This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

I think gamers have gotten way too spoiled and hurtful to the industry...

#1keybladeXIIIPosted 1/6/2013 5:44:05 AM
*slightly long read*

At least, over the past couple of years. And I'm mainly talking about those people/reviewers who bash games online over the internet.

Now, I know everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and thankfully we are allowed to dislike games for whatever reasons. But this constant hatred I see over different websites/forums towards certain games that are not bad at all is just sad to see. The first example I want to talk about is Mass Effect 3 and its ending. It got so much hate and uproar online for it's ending alone that many people used it as criticism for the whole game and actually made Bioware give out free DLC that changed the ending, after they got so many negative comments, or "threats." I personally find this idea ridiculous. How often do you go see a movie and hate the ending? When you do, do you get to go back and see it again with a different ending for free? No, not often, one would presume. Sure, you can say that Bioware did a good thing by responding to their fans, but I don't think it was smart at all. Bioware wrote a story that they liked and didn't have a problem with, and that original ending was how they wanted it to end. Regardless of what the fans thought of it, Bioware themselves should be the ones who decide how their story plays out, not the fans. They should not be given that much power, as good as it may sound. Why am I so upset about this? Because I know a bunch of people in real life, including myself, who played and beat all three games in the series and didn't have a single problem with the ending. But it's that small percentage of gamers online (who for whatever reason everyone thinks represents the majority of gamers) that made an impact.

Now on to my next example- DmC. I can't believe how much hate this game gets everywhere online, from Gamefaqs to Youtube. Capcom could have just abandoned the entire series like they did with others, but yet they decided to move on with other games and handed it over to Ninja Theory. We should all be thankful we are getting another DMC game at all, whether it's good or not. I played the demo and I love it. I love the different style and atmosphere and I like how the new Dante looks, as opposed to that early 2000 generic anime look. I love how the trailers are designed as well. Are you allowed to hate on the game? Of course you are. But when it hasn't even come out yet and people are just hating on it because it seems easier than the others, as well as how the demo played out(look at how different/easy the RE6 demo was with ammo and how much scarce it was in the actual game), it's just sad. Are the new Mario games harder than the NES ones? And with the continued hate Capcom/DmC will get, they might or might have already changed the game from how they wanted it to be, or they might feel depressed on all their hard work. Do you people know how hard it is and how much it costs to develop a big game nowadays? For some, it's make it or break it.

Another example is with reviews from games like RE6 and Hitman. RE6 got a 4.5 from Gamespot and a 3.5 I think from Destructoid. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but the game is simply not that bad. It's 6 or 7 at most, yeah, but to basically discourage people from buying a decent game as if it is as bad as games like Shaq Fu, Superman 64, and Amy is disheartening and not right.

All I'm saying is, we as gamers should remind ourselves of who we are. We shouldn't be against people making games, and making games how they want to---we should support them. Do we want less games? There are many bad games out there, but to hate on these decent ones for ridiculous reasons is not smart at all. And by spreading the hate online, you have to be aware of how big of an impact you are really making on the industry. You have to ask yourself, is it really worth bashing on these games?
I hate seeing sigs with PC specs on them.
PSN: tookhster ------ Proud owner of a Wii, PS3, 360, 3DS, Vita, and now a Wii U!
#2thesnoopmeisterPosted 1/6/2013 5:47:19 AM
Inflation! Games are 100x bigger and still the same price, and still we complain. Well, not me.
PSN - thesnoopmeister
#3Rainy_David1Posted 1/6/2013 5:50:59 AM
In relation to low review scores, I think it's a great thing that a site or sites were willing to give scores below a 5. It seemed for too long every game that came out with even just a little hype was above a 7 no matter how bad or disappointing it was
#4keybladeXIII(Topic Creator)Posted 1/6/2013 5:54:53 AM
From: Rainy_David1 | #003
In relation to low review scores, I think it's a great thing that a site or sites were willing to give scores below a 5. It seemed for too long every game that came out with even just a little hype was above a 7 no matter how bad or disappointing it was

I see what you mean with that, but there's a reason most of those hyped games were rated as well as they were: they were actually good. And almost any big title deserves a good score because those are the ones that are under the most pressure and the ones that usually turn out good and look the best (again, most of the time, not all the time)
I hate seeing sigs with PC specs on them.
PSN: tookhster ------ Proud owner of a Wii, PS3, 360, 3DS, Vita, and now a Wii U!
#5keybladeXIII(Topic Creator)Posted 1/6/2013 6:50:41 AM
bump for any more thoughts?
I hate seeing sigs with PC specs on them.
PSN: tookhster ------ Proud owner of a Wii, PS3, 360, 3DS, Vita, and now a Wii U!
#6ATTACK__CATPosted 1/6/2013 7:13:05 AM(edited)
^ maybe i could throw the word COD out there.

some people hate it, others love it.

personally im meh. i bought it. i play it with a friend of mine when were sick of borderlands/ whatever else. its a nice friends bonding by teaming up and owning nubz type of game. every other shooter weve done like this got old slower than any individual COD (resistance 2+3 and mag). but its like 5 years since resistance 2... do people still expect me to be playing it having been in one of the best clans in the world for ages (had 4/10 in top 10). there comes a point where you just want to move on. cod has changed enough that as a series we keep coming back, even if individual games get old.

its not destorying the industry, there were things like it long before COD (sports games anyone). its just popular to hate it now. HALO for example. biggest changes from 1 to 2 were 'dual weilding' and then they took that out. the plot to halo 2 is awful and its ending is considered one of the worst ever. thats got to be worst than cod. no because it was in a time when no one cared about repetative sequals. it dodged the bullet then and so it is immune now! 'oh but its once a year' so is assassins creed.

