you'll see if you click my name and check out what I've written on Bitmob. So my interests are varied, involve both gaming and storytelling, and I feel quite strongly about them.
 
So here it is:
 
Complaining about paying for something and not getting access to everything on the thing you paid for (i.e., the SFxT disc) without paying even more money is not "entitlement." It's a valid complaint. At best, it's a complex issue and game designers need to address it before gamers start speaking with their money en masse. For now, don't buy SFxT. Play Skullgirls. It's way, way better.
 
Complaining about a story, regardless of the medium it's told in (game, movie, novel, etc.), not ending in a way you feel is sound, or otherwise not living up to your (hopefully reasonable) expectations, isn't "entitlement." It's simply part of being an audience member. You will have opinions about the merits and drawbacks of any story, and voicing them is okay... provided you respect that others have the right to pick those opinions apart, should they be poorly constructed.
 
Demanding that a finished story be changed is not "entitlement." It's just really, really dumb. If Square Enix gave me the rights to all things Chrono, I'd retcon all of Cross... but I wouldn't recall all the discs and replace them with ones containing a different narrative. Chrono Cross may be a giant pile of trash (shameless plug: I wrote an article about it on this very site, check it out), but its story is a whole, complete entity. Should Chrono Trigger be rebooted, the old canon isn't destroyed; it's simply a different canon. Demanding it change to meet your subjective tastes is the height of folly, and no storyteller with even the slightest shred of self-respect will agree to such a demand.
 
Finally, any complaint, criticism, or demand you may have is best advised to be thoughtfully constructed, lest it be subject to rightful ridicule.
 
Zat eez all. 
Default_picture
William Usher
April 14, 2012

I registered just to say what a great write-up this is. There were only a few of the well-known gaming sites who sided with gamers and as everyone pointed out, GameSpot and IGN were not among them. Destructoid, Forbes (yes Forbes) and Venture Beat seemed to be on the side of consumers regarding most of these issues but all the big dogs were basically fighting consumers to protect corporate interest. That makes zero sense given that consumers make the industry tick, not the publishers.

I'm glad you at least addressed this because even on our site we have people condemning us for not siding with Capcom/EA even though lately just about everything these two have been doing has been anti-consumerist all the way around.

230340423
Layton Shumway
April 14, 2012

Thanks for registering, William! Take off your jacket and stay a while. :)

5211_100857553261324_100000112393199_12455_5449490_n
Bryan Harper
April 14, 2012

Yes, having characters on the disc that were planned to be released as "dlc" behind a money gate kinda sucks.  And yes, Capcom's excuses for what they did were lame at best.  This does not, however, change the fact that this is stuff that was being developed by a team of employees after the game had been finished and was undergoing X layers of polish, as utilized by their DLC staffing, as has been done with EVERY game with DLC since DLC was a thing.

 

You WERE going to be charged for this stuff.  The fact that it's on the disc just meant they were able to save money by selling you an unlock as opposed to a full download.  Or a download at all, really.  That's the reality.  It's not pretty, but this is what these guys have to do in order to keep their jobs after the game is finished.  Otherwise, people who WEREN'T just working on the game in question would be hired in to work on this stuff X months down the road, and the difference in quality would more than likely be apparent, and would therefore suffer.

 

If they had kept the characters off the disc and charged you $15 three months down the road for the unlock with a hefty download, you would have paid for this content.  You'll pay for this content even though it's already on the disc, and quite probably will actually end up waiting LESS time to get the content as it is.  The difference is all in appearances, which is where the "entitled" schtick comes into play.  It is INCREDIBLY presumptuous to assume that anything these game companies create after the game has been finished should be given to you gratis.  

 

Paying money for these games and then bemoaning Capcom's business practices afterwards is not going to solve your problems.  You need to vote with your wallet.  This, and only this, is what Capcom needs to hear from you, because for every ten people crying on the forums about how unfair their lfie is that they're being MADE to pay $15 for stuff already on the disc, there's at least 200 people who could care less either way, 30 people who were going to buy the DLC regardless of its distribution or unlocking methods, and 800 people lurking on the forums without any vested interest in the inclusion or exclusion of characters other than to shake their heads sadly and wonder why these people have nothing better to do with their lives than bitch about video games from companies that they claim to hate, yet for some reason cannot stop talking about.

