Question about gamer's/websites/shows attitudes towards games

[DeanKind]

OK, first off, thank you for replying to this, I genuinely thought after posting this it'd have been a bit long winded for most to read nevermind reply in great length & detail, so again thank you. Very interesting reading.
Secondly I did say "be kind and gentle", and I'm seeing a bit of argy bargy between some users...keep it nice and friendly guys, it's a discussion

• There are gamers who exhibit entitlement issues, but it's like saying all white people are white supremacists. They're out there, but by far not the norm.

True, 100% agreed, and I hope I didn't come across as saying that ALL gamers are entitled, as it wasn't my intention.

• But ultimately, game journalists are like film critics. Listen to them if you want, or don't if you don't. I find them mostly hot air, myself. I like games that people and journalists hate (Assassin's Creed 3, Assassin's Creed: Unity, and Arkham Origins immediately spring to mind) and I hate games people generally liked (AC: Syndicate and AC: Odyssey just to go back to the well of my favorite franchises to make the point). They're not going to sway my opinion one way or another; no one will. If I like a game, I like it. Period.

Again I agree, That being said though, just because you and I don't tend to go by what reviewers/journalists etc say, doesn't mean it doesn't have a impact on other people. Like for example Angry Joe (No hate, I like him, just using him as an example) spouting his massive rant about why he thinks a game sucks ass, it influences others, retweets, etc etc and can impact a game's sales even if these are unwarranted (Or in BETA/Alpha or before patches etc). Say the game a few weeks later has been fully patched all bugs fixed etc..how often do you go back to re-look at a review or do they re-edit their vid or article...damage is done. Reputation is severely hit. Game is a dud. Like I said on my earlier post you type in Mass Effect: Andromeda...very little has been commented on the patches (Game still isn't amazing don't get me wrong) but type in ME:A on youtube and you'd still think it was that buggy mess with the atrocious facial animations from it's first release which it isn't.

• The Witcher 3 and Doom 2016 are the result of feedback from gamers, we must take into account the failure of Doom 3 and the evolution of The Witcher 1, 2, 3.

Touche, I agree that gamers can have a influence for sure to avoid past mistakes or areas that could've been improved.

• No. Gamers pay, and gamers have right to get what they want for his money.
  You cannot sell broccoli to chocolate fans and accuse then of being entitled for hating broccoli

I agree, but where's the cut-off? I understand if I bought chocolate and got broccoli, I have every right to be upset, but don't you just ask for a refund/change of product and move on.
It's like going to the cinema, you sat and watched a shitty movie...do u go "ah that was shit...oh well" and move on or do you kick up a baby hissy fit and whine about Lionsgate being the worst studio ever.

• In the past, developers made games for the love of gaming. As the industry grew, it attracted predators and parasites, which have no interest in gaming, but on the business side or political opportunities they open.
  
  The backslash is deserved. You can be fine with having the same wage along years, if you love your work, but investors want profits to grow, so they don't accept that chocolate is only sold to chocolate fans, and they turn it into broccoli-flavored chocolate, expecting to sell it to everybody, and everybody complains.
  
  Complains are good. They signal bad business practices, and corporations need to know when and why they annoy the customers.

Agreed, a lot of good points.

• Who else should have a say on games?

Maybe I should clarify this one, maybe I worded this wrongly.
When it comes to bad business practices like you said earlier...I agree, voice away until your hearts content.
What I was meaning with this is...Fuck I'm going to use Mass Effect as an example again, lol...PROMISE I'm not a fanboy.
Most people hated the Mass Effect 3 ending right? should I have an influence on that? Should I be able to voice and say "I DONT LIKE THIS ENDING I WANT IT CHANGED!!!" Not liking the ending is fine, but demanding changes? I don't like the ending to a lot of movies or books...can I demand changes? or send death threats because the game didn't do something I wanted it to.
Isn't games like a novel or movie...you're there to enjoy the ride...not dictate how the creators should change it to the way you want it to, because can I guarantee what I prefer is what you'd prefer?

