Why I think the ME3 fans are actually mad

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

That's a really good post OP.

There's something off about this whole thing and I think you just hit the nail on the head. Art or not we have a right to an opinion. The fact some people want the ending changed or clarified shows Bioware how much people loved the IP, they were giving them feedback. Yahtzee used the term 'browbeat' how can it not come across like that when so many are dissatisfied.

The same effect happened with Final Fantasy 13 and Dragon Age 2. Final Fantasy 13-2 certainly fixed those issues to an extent, listening to your consumers isn't a bad thing.

Everyone keeps talking about a 'dangerous precedent' but there is already a relevant precedent...Bethesda changed the ending to Fallout 3 and here we are still playing games.

A quote from a news article at the time

And all those who finished the game were pretty much disappointed with the final third, which feels rushed and not fully thought through. Well, MTV Multiplayer talked to Todd Howard, the executive producer on Fallout 3, and gave him the possibility to respond to the criticism players had for the ending of his game.

He quickly shot back by saying that "Based on the feedback I've seen, most people are pissed off that it ends, not the 'ending' itself. Maybe that's one and the same, I don't know. That's another thing we're changing in DLC3. We really underestimated how many people would want to keep playing, so that's probably the last time we'll do something like that."

and lo the world did not end.

I've been thinking this was just a tipping point of something bound to happen eventually. From DRM and onine passes, to removal of system features, to questionable review practices, to a general attitude equating used game buyers as paraiah and theives, the industry has not seemed endearing to gamers for a while. The new "It's my world I'm just letting you play in it for $60" attitude isn't helping much, nor is the conventioal attitude that the only justifiable was to show anger is to deny companies money for future games (punishing yourself as well).

I mean, no, we aren't owed anything, but that fact in itself doesn't jusify being a jerk or taking advantage of our willingness to part with money for video games.

I can understand why people are pissed off about the game's ending. Its not that its sad or that they are entitled ETC. Its that it comes completely out of left field. I personally don;t hate the reason for the Reapers, and from a machine perspective I actually sorta think it makes sense. It would have been a much different ending if there had been some lead up. Also, the star child of exposition; this was just bad story telling. Worst of all was the lack of closure that we were given for our squad mates ( I don't care what people say, Joker and Edi were not in the Normandy in the Relay, how could that happen Joker would never leave earth with Sheppard still there and EDI was helping me fight Reapers????)

What really pisses me off about this though, is what EA will do in the future if Bioware delivers an improved ending and sell it. This will set a horrible precedent that I am sure EA will exploit. If you do not want to open a can of worms, do not buy this dlc. Do not encourage Publishers who are trying to monetize the industry as much as possible another way of gouging the consumer. I will not buy an improved ending, and I suggest anyone who does not enjoy being ripped off in the future do not buy the dlc either.

Chris Mosher:
What really pisses me off about this though, is what EA will do in the future if Bioware delivers an improved ending and sell it. This will set a horrible precedent that I am sure EA will exploit. If you do not want to open a can of worms, do not buy this dlc. Do not encourage Publishers who are trying to monetize the industry as much as possible another way of gouging the consumer. I will not buy an improved ending, and I suggest anyone who does not enjoy being ripped off in the future do not buy the dlc either.

I don't buy this line of reasoning that says it's a crafty business practice to get everyone hating your game so you can sell them DLC that fixes it. Wouldn't it make more sense to get them LOVING your game so that they're enthusiastic to buy the DLC? As opposed to angry/mutinous/running your IP's name into the mud?

No one is sitting around a board room saying "This horrible publicity and alienated fan base is incredible, how can we bottle this and repeat it in the future?"

BloatedGuppy:

Chris Mosher:
What really pisses me off about this though, is what EA will do in the future if Bioware delivers an improved ending and sell it. This will set a horrible precedent that I am sure EA will exploit. If you do not want to open a can of worms, do not buy this dlc. Do not encourage Publishers who are trying to monetize the industry as much as possible another way of gouging the consumer. I will not buy an improved ending, and I suggest anyone who does not enjoy being ripped off in the future do not buy the dlc either.

I don't buy this line of reasoning that says it's a crafty business practice to get everyone hating your game so you can sell them DLC that fixes it. Wouldn't it make more sense to get them LOVING your game so that they're enthusiastic to buy the DLC? As opposed to angry/mutinous/running your IP's name into the mud?