 

The fact of the matter is DLC is created outside the framework of the actual game, plain and simple.  If the product is somehow lacking without said DLC; if it is an incomplete game without said DLC, and it is not worth the asking price without said DLC, do NOT BUY THE GAME.  It's really as simple as that.  No entitled uninformed/misrepresented opinions required.

Default_picture
William Usher
April 14, 2012

Well that would be fine and dandy Bryan, but as the hackers pointed out, the hex-wall used as a pay-wall was extremely flimsy, and ALL evidence points to the characters being designed alongside the rest of the game and being arbitrarily locked. Just check out the evidence and judge for yourself.

Also, all the locked Capcom characters with the exception of Elena, are ports from SSF4: AE, so it's not like they were "designed" they were ported...and locked.

There's also no excuse why people have to pay separately for a game's ending with Asura's Wrath. The "rage" and "anger" on the forums, aggregators and sites like Amazon are well deserved because it helps inform other consumers, and the more people inform others about this the better.

5211_100857553261324_100000112393199_12455_5449490_n
Bryan Harper
April 16, 2012

Remember how the "hackers" found that Day Zero DLC on ME3?  And how it turned out to simply be a placeholder for the DLC's implementation to reduce errors in the future?

 

I'm sorry, but I don't take anything these kids peeking into stuff and giving secondhand accounts of seriously at all.  They weren't there, they don't know.

Default_picture
Dammy Onafowokan
April 16, 2012

Hey Bryan,

Why do you refer to them as kids? Just wondering. Do you consider yourself a kid as well? I'm really not asking with and bad intent, just curious about your choice of words. Also, I don't care what the reason was for having placeholder data on the disc, making customers pay extra for a Prothean teammate was a low-class, extortionary money grab of the most blatant order and in my opinion, FAR worse than any problems with the ending since they can't hide behind the shield of "artistic integrity" in that case. There they drank from the flask of the "nickel and dime"

5211_100857553261324_100000112393199_12455_5449490_n
Bryan Harper
April 16, 2012

Honestly, I looked at the DLC and said "Do I need this to finish the game?" It appeared to be extremely derivative and unimportant (as important as a Prothean team member SHOULD be, this was upsetting) so I passed on it.  That should be the takeaway, in my opinion, is was it appealing enough to spend money on?  For me, someone who's spent probably a couple hundred hours playing the previous two installments, it wasn't.  So I wasn't offended that it wasn't part of the original $60 plan, and I didn't buy it.  That was my end story.

 

Never let a company feel like they have a gun up to your head and are forcing you to consume their content.  You do that, and they win.  It's not a question of willpower, it's a question of common sense.  Given the choice of paying what THEY consider to be a $75-worthy package, would I have rather paid 75 and gotten the prothean than pay $60 and NOT?  Hell no.  I can pass on that.

 

As for the kids remark, I find anyone making naive commentary on things they have no firsthand experience in and passing it off as Gospel Truth to be rather childish.  If this had come from within the development team; if someone from Capcom had confirmed that the locked characters were developed in-line with the core cast by the same team within the same time frames, this would be a whole other attitude I'd be toting around.

 

But it's not.  It's a bunch of kids with too much free time trying to stir up shit and talk about things they do not understand because they could not possibly understand... That's why I call them kids.  When I picture these "hackers", I'm envisioning a bunch of sixteen year olds on 4chan being bored and injecting some drama into the gaming scene.  That's essentially what happened.

Default_picture
Dammy Onafowokan
April 16, 2012

Okay. I just wanted to make sure I understood where you were coming from. Thanks for the explanation.