^i think mass effect was a problem with that sort of game. you let someone have free choice affecting the fate of entire species all the way through a series, and then you get to the end. how do you tie together and overarching plot while maintaining that level of choice. its a question of escalation.

'join the reapers for the greater good' -> instead they decided to close it off in a way that FIT the overarching story. Choices were hard to work in, and the origional 3 options were awful, but minor in the scheme of things. people complainted these were 'token choices' do you want your ending in red, green or blue skin? but trying to think of that many sensible endings to such a large plot, with all the variables of whos alive/dead / what species are around... would just be a mammoth task. perhaps they should of developed for longer. but in the end its all opinion and 'what ifs'. they probably didnt think their ending was bad, and didnt anticipate the hate. to them it was a reasonable end to the overarching plot. players didnt get alot of choice. but thats like saying 'players couldnt choose to ignore the reapers and start a farm in mass effect 1 and live happily until their death'..

wed all love a game with infinite choices where you can do anything.... but its simply not plausible on modern media and would take too long for too many people to develop.

compromise. you follow their overarching plot. they let you pick the fine details. when it came to the end thats exactly what you got. but by then you didnt feel it was 'enough'

^DmC i do get all the hate but only because of this:

in no book / other media ever has that been good dialogue for anythin g that isnt trying to portray 12 year olds.

the redesign / gameplay changes i do not like, but did not rule the game out because of them. i have all 4 devil may crys and started at the first on release. the changes jarred me, but i figured so long as the core was the same it would be okay.

the above dialogue was just so bad.... so bad...
*PSN yggdrasilProject*
*Black FC 1420 6344 0225
#7keybladeXIII(Topic Creator)Posted 1/6/2013 7:30:15 AM
Yeah I see your point about ME3.
But with the DMC dialogue, I don't get how that's any different from this:

I mean sure there's no f bombs, but Dante is still cocky and I think they are both funny.
I hate seeing sigs with PC specs on them.
PSN: tookhster ------ Proud owner of a Wii, PS3, 360, 3DS, Vita, and now a Wii U!
#8FellDudePosted 1/6/2013 7:54:33 AM
"I think gamers have gotten way too spoiled and hurtful to the industry..."

Actually you can blame the industry for attracting or creating that type of "gamer" this gen.

First they alienated their core gamers by trying to attract the casuals this gen by putting out flashy, no substance games for the most part. The industry wanted their dollar more than they wanted to keep their core gaming crowd happy.

I wonder why anyone would think the trend sheeple, those who hop from one new thing to the next would be a good demographic to cater to. They have no loyalty to anything but looking cool to their friends.

So if video games are suddenly "like, so yesterday,' and it becomes popular to hate them or a specific series for whatever reason. Hello backlash, and not only from the sheeple but the mostly ignored core gamers as well.

Empty flash can only carry you so far. Look at Capcom's practices for instance. They've been stripping out content (like pallette swaps) that would have been included in previous gens and are trying to milk an extra buck with it as DLC. The quality of their games have suffered for it. I don't mind genuine new DLC but stripping out series staples and marketing them as such is just low.

Considering CC's DLC practices as a case in point (RE:ORC was half DLC btw) not to mention the industries attempt to capture the casual dollar, are we spoiled or are they greedy?

Personally I think it's a combination of both but you have to recall whom the industry invited to the party this gen.
Of all the game consoles ever made, the Xbox 360 is the one closest to perfecting the hundred percent failure rate. - Former Owner of 3 of Microsoft Xbox 360's.
#9viruz42Posted 1/6/2013 7:58:05 AM
I'd say the industry had evolved and with that so that so has reviewing standards. I remember in the 90s all game ls were rated at least 7/10. Getting a 7 was like saying "well at least they tried". Like getting an award for being last place. Then around 2000, we began seeing a huge change in video game graphics, storytelling, length, depth, and artistic freedom. With these changes new , well defined standards had to be put in place, and have to continually change as the game industry changes. Also when 15 or so amazing games come out all at the same time (every November), gamers now want revised to morsel rank the games than give them all 9/10. I'm not saying the reviewers are always fair or justified, but when the industry changes, so do the basic standards.

As for the whole gamer hatred thing, where the hell have you been? That's been going on for ages. EA is a huge corp who has bought out and strangled so many developers they probably added the ME3 ending to try and sage face.
#10ShineboxerPosted 1/6/2013 8:06:35 AM
I'm not gonna read that, just more inane nonsense.