Jimquisition: Joy Begets Anger

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

spartandude:
Yep thats money and time im never getting back. Again I get that other people liked it, but I'm pissed off that these reviewers just gave the game such positive scores and mentioned only one or two of its shortcomings (or failed to see what other people wouldnt like) and even passed off these weaknesses as just meh.

I'm not trying to pick on you here but this is pretty much a widespread issue. Why do people believe that they are somehow owed a good experience? I get that games are expensive but the reaction of anger can only come from a belief that you somehow deserve to not be exposed to something you dislike. You had an experience, you did not like it, you moved on. Imagine going through life being angry at every meal you eat that you don't enjoy, every book you don't like, etc. And worse, being angry at the people who do like them. That is what is basically happening here.

I agree that it's a new thing in video games (or at least it's been growing at an unusual rate), but I think in other forms of media it's taken a good hold for a while. I remember going to YouTube channels featuring rock music and people just out and saying "You like Jus", oh wait make I get this right (clears throat), "YU LEIK JUSTIN PEEBER YO A (insert derogatory gay thing here) DIS IS REEEL MUSIC! SO FUK YU ALL HIP HOP RAP (insert derogatory gay thing here.)"

Does this mean that this behavior is okay? No. It's not.

Truth Jim, I've had the most awful things said to me/about me because I said I liked Mass Effect 3 including the ending.

Brilliant, this needed to be said. Jim didn't just say it though he dropped the hammer, I hope this trend dies away but my faith in the gaming community is at an all time low and I can only see this continuing.

Jimothy Sterling:
Nowadays, you can't even be happy without it pissing someone off, and it's a damn sad time for all.

I usually don't like to reply directly but you have a legitimate question you deserve an answer for. I personally prefer a reviewer to underrate something than overrate something. Just before I started renting games, I spent $50 on No More Heroes because everyone (even Yhatzee, who is usually a strong critic) was saying it was practically the best thing on the Wii. After playing a few minigames based on jobs so boring we usually give them to immigrants, I felt like I had been tricked. Like some snake oil salesman got me to buy his tonic by getting Gary Null to lift a cart after drinking it in front of me.
That's my reason but I feel that it pertains to poorly put together games that get rave reviews and that seems to happen most at the beginning of a console cycle. If it's a well made game with a lot of good content (like any Zelda game I've played; doesn't include the controversial one you mentioned), then there's no reason for it other than it's "cool" to some people to hate things that are popular...or, yea, envy. I guess I envied the people who got enjoyment out of No More Heroes but only because they didn't feel like they wasted $50.

And thanks for giving me a reason to want a Vita; Tearaway looks like the trippiest thing since the invention of the Katamari.

CitySquirrel:

spartandude:
Yep thats money and time im never getting back. Again I get that other people liked it, but I'm pissed off that these reviewers just gave the game such positive scores and mentioned only one or two of its shortcomings (or failed to see what other people wouldnt like) and even passed off these weaknesses as just meh.

I'm not trying to pick on you here but this is pretty much a widespread issue. Why do people believe that they are somehow owed a good experience?

Because that is what you're paying for. If you didn't think it would give you a good experience, you wouldn't buy it.

To use your food analogy - if you go to a restaurant and the food sucks, you're going to feel annoyed. Particularly if it got glowing reviews.

In fact you may, as a lot of people do, go online and complain about it to a more general audience in order to warn others away from it.

Veritasiness:
...sheeple...

Anyway, I got to agree with what you said first.
It seems no matter what people in the games industry do, right or wrong, there's always a group of people getting mad at them for something or another.

canadamus_prime:
I cannot believe that this is actually a thing. I think "idiot" is being far too kind to people like that.

I don't know if this thing is really all that new, but it does pop up quite a lot. Especially recently with all the lists being made.

What surprised me though was that Jim has people being bigger jerks to him over positive reviews than negative ones.
Didn't see that coming.
Shame it was not just from "fans", but also Jim's peers.
:/ Kind of a bummer.

xPixelatedx:
snip

Because God forbid people genuinely like these games. After all, how can anyone like something that doesn't reinvent the wheel, or is aimed at the lowest common denominator?