No one is sitting around a board room saying "This horrible publicity and alienated fan base is incredible, how can we bottle this and repeat it in the future?"

I don't think that happened in this case but with the way that publishers have be going on about how they need extra ways of monetizing their games I would not put them past a publisher. Remember that ultimately a publisher's loyalty is not to their customers but to their shareholders and if they think that they can sell more stuff to make profit for the shareholders they will do it. Looking at other industries EA would not be the first to screw up and go to far in the favour of the shareholder and doing something that pisses of a customers base. These are people running the company and people make bad judgement calls and i am not reading any intentional malice into what these people are doing, just bad judgement.
Also, maybe you have more faith in people but I have spent my time in business school where it is drilled into our heads to maximize shareholder value and I seen people go about this in the wrong way. Due to this experience I would put little past executives.

I completely agree with you. It seems to me that this outrage was a long time in the making. There is a complete lack of respect for consumers in the gaming market, ME3 is just the straw the broke the camel's back. People were upset that they messed up the ending, badly. They voice their complaints, but instead of communicating with their fans Bioware/EA hide behind a wall of PR and proceed to ignore their fans.

You know what could have gone a long way? Having some transparency, having the balls to go out in front of angry people and being honest. I guarantee you their would be a lot less anger if people were told the truth. Acknowledge their frustration and the issues, something! The customer is a human being, maybe you should try treating them as such? Let me bring up some thing interesting. The other day a local burrito chain offered free burritos to anyone who showed up at certain restaurants. You know what? I'm going to go back there. If publishers tried to gain the good will of their fan base they would be much more forgiving, especially if you admit that you fucked up. Respect me and I will respect you. Treat others the way you want to be treated, right?

Instead "gaming journalists" and "rational people" continue to inflame the issue, and all this bickering is causing people to lose sight of what is important. Their are few discussions on the board that talk about the issue respectfully, and i've lost count of the topics that devolved into name calling.

The day one DLC made me put my foot down. I didn't but Mass Effect 3 because of it. I do believe that the Prothean should have been with the game, and I find the nature of the DLC to be rather disturbing. I don't think it makes me entitled. If the DLC was made before or after the development cycle, Bioware loses in my eyes.

Developed during development cycle:
Bioware/EA cut out a piece of their game in order to sell to fans again. It is a disgusting business practice that lies to fans and artificially increases the price of the game, even though on the surface it appears that there is a full game. It displays a lack of respect for themselves and their fans.

Developed post development cycle:
This DLC was made fairly, the devs had nothing to do and decided to make this DLC out of the kindness of their hearts, so they have every right to charge for it. Sure, I don't like it, but the devs can certainly do it. Then again, why make the squad mate a prothean? If he is so non essential why make him a prothean? This is a race that is pivotal to the plot of the first game, an extinct species that managed to fight the reapers, reduced to a ten dollar buddy with no serious impact on the game. This not only shows Bioware/EA's lack of respect for themselves and the fans, but also a lack of respect for the creative property. There is no good reason for him to be a prothean if he isn't important unless they wanted to cash in on the race to encourage sales. Where is the artistic integrity now?

I'm glad this has happened, and I hope publishers learn a valuable lesson from this. STOP TREATING YOUR CUSTOMERS LIKE CRAP!

Because if game companies are going to just treat us like walking wallets, then why should we treat them as artists?

Fuckin' A, that's what I've been thinking (more or less). I guess they cut off bits of the ending like it was on sale and that made me think, "well, shit. If the ending means THAT little to them why the hell should I care about it?"

I don't know. I really don't

RafaelNegrus:

There are many people who say the attacks against Bioware threaten gaming as an art form, all the while claiming that we as gamers should seek no validation from non-gamers. I don't think validation from non-gamers is necessarily all that important, but I think respect from within the gaming community in general IS. Because if game companies are going to just treat us like walking wallets, then why should we treat them as artists? And if game journalism doesn't watch out for consumers against the exploitations of the companies, why shouldn't we think that the two are in league together?

Bolded for truth!

re: game journalism.