Default_picture
Calum Shaw-Mackay
April 15, 2012
It's the way gamers appear to be going about raising grievances, not the grievances themselves, that allow people to believe that they're entitled. Realistically, we should have some kind of fans organisation, like the EFF to help raise discussions with devs and publishers for the fans in a mature and reasonable fashion, but as it is a lot of these actions look from the outside as being pretentious at best, and childish at worst. But seriously, what did the Retake Mass Effect movement think they would achieve with 400 cupcakes sent to Bioware? $80000 dollars for Childs Play was a massive achievement that everyone involved should be rightly proud of being involved in, but playing Devils Advocate for a moment, it didn't exactly get you any nearer to achieving the goals of the Retake Movement. The fact of the matter is that gamers expect more gameplay, better graphics and audio, less repetition with every generation, and costs go up, but rarely are video game prices to the consumer being pushed up in line with the increased development costs and inflation; this is never honestly considered by most fans. I just have a feeling that if discussion was reasonable instead of coated in vitriol and vehement disregard for anyone that happens to disagree with the disenfranchised section, then there's a better chance of getting your requests looked at. Yes, they are requests. Making 'demands', petitions that 'demand' and basically threatening to withhold your cash until your demands are met ( forgetting that you have a choice to buy in the first place and no one is holding your arm behind your back until you buy the game anyway) will only make this 'entitlement' schism deeper and more divisive
Default_picture
Dammy Onafowokan
April 15, 2012
While your comment does have some truth to it, it still lumps gamers into one "entitled" group. It also doesn't seem to assign any of the blame to game journalists who seemed to act just as Petty and snobbish as any gamers and the devs themselves who pursue anti comsumerist platforms. Also, gaming pricing structure is flawed. A flat $60 price point is not the best way to go.
Default_picture
Calum Shaw-Mackay
April 15, 2012
Absolutely. The hypocrisy of someone who is being paid to be a reviewer, or a 'professional blog writer' telling someone that they cannot have an opinion or that they are automatically wrong without providing valid context, when essentially they themselves are only important for their opinion, is not lost on me; I find it distasteful at best and grossly insulting at worst. I'm not necessarily lumping gamers into a single entitled group, but it's more the fact that often that the signal to noise ratio is extremely low, reasonable discussion gets lost in the slagging off, so in essence the baying mob that often accompanies these kind of things, does all the lumping into one group for you - Gamers need a recognised and reasonable voice, one that can't be curtailed by petitions and people shouting 'Your Game sucks!' otherwise all the posturing, the petitions, the complaining will get you nothing.
Default_picture
Dammy Onafowokan
April 15, 2012
I wholeheartedly agree. The level of civil and rational discourse in the the gaming community needs to increase dramatically. Bloggers and game journalists must also act in a more professional manner when interacting with the gaming community.
Default_picture
Jacques Jones
April 15, 2012

Freakin well-said, man. I'm not gonna go into why I agree with what you've said, though I'll address a bit of why I've never agreed with the "artistic integrity" angle.

I'm a writer. I'd like to say I'm a damn good one, but it's more like that I'm just pretty good. If someone read one of my stories and was dissatisfied with the ending, I'd most certainly want to know why. Whether it's a creation of my mind and therefore my artistic expression is irrelevant: especially if I got paid for it, I wrote the story in question for the sake of the readers. If they were satisfied with everything but the end, then it was likely a failure on my part. If I've promised that this story, the end to my highly-acclaimed tetralogy(I try to avoid trilogies, since everyone has them these days), will tie up all the loose ends and answer all the remaining questions left in my series, and my ending instead raises as many or more questions than it put to rest, I should not be surprised that my fans are upset. And because I led these people on- because I convinced them to spend money and time on my story and then showed all my promises to be false- they deserve an explanation. 

Not PR crap, but the truth.

If, for some odd reason, I got the idea in my head to completely break from form only for the story's ending, and so ruined something that many fans had, up until that point, loved, I would write a new ending. For something like a novel, it'd be tougher to do than for a video game, but I'd try to make amends with my offended fans by delivering this end at as low a cost as possible. Especially if I wanted them to look forward to my next series of works. As a writer, I've got even more artistic freedom inherent in my work than a gaming company. But as a manufacturer of a good, I must also satisfy my customer to hopefully ensure their continued patronage.

I really don't see what's so hard to understand about that.

Default_picture
Dammy Onafowokan
April 15, 2012

It's because you're a rational human being with a sense of right and wrong Jacques, and you're able to swallow your pride and realize "hey, I've made a biiiiiiiig mistake here. I should probably do my best to make amends". You also realize that even though you pour your heart and soul into something, the second you sell it for money, it becomes a product, which means you have customers. And customers come with expectations and passions of their own. Still, you'd hope that your loyal fanbase would air their grievances with you in a civil and respectful manner and you would oblige in kind. Kudos to you sir.