My only "anger" at positive reviews is when a review, like the Dragon Age II review here, unabashedly praises the game but fails to mention most, or even any, of the problems included in the game itself.

It's the same thing where, for instance, reviews came out for the new Forza and Gran Turismo and several didn't bother informing players that there was less content than before and a gross number of microtransactions in their place. Didn't even get a single mention from many major reviewers, and that's stuff WE WANT TO SEE MENTIONED before we make a purchase.

It's hard to be an informed buyer when reviewers fail to include both the good, and the bad, in equal measure. Give a game a perfect 10/10 if you want... but don't tell me it's a flawless game with absolutely no negative qualities whatsoever.

That mindset made GTA4 the highest rated game on Xbox 360... and, good grief, does that game have problems, to the point it's nowhere near my top 50 games on the system. So, so many bad game design decisions. But you wouldn't know it from reading the reviews.

Bruce:

CitySquirrel:
I'm not trying to pick on you here but this is pretty much a widespread issue. Why do people believe that they are somehow owed a good experience?

Because that is what you're paying for. If you didn't think it would give you a good experience, you wouldn't buy it.

To use your food analogy - if you go to a restaurant and the food sucks, you're going to feel annoyed. Particularly if it got glowing reviews.

In fact you may, as a lot of people do, go online and complain about it to a more general audience in order to warn others away from it.

Except, if it was only the food you didn't like, you wouldn't complain. Anyone who said, in a complaint, "The Lamb and Lentil soup was terrible because I did not like the cilantro" would be considered a complete idiot; you not liking the taste of the dish does not make it a bad dish. I hate seafood, but this does not make people who enjoy seafood inherently crazy. And I won't get angry at them for raving about the fish chowder at the local pub.

Obviously if there is something STRUCTURALLY wrong with the food then there is a difference, e.g. "the food was late", the steak was not cooked the way I requested it", "there was a severed finger in my vegetarian entrée", etc. But you would not get angry at someone who recommended the restaurant, you would assume they had a different experience than you.

And, more to the point, we were not given a certificate at birth stating that we would enjoy everything we experienced. Bad meals / games will happen. Again, why do you feel you deserve never to have a bad experience?

Edit: I forgot to make it clear that a big issue is confusing matters of taste with structural issues. Going back to DA2, I loved it. It is very hard to objectively determine the issues that were structural in nature and the ones that amounted to "I don't like how this tastes."

I think I know when this kind of overblown bile started; remember back in 2011 when Dragon Age 2 was released and and got metabombed and everybody was surprised because there was never a such a big difference of opinion between critics and players?

A popular or hyped game getting metabombed seems business as usual now, doesn't it?

It might have stared before this but that was when I first noticed it.

I rely on reviewers to give me fair, honest review. I bought DA2 after reading the escapist review, and when I was confronted by the overwhelming and very blatant problems with that game, I did not feel that the review I read had been honest about those problems. I don't usually* care about people liking stuff I don't, but I need to get something a bit more than that from a 'review'. Plenty of reviewers have produced reviews that endorse a film or game while still making clear to me reasons why I wouldn't like them, or vice versa.

Not that I've ever felt the urge to post hateful messages or troll forums or comment sections. Being disappointed in a review is no reason to be a dick on the internet. The internet has dicks enough, already.

*On the other hand, there are some games that are just morally repugnant, and when people like those, yeah, it's upsetting. Particularly people I otherwise respect. Again, no reason to be a dick on the internet, and I wouldn't call it 'upsetting', but it does bother me that an individual I otherwise respect like Mr. Sterling would think so highly of, say, Bioshock Infinite. But that's a conversation that's been done to death elsewhere.

CitySquirrel:

Obviously if there is something STRUCTURALLY wrong with the food then there is a difference, e.g. "the food was late", the steak was not cooked the way I requested it", "there was a severed finger in my vegetarian entrée", etc. But you would not get angry at someone who recommended the restaurant, you would assume they had a different experience than you.