Of course they're in league together. It's not some huge conspiracy (which is how "in league together" can be interpreted as implying), but it's certainly a parasitic relationship. Game journalists need to get the best access possible to the game studios, the designers, the writers, the artists and everyone else involved in the games. People are far more likely to go talk to someone who they think is going to be friendly toward them than someone they view as antagonistic. That's just human nature, and there's no way around it. Gaming journalism (and journalism in general) will always have this issue. What we need to do is to find reviewers who have the same feelings towards the kinds of games we like that we do. Then figure out when that reviewer is giving a good review for the sake of keeping the relationship with the publishers, and when they're giving a good review because it's a good game.

RafaelNegrus:
I'm not sure if this is really the case, and I'll use Yahtzee as my example. I doubt he is overly influenced by EA or Bioware, but he has been in the industry for so long that he has become rather cynical. He takes this kind of thing for granted and sees it as normal, meaning they do not get called to task for failing to meet their own potential. And he's one of the better critics out there, many of the others mostly judge games based on technical proficiency, which all of us should agree is really just a baseline, not a mark of what can be termed art.

I wouldn't call Yahtzee one of the better critics out there. I'd call him one of the most entertaining critics, and one of the few critics who's willing to say what's wrong with a game. But better critic? No, not really.

"Is prostitution not preferable to extortion?"

I may be misquoting Shepard there... my memory is a bit fuzzy.

Your actually misquoting Saren...just saying

RafaelNegrus:
Because if game companies are going to just treat us like walking wallets, then why should we treat them as artists?

This is turning out to be one of my absolute favorite things about the whole mess: that, in the space of a few weeks, we've gone from a seemingly endless conversation of the question "are video games art?" to "THIS video game IS art, flawless and exempt from all criticism now and for all time, and FUCK YOU FOR TRYING TO DESTROY ALL VIDEO GAMES FOREVAR!!1!"

I'm pretty sure these are still relevant:

"The inability to convey intent is the definition of failed art."

"The ending was so inexcusable, on so many levels, that I can't help but laugh at people's attempts to defend it by calling it art. As if art were not subject to ridicule and criticism."

image

I agree with you in a way but feel instead of making the ending so that you would buy a new dlc ending but more in line with buy mass effect 4 to see what happens next.

They are going to try and milk the francise abit that is kinda in their right to do so but they have done it really badly.

RafaelNegrus:
snip

Best OP I've ever read.

Could someone get this thread stickied? Please???

It really could prevent a fuckton of arguments on the matter.

Good first post and I agree!

It really is starting to get on my tits that so many people are just calling us whiners when the reality is we're actually doing something rather than just sitting there having a tantrum.

Be it feedback, suggestions, charity donations or cupcakes - we are not just chucking our toys out the pram!

RafaelNegrus:
*snip*

First, I want to welcome you to The Escapist with open arms and say that that is quite possibly the most coherent and straightforward perspective on this whole debacle (I refuse to call it controversy), that I have read so far. And really, I think that its spot on. There is a general lack of respect towards gamers as a whole, even though our sub-culture has permeated normal pop-culture so much that video-games are now even a legitimate form of sport, and yes, in some cases art.

Second, I cant help but feel that you cant exactly compare games as a medium to anything else. Sure, games have a close similarity to movies and other visual mediums, but really, video games are a unique entity. Games are not only interactive, their existence being primarily for the benefit of the player and his/her experience, but also due to the fact that games are changed on a near-constant basis on many different levels. From patches that tweak performance or fix glitches, downloadable content that can add to the story or gameplay, or even change the game on a fundamental level.

Movies, books, and other artistic mediums simply can't do that. And, even then, not all movies or books are considered art. Its a case to case thing. Same should go with games.

Really, all we want is respect and fulfilled promises.

Zhukov:
When I clicked on this thread I was already warming up my sarcasm engine to generate an unkind and pithy remark.

But that was actually an interesting and reasonable post.

And that is why he's going to be flamed into the ground by people who despite reason.

TheCaptain:
You know, I have actually wondered about how every single game critic has fallen in line behind the "games are art and thus may not be subject to constructive criticism or god forbid, change even"-argument. All the talk about "dangerous precedent" and whatnot seems... very one-sided, to say the least.

Of course, game journalists do have a different view on the industry than we have. But I missed a more multi-angled approach from somewhere in the writing community. I was actually holding my breath for this week's Extra Punctuation, but Yahtzee also saw "dangerous precedent" on Bioware talking about appeasing the fans.