Default_picture
Jacques Jones
April 19, 2012

I thought it was common sense that anyone within a market that included consumers would, on some level, answer to those consumers. Your consumers- your fanbase, in the case of most media- need to be satisfied in order for you to continue making money. Car manufacturers can't just make cars people don't like and yet expect those people to buy their product.

But, apparently, this generation in gaming has brought forth a consumer base who is willing to defend the producer's right to make what they want, effectively giving up their own right to a product they shouldn't have to complain about. I can't quite understand where this came from, but it's evident in a lot of different aspects of the gaming industry this generation. From DLC to yearly iterations of games that have changed little, to even paying to play online. The "digital revolution" is poised to take virtually all rights from us as consumers, yet people are cheering and praising it without even understanding this.

Gaming is headed down a dangerous direction, one that will result in another crash. And I don't think it'll be able to recover this time, sadly. 

Default_picture
Dammy Onafowokan
April 19, 2012

I love the analogy of automakers. Do you know why the big 3 automakers almost went kaput? Their products (with a few exceptions) were garbage and they failed to adapt when gas hit $4 a gallon. They kepy pumping out monster high-profit margin SUV's while their competition got  with the program. Eventually, consumers said "Screw you" and flocked to those who offered them the most bang for their buck. Kia and Hyundai went from being laughingstocks to serious competition for Ford/Chevy/Dodge etc. The gaming industry will soon find out that it's consumers can only be pushed so far.

5211_100857553261324_100000112393199_12455_5449490_n
Bryan Harper
April 20, 2012

Well now, that would be an interesting parallel if we were talking about two similar industries.  Since one offers a mode of transportation and another offers recreational digital entertainment... one is widely viewed as a metal casing that houses hardware designed to get them from A to B, while another is several forms of art interwoven to tell a story and entertain...  It sorta makes your argument silly. UNLESS you view the videogame industry the same way you view the auto industry!  In which case, I fully understand the outrage.  I guess.  Doesn't make it justified when paired next to common sense though.

Also, don't fool yourself.  Kia and Hyndai went back on top because the economy was garbage and their prices were hot.  Just saying.

Default_picture
Dammy Onafowokan
April 20, 2012

At their most basic, both are industries that sell products to consumers for money. I get the same amount of passion playing a great game as I do driving an exciting car....probably more excitement from the driving actually. For some (such as myself), I drive my car recreationaly at track days and the twisty mountain roads near my house. I love driving just as much if not more than gaming. Both car companies and game companies have to satisfy the customers needs or the customer will simply go elsewhere to get what they want.

Hyundai and Kia used to make crap cars at a cheap price. Now htye make great cars for cheaper than the competition. It just took a dip in the economy for people to finally give them a shot.  If EA/Biroware loses the trust of their customers, those customers will simply go to anyone else who can offer a similar product without all the hassle. Hyundai and Kia vehicles regularly finish in the top half of most comparison tests. They ar enot crap cars anymore.

Default_picture
Jacques Jones
April 20, 2012

Nice attempt at a misdirect, Bryan.

...well, actually, it wasn't. That was a poor attempt at making a very accurate analogy seem silly. In the process, you made your own ability to rationalize seem pretty weak.

As Dammy said, it's about people spending their money to buy things they want. You buy a product that appeals to you, whether it's games or cars or a vaccuum. The Big Three DID screw up, and they paid for it. Hyundai and Kia DID take advantage of this, but it wasn't just that they were cheap; they also improved their product. They made their product more appealing.

Common sense isn't common, by the way. It actually varies by region/upbringing and such. 

Default_picture
David
April 16, 2012

Very interesting article that I think adds to the debate well.  However, your point on piracy and your last paragraph greatly contradict each other, don't you think?  While I don't think piracy is the answer, one should thoughtfully debate why piracy succeeds better than DRM and such, rather than leave it at that as you say.  I may be wrong but I hope you see what I'm trying to say?

Default_picture
Jacques Jones
April 19, 2012

I don't see a disconnect there. Most pirates of games- or other digital media- have zero intention of actually paying for what they take; they simply hide behind excuses that sound reasonable.

 

DRM, though, is something that has driven more people to piracy, as it generally winds up being more of a hindrance to the people that WANT to pay than to those that have no intention of doing so.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.