And, more to the point, we were not given a certificate at birth stating that we would enjoy everything we experienced. Bad meals / games will happen. Again, why do you feel you deserve never to have a bad experience?

I think this is where the analogy fails. In a restaurant, the reviewer gets a different dish than you, so you could have a structurally wrong dish and the reviewer could've had a good one. But a game reviewer playes the exact same game you did, so he should point things out that are objectively wrong with the game. If a reviewer fails to mention that the ending of a game was clearly rushed from a production standpoint(the reuse of color-coded cutscenes in ME3 for example) than you have a right to be angry at the reviewer if you bought the game on his recommendation.

I think a reviewer should say if he gave a game a very positive review because he liked the game instead of it being objectively very good. That would solve the issue.

Everything else was very well said. Even if you wasted money and time on a game because you trusted a reviewer, insulting someone is never gonna help.

I have no problems with Greg liking Dragon Age 2. My issue is with him, as a professional reviewer, giving such a flawed game a perfect score and calling it "A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics" and "what videogames are meant to be".

Then, he goes on to do a TW2 review, and that's a game superior to DA2 in almost everything, and gives it a 30% lower score? I worked as a game reviewer from 2000 to 2007 and in examining some 60+ games I know that it's hard not to let your personal preferences influence you. However, especially when handing scores to games in the same genre that are released relatively close to one another, you should be able to stop, have a look, and see that something is wrong with your grading.

Jim makes an excellent point here that I hadn't really considered

As a western gamer with a long-standing love of eastern developers like Atlus & Nippon Ichi, this is nothing new.
Example: Catherine is probably one of my favorite games of all time. A lot of people didn't think so. I get that. It's a bizarre game on a fundamental level. Not for everyone. But the bile-spewing that statements as innocuous as that have earned many is, to me, more confusing than anything else

Sorry, Jim, but I can't let this one go.

Not because I disagree with your basic premise, because I don't.

But you're NOT "a stranger on the Internet", nor are any of the other persons who present themselves as noted reviewers. Not just of games, but of anything. If you're making a profession of it, people expect that you put some real thought and work into what you do, and in this case, that's reviewing.

The entire point of reviewing something is to give the community you're reviewing for a heads-up. Sure, opinions differ, and there's no way there can or should be a lock-step agreement on what rating or review any given game should get from any given reviewer or rater.

That said, it brushes aside the point when YOU get angry about OTHER people getting angry that a game which ISN'T perfect gets A PERFECT RATING.

That's an issue for legitimate criticism. Rage? Well, in terms of shock and perhaps a feeling of betrayal, sure. Rating a good game as "perfect" or a crappy game as "good" does the entire community a disservice. Backlash can and should be expected when a reviewer can't muster the basic objectivity necessary to at least place their review in the same ballpark as observable reality.

Personal insults and such are childish, no excuses there. But you yourself have gone off when a given reviewer has given a crappy game a pass, for the same reasons, and frankly, you've been just as vicious when you suspect the fix was in. That someone got special treatment or there was quid pro quo going on.

We "commoners" in the gaming community have the same reactions and often tend to leap to the same conclusions.

In the end, civility should always be the first resort, but you can't expect people not to feel betrayed when someone they rely on says "PERFECT!" for a game that clearly bears major flaws. That's not a difference of opinion --- it's a failure of trust.

Bors Mistral:
I have no problems with Greg liking Dragon Age 2. My issue is with him, as a professional reviewer, giving such a flawed game a perfect score and calling it "A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics" and "what videogames are meant to be".

Then, he goes on to do a TW2 review, and that's a game superior to DA2 in almost everything, and gives it a 30% lower score? I worked as a game reviewer from 2000 to 2007 and in examining some 60+ games I know that it's hard not to let your personal preferences influence you. However, especially when handing scores to games in the same genre that are released relatively close to one another, you should be able to stop, have a look, and see that something is wrong with your grading.