• Yes, it can suck (people reviewbombing dota 2 because of some racist shit a pro player said)

That is bullshit, I hate that kind of nonsense, it's unfair, agreed

• If by media you refer at big game journalists only (so not youtubers or smaller websites) no. Most people go check user reviews first. Sure people can be misleading (god of war rated 9.1 on metacritic for example, 3 points too high if you ask me

I mean all kind of media, YouTubers included, probably more so YouTubers being honest. User reviews are incredibly iffy imo because said users can be influenced by said YouTubers, lol (And yes...God Of War isn't THAT great :P)

• Gaming went mainstream. It casts a very wide net

True, very true, it does create a lot of grey area's which isn't easily solved with just a wave of a wand.

I'm VEEEEEERY sorry if I haven't used the quotes correctly...I don't know how to quote more than one person without editing it manually, it kept erasing what I wrote and replaced it with the quote I clicked on...Maybe I'm retarded, sorry.
But thanks for the read and please keep it kind and gentle guys yeah
I shall ponder what's all been said in here, trust me. A lot to evaluate.

[Merlin]

I feel like you just wanted to vent because you made a stupid choice and slapped down like $2000 on hardware between a TV and a console just to get ready for Mass Effect Andromeda. Its fine.

But man this is a bit too much. All you have to do to find out if you will enjoy a game is not even look for a review. Just look at some gameplay videos, that is so easy these days. Of course we needed reviews before web video. Outside of that it was store kiosks, demos included on other games or given as promos with a magazine or a box of cereal or whatever. Then you could also just play at a friend's house too.

Pretty simple all you have to do is just look at the game. Look good? Then get it, look bad? Then don't. All you need to do is be told by someone on the internet what games are similar to games you already enjoy. Then just look into it.

Also haha, you got fooled by Mass Effect Andromeda.

[electrospasm]

I also realise re-reading all this I'm coming across as a BioWare fanboy

You do and it makes it difficult for me to take your opinion seriously. I used to be a huge fan of Bioware, I finished the 2nd ME game at least 7 times and had well over 700 hours in the multiplayer. The ending of the 3rd game was insulting, Bioware's communication after the 3rd game was insulting. They had a chance to get the community back on their page with Andromeda but they actually managed to go down in quality, the writing is unbearable at some points.

Gamers are not entitled, gamers are beginning to realise that they hold the money and they refuse to spend it on shit (that includes companies who treat their actual customers as sub-humans).

[xadu]

Everyone is talking about Anthem, because it has a lot of promotion. I hate it, but I'm continuously bombarded with info about it. Algorithms know that I'm the game's target (they don't know that I hate that specific game).

Nvidia is giving 2 games for free with new cards: Anthem and Battlefield V. The are everywhere.

Marketing is how Call Of Duty and Halo got famous, despite being mediocre, derivative shooters, and a lot of people bought them in masse. Is all marketing, and that mediocrity tends to turn into the new normal. That's what scares gamers.

[Aidy]

Which magazine do you read today that also doesn't have a site?

That's irrelevant. Anyone can have a website but not anyone can publish a magazine. If someone has a magazine they also choose to make available on line then they are probably still credible journalists. If someone only has a website they're a blogger.

There aren't just loads, they are becoming the norm

They're not. Everyone on here talking like there are only three games ever made makes it seem like it's the norm, but it's not. I have no problems buying games not marred by micro transactions.

Bioware...EA

Anthem, Anthem, Anthem, Anthem, Anthem does this, Anthem does that, Anthem does this, Anthem does that, Anthem, Anthem, Anthem.

Listen to yourself, you're talking about ONE GAME. You know Anthem isn't the only game ever made? If you don't like Anthem don't play it. Why are you talking like every game is like Anthem?

Now you don't need to make good games

So people buy games that aren't good and pay micro transactions on games that aren't good? No-one needs to make good games. GTA, Red Dead Redemption, Assassin's Creed, God of War. Yeah, people don't make good games anymore, they don't need to.

Do you realise how ridiculous you sound?