This is exactly what I mean. If he would've said he liked the game very much and therefore gave it a perfect score that wouldn't have been a problem, even if he didn't point out the (apparent) flaws of the game. If the game was really objectively as bad as people say (since I haven't played DA) and he said the opposite thing, he clearly misinformed his readers.

I experience much the same whenever I talk to anyone about Anime, and I think it should relate to real life too.

I'd admitted openly to the sin of loving Naruto, so far I've never met anyone IRL who also liked Naruto... and had more than a few rage and tell be I shouldn't call myself an anime fan. Then there's when I like anything with ecchi in it and someone will just scream Hentai...

CoD/BF I get, I loved it but just can't justify the cost atm or I prolly would play it. But I know the series gets a lot of unnecessary flak.

Oddly some of the most harassment comes from my love of League of Legends and World of Warcraft.

LoL I like cuz it's free and just a bit of arcade/competitive (MOBA) style gameplay. I find it a bit more accessible than others and I just enjoy playing.

WoW... it's hard to justify to people. I'm not playing at the moment, again due to money issues, but I'd like to be and I understand why lots of people do play it so often. I loved just doing random quests and seeing where the lore takes me.

I just... don't think I'd ever have that reaction to someone else liking something...

ex275w:

Thanatos2k:
One addendum though: Hating a review/review score is not quite the same as hating someone else because they like something. That perfect Dragon Age 2 score IS a travesty, not because the reviewer liked the game, but because professional reviews are supposed to be more than just whether the reviewer liked it or not, they're supposed to be a rational objective analysis of the components at play, and any objective analysis of the quality of Dragon Age 2 will find it wanting.

Reviews can't be 100% objective, they have to mix subjective opinion and objective facts (this game has 10 missions, it costs 60$, etc.) and form those objective facts write why the game is worth buying, renting, stealing from Gamestop, breaking or waiting until the price goes down. (For example the game has 10 missions, that's not a whole lot of variety 1/10)

Except many reviewer don't do that anymore, in many cases you get an extended love/hate letter to the developer with little to no meaningful information. I miss old gamespot reviews made by Greg Kasavin where the guy would usually give you information about the length of the game, replayability, graphics, music score and the content price relation which was usually enough to get you interested.

CitySquirrel:

spartandude:
Yep thats money and time im never getting back. Again I get that other people liked it, but I'm pissed off that these reviewers just gave the game such positive scores and mentioned only one or two of its shortcomings (or failed to see what other people wouldnt like) and even passed off these weaknesses as just meh.

I'm not trying to pick on you here but this is pretty much a widespread issue. Why do people believe that they are somehow owed a good experience? I get that games are expensive but the reaction of anger can only come from a belief that you somehow deserve to not be exposed to something you dislike. You had an experience, you did not like it, you moved on. Imagine going through life being angry at every meal you eat that you don't enjoy, every book you don't like, etc. And worse, being angry at the people who do like them. That is what is basically happening here.

Pretty much hit the nail on the head in regards to what I was going to say. To elaborate further:

Why do so many people feel so personally slighted and hurt when they play a bad video game? The best way to address playing something bad is to acknowledge "Well, I didn't like that very much," take some knowledge about how not to design video games away from it, laugh it off, and move on. I love video games. They are a huge, important part of my life, to the point that I harbor some aspirations about going into game design myself. However, I do not let a bad experience that I have playing a video game turn me into a frothing ball of hatred.

Earlier this year, I was one of the poor saps who pre-ordered Aliens: Colonial Marines. Let me say that again: I PRE-ORDERED Aliens: Colonial Marines. That game was a steaming pile of horseshit, and I ended up forcing myself to play through it as a learning experience, but did I let that turn me into a hate tornado? No. I took it as a learning experience to learn more about how not to design a video game, laughed at myself for being an idiot, resolved not to pre-order games on Steam ever again, and moved on. In 2012, Paper Mario: Sticker Star was one of the biggest disappointments of a game that I've ever played, but it was a wonderful learning experience as well. I was able to pinpoint exactly what I didn't like about it from a design standpoint and jotted down my thoughts on it, and I came away having gained something positive from the experience.

My point is, you will inevitably play a bad game, or a game you didn't like. Not all games are good, but you can make each and every game, or any piece of media for that matter, into a positive experience if you just take away something good from it. Even if you will never actually make a video game in your life, you can learn about what you like and dislike and hopefully make a better purchasing decision next time. To link this all the way back to Jim's thesis, not getting so seethingly angry about not liking a video game will hopefully make you less inclined to respond with anger if someone else likes it. Entertainment is supposed to bring joy into our lives, not make us all unhappy wrecks.

I like to think critics and reviewers are part of the reason for this "culture of negativity." They tend to be the first ones to insult series as well as insult the people who like the series, even going as far as painting them as "the reason why the [blank] industry sucks the way it does. Like naturally COD is popular because people like COD games and buy them so usually reviewers imply or outright say that the COD fans are to blame for the domination COD has on the market and all the COD clones therein. Ergo, all COD fans are attacked. Thus creating a culture in which people want to screw over content they do not like by attacking what they believe is the source the people who like the things you don't like (thus buy it, generate revenue, makes it successful, etc.). People do not like you liking DMC because "it's not supposed to be liked" and your praised helped make what they don't like successful, so you are the enemy.

Inversely it's also a "put your money where your mouth is" type of deal. With all the bile and criticism critics tend to put out on games people actually do like and how they belittle the people who like them, naturally those people expect a title that completely blows the games they insulted out of the water. Something that is so good it justifies their previous negative reviews. It can't just be "good" or "fun" because those were the types of games, in their opinion, the reviewer shot down in the past, it has to be "completely perfect" or the critic paints a target and allows other people to "criticize" and "give their opinions" on the stuff they like.

A jimquisition on my bday, what more could anyone ask for?

I know I have done this on occasion. I remember getting upset with some critics during the Mass Effect ending debacle. I never sent like hate mail or actually do anything, but I would get all worked up. I really got upset though when they started calling people who didn't like the ending entitled shits and whatnot. Though I would argue it did affect me, seeing as how it kinda kickstarted the depressive episode I was in.

But when I do get upset at people, especially for something stupid like this, I think its more a sign to me that I'm spending too much time on the internet and need to log off for a bit. The constant negativity and anger towards everything really can get to you after a while.

So Jim is finally loosing his mind eh?

Thats a good way to start of the new year.

Have a happy new year Jim, thank god for you! (You lucky bastard!!)

I guess every so often I will disagree with what Jim says (well on a few points at least).

While I could care less what subjective score a reviewer gives a game, I do want to know everything about it. I love Dragon age 2, and have beaten it 6-7 times (with another play through coming when I finish my latest play through of DA:O), yet I will admit there were plenty of flaws in it. If a review gives a game a perfect scores and does not acknowledge the faults then they are the ones doing the industry and gamers a disservice. They are paid to give a review of the game play, not tell us what their favorite games are (well not only that at least).

Also I disagree on it being the industries fault for everything being call of honour 2054. Every year 3-4 of the same damn game are released and they are always the top sellers. I don't have an issue with people liking these games. I do have an issue with people paying $60 for the same game with a different map. What company wouldn't continue to do this if it prints money. What company wouldn't see if they could tap into that market. Smart ones will realize their niche will not always fit in the shooter market, but company heads are not usually games or developers.

but other than that someone's liking for disliking of a game doesn't impact me in the slightest, and there is no reason to be angry over a subjective preference.

PortalThinker113:

CitySquirrel:

spartandude:
Yep thats money and time im never getting back. Again I get that other people liked it, but I'm pissed off that these reviewers just gave the game such positive scores and mentioned only one or two of its shortcomings (or failed to see what other people wouldnt like) and even passed off these weaknesses as just meh.