I don't know if you are just too innocent or too ignorant to see what is going on

You can't find good journalism, you can't find good games, you can't find any game that isn't Anthem, Fallout 76 or Battlefield V and you think I'm ignorant? LOL

[Dub-Z]

Gaming went mainstream. It casts a very wide net.

[Magvel]

Are gamers entitled?

Yes, it can suck (people reviewbombing dota 2 because of some racist shit a pro player said) but if competitive melee is still a thing today it's because of it's community. Hell I think the last official pokemon game that came even close to some fangames (insurgence and desolation being my favourites) was BW2.

People who bitch about everything suck but all of the greatest fanworks are made by people entitled enough to use their free time to build their own vision of a game/franchise.

Are media overly harsh/influencing?

If by media you refer at big game journalists only (so not youtubers or smaller websites) no. Most people go check user reviews first. Sure people can be misleading (god of war rated 9.1 on metacritic for example, 3 points too high if you ask me)

Should we have a say on games?

Yes lol, who does otherwise ?


Also to discuss more the "gaming bad vs gaming good nowadays". While I grew out of AAA games (last one I played was God of War and it disappointed me a lot, I mean it's competent yeah, but "the game of this generation" ? Seriously ?) there is a lot of great games nowadays. You just have to look for the AA's and the indies. Hell the "year of the lootbox" was the same Persona 5, Cuphead and NieR Automata came out. Even games with microtransactions can be great (Rocket League comes to mind, sure there's stuff that affect the gameplay paywalled but nearly everyone even in the pro scene plays with the octane, a free car).

Just look for stuff you enjoy, enjoy it and don't pick what you think is bad. Plain and simple as that.

[Thomas_JCG]

I don't agree at all. When I buy games magazines I see nothing like that at all, so I don't know what magazines you're buying. It seems like you're talking about websites, but writing for a website doesn't make you a journalist, it makes you a blogger. If you seek journalism from bloggers then you're bound to be disappointed but that's your fault, not journalism's fault. Not only do I find as much proper journalism as I want, I also know where to go to find independent reviewers who I know will give an unbiased opinion or review. If you rely on IGN or whatever and that's your only source of information then that's just you.

Which magazine do you read today that also doesn't have a site? They share the same staff, so if I read an article written by Christopher Livingston on paper, he is a journalist but if I read it online he is a blogger? The medium doesn't change the quality of writing or content.
And yeah, there are plenty of independent journalists out there that actually know what they are talking about, but they are the minority. Sites like IGN are vastly more popular, and because of that they have more chances to negatively influence gamers' opinion, that's the problem with gaming journalism today, it's bought and paid for the triple A industry.

I have no problems whatsoever finding AAA games that are devoid of micro transactions, multi-player etc. Sure there are loads of those games out there that I don't care for.....so I don't buy them.

There aren't just loads, they are becoming the norm, in case you never heard of "games as a service" until now. Consider how Bioware, a studio long praised for their amazing stories and memorable characters ended, and you will see the transformative power of money, major publishers are all pushing for games with MTX, with companies like EA even going so far as fighting local legislations.

However in order to make money you have to make good games. You speak as if people are held at gunpoint when they walk into a game store and are forced to buy games.

That was true many years ago. Now you don't need to make good games, you just have to add an option to pay. And no, we aren't being held at gunpoint, it's a much more subtle approach: getting people hooked into gambling so they will keep throwing money at games that aren't worth even 10 dollars.

I feel sorry for you and your ilk, for me personally gaming has never been better.

Don't be. I pity you, though. I don't know if you are just too innocent or too ignorant to see what is going on with games besides the pretty graphics.

[Aidy]

1. Gaming Journalism is Dead: In days of yore, the only people interested in being gaming journalists were people that really loved games. Today, that's far from the main requisite. Any college dropout seems to qualify, specially if they care more about politics than anything else. Reviews are unbalanced, being extremely forgiving for triple A games and aren't really aimed at the players, who can quickly identify the fake and uninformative reviews that sites like IGN put. All content seems to be geared to sponsors, which is why every site must publish at least four Fortnite articles a day.