I'm not trying to pick on you here but this is pretty much a widespread issue. Why do people believe that they are somehow owed a good experience? I get that games are expensive but the reaction of anger can only come from a belief that you somehow deserve to not be exposed to something you dislike. You had an experience, you did not like it, you moved on. Imagine going through life being angry at every meal you eat that you don't enjoy, every book you don't like, etc. And worse, being angry at the people who do like them. That is what is basically happening here.

Pretty much hit the nail on the head in regards to what I was going to say. To elaborate further:

Why do so many people feel so personally slighted and hurt when they play a bad video game? The best way to address playing something bad is to acknowledge "Well, I didn't like that very much," take some knowledge about how not to design video games away from it, laugh it off, and move on. I love video games. They are a huge, important part of my life, to the point that I harbor some aspirations about going into game design myself. However, I do not let a bad experience that I have playing a video game turn me into a frothing ball of hatred.

Earlier this year, I was one of the poor saps who pre-ordered Aliens: Colonial Marines. Let me say that again: I PRE-ORDERED Aliens: Colonial Marines. That game was a steaming pile of horseshit, and I ended up forcing myself to play through it as a learning experience, but did I let that turn me into a hate tornado? No. I took it as a learning experience to learn more about how not to design a video game, laughed at myself for being an idiot, resolved not to pre-order games on Steam ever again, and moved on. In 2012, Paper Mario: Sticker Star was one of the biggest disappointments of a game that I've ever played, but it was a wonderful learning experience as well. I was able to pinpoint exactly what I didn't like about it from a design standpoint and jotted down my thoughts on it, and I came away having gained something positive from the experience.

My point is, you will inevitably play a bad game, or a game you didn't like. Not all games are good, but you can make each and every game, or any piece of media for that matter, into a positive experience if you just take away something good from it. Even if you will never actually make a video game in your life, you can learn about what you like and dislike and hopefully make a better purchasing decision next time. To link this all the way back to Jim's thesis, not getting so seethingly angry about not liking a video game will hopefully make you less inclined to respond with anger if someone else likes it. Entertainment is supposed to bring joy into our lives, not make us all unhappy wrecks.

Probably for the same reason someone buys anything that doesn't work as advertised. Seething angry is stupid, but if I buy something that doesn't work I take it back, and if they won't then I don't shop there again.

I'd be lying if I said I didn't, to some degree, "get" the rage.

Maybe not on an individual private consumer level. But on a critical level? Especially with the drive to reduce review scores to a scale-of-ten number?

I get it when people are frustrated when a forgettable game with a contrived story but flashy production values gets 9s and 10s, or even when some indie darling gets the same treatment despite being buggy as all-get-out, having the depth of a Necco wafer, and/or presentation that would shame the NES.

I get it because it seems like a big old vote for "more of the same"- a vote in an election which I do have a stake in, but don't really get to vote in myself. Thousands of people may buy a game because someone listed on Metacritic gave it an 8, 9, or 10; comparatively, my indifference or derision isn't going to make a scratch. And then we are going to get more of the same, and likely as not, it's going to be more of the same on the broad strokes while missing the intricacies or polish that made the "leader" as successful as it was.

At that point, it's hard to see it being about others' joy so much as your own joy slipping out of reach because there's only so much development money to go around.

Jim's right, of course, that the "follow the leader" tendencies are largely an industry problem. But it doesn't occur in a vacuum. And yeah, this ties in to older "Jimquisitions" like "Hate out of 10" and "Metacritic is Not the Problem". We need an extended (preferably polite!) conversation about games that doesn't reduce things to numbers, where consumers feel they can be heard, and where a game review isn't the end of that conversation. I just don't know how to bring such a thing about.

Systemerror:
snip

He was the one who got hung up on the food thing. I simply pointed out that it would be silly to go through life enraged at everything you did not enjoy. Also, I have trouble notion of an objective review. How do you know what is taste and what is structural? I hate opera. This is because I hate that style of singing. This is structural for OPERA, but it is still based on a matter of taste. In a game, anything not at the level of coding and programming is a matter of taste.

Maybe one of the issues is that there is no distinction between game reviewer and game critic.

Jim, as always I thank god for you, but for once, I cannot thank god for this video. I think I agree with where you're coming from, in that getting angry at someone else's enjoyment is wrong, but the extrapolations take it too far. Reviews will always be inseparable from the reviewer, but if they are to be criticism, they must be something different than an impressions piece or a Let's Play.

Let's look at the infamous Dragon Age 2 review that you mention. No, people should not be getting angry that he enjoyed the game. The fact that he enjoyed it is a legitimate part of the review. But there is a very large step from saying you enjoyed a game, and singing its praises to high heaven and not even looking at potential flaws. That is not reviewing. That is advertising.

Now hold on. I am not in any way making accusations of payoffs or dishonesty here. I believe that the DA2 article was honest. I advertise my favorite games on a regular basis. But if I am trying to review something for someone, I make sure I pay attention to its flaws, or places that I liked that many people might not (I love the hell out of FFXII, for instance, but I can still see its issues). Playing a game for enjoyment is good. It is what they are for. But when you do this for your job, while enjoyment is a perfectly fine side-effect, it is no longer the entire point.

-Dragmire-:

Falterfire:
You say you want to love all games, but do you really?

Do you really want to even imagine a world in which Ride to Hell: Retribution was a title which brought you unadulterated joy and cheer?

I don't know, some people enjoy laughing at how broken a game is. I suppose that's not enjoyment of the game itself though.

But look at how much damn fun those people playing 'Amazing Frog?' are having not only with the game, but how broken the game is?

Blade_125:

PortalThinker113:

CitySquirrel:

I'm not trying to pick on you here but this is pretty much a widespread issue. Why do people believe that they are somehow owed a good experience? I get that games are expensive but the reaction of anger can only come from a belief that you somehow deserve to not be exposed to something you dislike. You had an experience, you did not like it, you moved on. Imagine going through life being angry at every meal you eat that you don't enjoy, every book you don't like, etc. And worse, being angry at the people who do like them. That is what is basically happening here.

Pretty much hit the nail on the head in regards to what I was going to say. To elaborate further:

Why do so many people feel so personally slighted and hurt when they play a bad video game? The best way to address playing something bad is to acknowledge "Well, I didn't like that very much," take some knowledge about how not to design video games away from it, laugh it off, and move on. I love video games. They are a huge, important part of my life, to the point that I harbor some aspirations about going into game design myself. However, I do not let a bad experience that I have playing a video game turn me into a frothing ball of hatred.

Earlier this year, I was one of the poor saps who pre-ordered Aliens: Colonial Marines. Let me say that again: I PRE-ORDERED Aliens: Colonial Marines. That game was a steaming pile of horseshit, and I ended up forcing myself to play through it as a learning experience, but did I let that turn me into a hate tornado? No. I took it as a learning experience to learn more about how not to design a video game, laughed at myself for being an idiot, resolved not to pre-order games on Steam ever again, and moved on. In 2012, Paper Mario: Sticker Star was one of the biggest disappointments of a game that I've ever played, but it was a wonderful learning experience as well. I was able to pinpoint exactly what I didn't like about it from a design standpoint and jotted down my thoughts on it, and I came away having gained something positive from the experience.

My point is, you will inevitably play a bad game, or a game you didn't like. Not all games are good, but you can make each and every game, or any piece of media for that matter, into a positive experience if you just take away something good from it. Even if you will never actually make a video game in your life, you can learn about what you like and dislike and hopefully make a better purchasing decision next time. To link this all the way back to Jim's thesis, not getting so seethingly angry about not liking a video game will hopefully make you less inclined to respond with anger if someone else likes it. Entertainment is supposed to bring joy into our lives, not make us all unhappy wrecks.

Probably for the same reason someone buys anything that doesn't work as advertised. Seething angry is stupid, but if I buy something that doesn't work I take it back, and if they won't then I don't shop there again.