I don't agree at all. When I buy games magazines I see nothing like that at all, so I don't know what magazines you're buying. It seems like you're talking about websites, but writing for a website doesn't make you a journalist, it makes you a blogger. If you seek journalism from bloggers then you're bound to be disappointed but that's your fault, not journalism's fault. Not only do I find as much proper journalism as I want, I also know where to go to find independent reviewers who I know will give an unbiased opinion or review. If you rely on IGN or whatever and that's your only source of information then that's just you.

2. The Industry Gives Us Reason to be Pessimistic: It used to be I would jump with joy whenever my favorite studio, Bioware, announced a new game. Now, I can't even bother because I know it will be garbage (Mass Effect Andromeda) or multiplayer riddled with MTX (Anthem).

Again that's just you. I have no problems whatsoever finding AAA games that are devoid of micro transactions, multi-player etc. Sure there are loads of those games out there that I don't care for.....so I don't buy them. I buy the games that meet my requirements. Reading this forum you'd think only three games existed; Battlefield V, Fallout 76 and Anthem. Every thread talks and moans about those games relentlessly. If you don't like them don't buy them. These games are the minority and if it's beyond you to find the games you like then don't blame the industry for that. Do some research. Look somewhere other than IGN.

The gaming industry went from satisfying players to satisfy shareholders, they no longer care about making good games, they care about making money.

That's always been their focus. That's always the focus of any business. However in order to make money you have to make good games. You speak as if people are held at gunpoint when they walk into a game store and are forced to buy games. You might not like the games other people are buying but that just means they have different tastes to you.

I feel sorry for you and your ilk, for me personally gaming has never been better. It gets better with each generation, as technical limitations dwindle and new possibilities open games are getting better and better. Forget about Fallout 76, Battlefield V and Anthem....there are a lot of games out there....find the ones you like and buy them. Or just spend your days moaning on the internet that people are buying games you don't like and talking like every game is full of micro transactions, whatever works for you.

[Thomas_JCG]

Three things to consider when questioning about gamers, media and the industry relationship:

1. Gaming Journalism is Dead: In days of yore, the only people interested in being gaming journalists were people that really loved games. Today, that's far from the main requisite. Any college dropout seems to qualify, specially if they care more about politics than anything else. Reviews are unbalanced, being extremely forgiving for triple A games and aren't really aimed at the players, who can quickly identify the fake and uninformative reviews that sites like IGN put. All content seems to be geared to sponsors, which is why every site must publish at least four Fortnite articles a day.

2. The Industry Gives Us Reason to be Pessimistic: It used to be I would jump with joy whenever my favorite studio, Bioware, announced a new game. Now, I can't even bother because I know it will be garbage (Mass Effect Andromeda) or multiplayer riddled with MTX (Anthem). The gaming industry went from satisfying players to satisfy shareholders, they no longer care about making good games, they care about making money. That's why so many games seems to be a disaster at launch, and people are more than justified in complaining about it, you are not acting like an entitled brat if the product you paid for is defective.

3. The Hype Culture is Real: This industry loves to drum up their games as the greatest thing since sliced bread. They raise gamers anticipation in order to boost pre-orders, but seldom deliver. This is a issue on both parts, the industry for outright lying in their presentations and rushing games; and gamers for still falling in their traps. The result is always the same: A game that fails to live to the unreasonable expectations and gamers pissed over being misled.

Basically, the industry distanced itself from gamers, and uses the media to influence us. Naturally, this isn't what we want, so we lash out. Nothing will fix that until the industry changes.

[xadu]

So after this long-winded post my questions are...
Are gamers entitled?

No. Gamers pay, and gamers have right to get what they want for his money.
You cannot sell broccoli to chocolate fans and accuse then of being entitled for hating broccoli

Are media overly harsh/influencing?

In the past, developers made games for the love of gaming. As the industry grew, it attracted predators and parasites, which have no interest in gaming, but on the business side or political opportunities they open.