But that's the point. "Not being good" is not the same thing as "doesn't work." If I buy a game that is bugged so bad that I cannot play it, or I purchase a physical disk and it is broken before I even put it in my console, you can sure as heck bet that I will be angry and wanting my money back. But if I play through a game, start to finish, and don't like it, I have experienced the entire product. I cannot un-play the game after I have finished it, I can't return the experience that I already had. I may not have liked the game, but the game being bad isn't a horrible offense that should get me seethingly angry.

You're right in that I would probably then be less inclined to go back to the same "store," and maybe even advise others to not play the game, but I can still take something positive away from that experience. I will never demand a refund simply because the entertainment I took part in was not to my liking. That was a risk I signed up for when I bought the thing.

This is the most refreshing video in a long time. The irrational negativity just wears me out and burns me out. The worst thing about the internet is the need for people to justify their intellect and interests.

nightazday:
I like to think critics and reviewers are part of the reason for this "culture of negativity." They tend to be the first ones to insult series as well as insult the people who like the series, even going as far as painting them as "the reason why the [blank] industry sucks the way it does. Like naturally COD is popular because people like COD games and buy them so usually reviewers imply or outright say that the COD fans are to blame for the domination COD has on the market and all the COD clones therein. Ergo, all COD fans are attacked. Thus creating a culture in which people want to screw over content they do not like by attacking what they believe is the source the people who like the things you don't like (thus buy it, generate revenue, makes it successful, etc.). People do not like you liking DMC because "it's not supposed to be liked" and your praised helped make what they don't like successful, so you are the enemy.

Inversely it's also a "put your money where your mouth is" type of deal. With all the bile and criticism critics tend to put out on games people actually do like and how they belittle the people who like them, naturally those people expect a title that completely blows the games they insulted out of the water. Something that is so good it justifies their previous negative reviews. It can't just be "good" or "fun" because those were the types of games, in their opinion, the reviewer shot down in the past, it has to be "completely perfect" or the critic paints a target and allows other people to "criticize" and "give their opinions" on the stuff they like.

Amen, If I remember correctly Adam Sessler recently did a stream where he played Kingdom Hearts because he hates it and mocks people who like it. So he spent the entire session making jabs and digs at the game and those who like it. This could easily be carried through to a lot of the issues in the gaming community, a lot of it comes directly from the audience imitating the critics. They use smarm, spite and Virol in their writing and then wonder why their comments are filled with the same. Well I learned it from watching you Dad. There are critics I could point out like Jeremy Parish who can crack the odd joke, but keeps the tone of his reviews in a sane place and generally seems to get back the same in return.

As always enjoyed the video, but more importantly I have to say much love Jim for throwing in those Ancestral Trail pics, I loved that series so much as a youngster it's nice to see that someone else remembers it also! Keep up the good work sir!

But isn't the real Willam Dafoe made of plastic and dreams?

I can certainly agree that on the surface, taking offense at someone else enjoying something seems pretty damn stupid, and in many cases, it is pretty damn stupid. However, as Jim pointed out, there is the concern that too many people having low standards and being satisfied with games that most would agree are poor quality, designed based on the responses of focus-tested groups will lead to the industry never developing anything better. I'm confused, though, at how he then turns right around and says "don't blame people for liking it, blame the developers for making games like that." Well...if people keep eating up the lazily made, cheaply produced games that were made just to check off a list of desired features from a focus group...why should developers bother doing otherwise? Why should developers shift money from the easy-to-produce, lowest-common-denominator shooters, god games, RPGs and the like and put it into ones that are innovative, different, take risks and try altering the formulas that have become almost industry standards? Remember that these days, sadly, mainstream game developers' primary goal isn't to provide a quality product to benefit its customers...its to get the consumers' money as fast as they can, however they can.

I'm not saying that throwing petulant tantrums and raging on the internet over positive reviews is a good thing; it's not. However, I think perhaps some of the more mature people who are looking at the big picture, and seeing an industry being steered by lot of people with low standards, do have a right to not be all that pleased.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here