The backslash is deserved. You can be fine with having the same wage along years, if you love your work, but investors want profits to grow, so they don't accept that chocolate is only sold to chocolate fans, and they turn it into broccoli-flavored chocolate, expecting to sell it to everybody, and everybody complains.

Complains are good. They signal bad business practices, and corporations need to know when and why they annoy the customers.

Also, the most well funded media is on the business because they want to turn games into political carriers or propaganda. That's is why they do atrocious things like Polygon making a video about Doom, by a person which can't even aim, don't know how to move, shoots at med packs, and the article says that the game is bad because it is too difficult. They don't have any interest in games, they never played games, but pretend to review games.
Then they collude with investors. They give a broccoli-flavored chocolate a good rating, if they are paid by investors, and investors agree to put some propaganda on the former chocolate.

Should we have a say on games?

Who else should have a say on games?

[Baron Baldric]

Now that's just a personal/recent example, I could list many many more, but my point is, gamers opinions now carries weight, social media carries waay to much influence in my opinion on how games are being perceived/released and even if games should be continued or not.
I mean let's look at games most agree are amazing...Doom (2016) or The Witcher 3, do you think if gamers had more influence on those games, they'd have turned out the great pieces of software they are?
Do you think the "Family Matters" mission on Witcher 3 would have been available if gamers opinions had anything to say on that...yet it's one of the best missions I've ever had the pleasure to experience.

The players had all the influence on The Witcher 3 and Doom 2016. These games were specially designed to adapt to the needs of the players. The difference between art and design, art is subjective, a personal expression, design is objective, you don't think about yourself when you design, focus on the consumer of the message or product.

The Witcher 3 and Doom 2016 are the result of feedback from gamers, we must take into account the failure of Doom 3 and the evolution of The Witcher 1, 2, 3.

The Witcher 3 is a game for men, the "Family Matters" mission is a representation of the most common of marital conflicts observed from a male perspective, fulfills the function of being a virtual therapist.

Obviously the media are advertising companies, they are paid to influence people, that is why we have to express ourselves and inform ourselves.

[Goldenfoxx]

My feelings?

• There are gamers who exhibit entitlement issues, but it's like saying all white people are white supremacists. They're out there, but by far not the norm.
• I wasn't paying attention during the Gamergate deal, but it did a good job exposing some serious breaches of ethics between developers and journalists. (I hate even calling gaming magazine writers "journalists" at this point. The who, what, when, where, why, and how got left behind a LONG time ago.) But ultimately, game journalists are like film critics. Listen to them if you want, or don't if you don't. I find them mostly hot air, myself. I like games that people and journalists hate (Assassin's Creed 3, Assassin's Creed: Unity, and Arkham Origins immediately spring to mind) and I hate games people generally liked (AC: Syndicate and AC: Odyssey just to go back to the well of my favorite franchises to make the point). They're not going to sway my opinion one way or another; no one will. If I like a game, I like it. Period.
• I'm a strong supporter of a type of symbiosis between gamers and developers. Without gamers, developers don't have a job or a medium for their art. Without developers, gamers have nothing to play. There needs to be a connection made. You can talk about stuff like the No Mercy glitch (which pisses me off to this day), but the miracle of modern gaming is that these things CAN be fixed now. I can remember sitting in my room talking to my friend Rodney on the phone back in the NES days wishing we could somehow play a football game, or connect directly to team up on Double Dragon 2. We'd have to settle for starting a game at the count of 3 and seeing which one of us could finish Duck Tales or Super Mario Bros. first. For all the negativity about gaming today, the opportunities are there to make things happen that we used to could only dream about. But you HAVE to talk about microtransactions and loot crates if you're going to raise questions about the current onslaught of anger from the fans. We have, for YEARS, kindly asked developers to stop shady practices like those, like releasing games on a deadline rather than when a game is actually finished, to maybe actually QT their games before putting them into the hands of players...those sorts of things, and they roundly ignored us, pushed forward, and are, right now, greedier than they've ever been. Yes, it's a business and a business is about making money. But how about we don't throw ethics under the bus in the process?
• I'm 44. If you're an old fart, what in the blue hell does that make me?