That said, one big problem is that lots and lots of us aren't on their best behaviour. Sadly, people (on both sides of the argument) resort to the kind of language that would earn them a good punch in the nose if they employed it in an old-fashioned barstool conversation. Too many people who enjoy the internet's lack of accountability a bit too much. And those are always the loudest. And some critics get away with too much as well. I think that MovieBob person hasn't been reprimanded by the Escapist for his badmouthing the fans via Twitter since forum rules don't apply there, but since he gets to advertise his Twitter account via the magazine, you got a double standart right there. I'm not saying people should be allowed to insult and attack him here, but this kind of treatment gets people even more riled up. Which leads to more inappropriate behaviour, which leads to more bad press about the player base, and stuff goes on.

But see Yahtzee is at least meeting us half way. He is willing to agree that something should be done. He is just in favor of expanding on the ending rather than retconning it, which frankly many of us would be okay with.

When many of the "Anti-Bioware" people make posts about changing the ending they want something different. That doesn't mean scrap the old one, it means fix the old one with some expansion. The "games are art" people then take the words far too literally.

At least that's my take on it.

Great post OP and I do agree there is more then the ending at stake. One of the things I really really resent is the whole "shut up entitled mass effect fanboy!" argument that some, not all, of the side against revising the endings have. It irritates me as it seems like this is a discussion we should be having, due to the unique technical possibilities of gaming, is changing a piece of narrative that doesn't work wrong? Has much responsibilities do story tellers have to make the ending satisfying in the default game, ignoring the possibility of DLC add-ons?

At the very least I hope game companies learn the importance of actually spending time on the ending. A bad side quest is easily forgiven, but the ending is much much harder. Particuarly for a series, which dare I say it, has always sold itself more on characters and world then actual game-play.

Alex Tom:

"Is prostitution not preferable to extortion?"

I may be misquoting Shepard there... my memory is a bit fuzzy.

Your actually misquoting Saren...just saying

I believe that's the joke...

I really don't want to have to state that, every time someone is subtle :D

RafaelNegrus:
-Snip snip-
Because if game companies are going to just treat us like walking wallets, then why should we treat them as artists? And if game journalism doesn't watch out for consumers against the exploitations of the companies, why shouldn't we think that the two are in league together?

I like you OP, that was very well said. Especially that last part. I'm definitely going to pass this post around. Also, thanks for the link to that article.

I apologize for thinking that this was going to be another rage thread.

boag:

RafaelNegrus:
To start with, I am a big Mass Effect fan, but since I lost my saves and need to replay the first two to get my Shepard back I did not buy ME3 at the beginning, and then I started hearing the news, as all of us have.

I think this issue comes down to more than just the ending, even though most people admit that the ending is terrible. I think the reason this has been so bad, and gone on for so long, is a sense of a lack of respect.

There's a sense of a lack of respect from Bioware itself, that it rushed a bad ending in its game and that it may very well try to sell DLC to make it better. This impression is not improved from Bioware statements that they would not do exactly what they did, or by putting out day 1 DLC.

But that's not the reason this flame war has gone on since the game has come out. This has continued, in my mind, because fans legitimate critiques have been openly derided by the gaming media, in what some have called a conspiracy and what I think is more likely to be just an emotional disconnect with fans.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/03/22/gaming-journalisms-problem-isnt-being-beholden-to-companies/

Instead of getting statements along the lines of "yes, the ending was bad for reasons X,Y, and Z" fans got called entitled and derided as immature children. Yes, some of them have acted like that but in characterizing the entire group as acting like that gaming journalism has gone too far. And if fans are getting disrespected by the mainstream media, gaming companies, AND gaming media, why shouldn't they be mad about that?

There are many people who say the attacks against Bioware threaten gaming as an art form, all the while claiming that we as gamers should seek no validation from non-gamers. I don't think validation from non-gamers is necessarily all that important, but I think respect from within the gaming community in general IS. Because if game companies are going to just treat us like walking wallets, then why should we treat them as artists? And if game journalism doesn't watch out for consumers against the exploitations of the companies, why shouldn't we think that the two are in league together?

Was I disappointed by the ending? yes

Was I mad? yes and then the feeling passed.

Am I still mad? Yes but not because of the ending, because I got called an whiny douchebag for complaining about it.

so in conclusion I agree with your entire analysis of the situation.

You're not a whiny douchebag if you complain about it. You're a whiny douchebag if you're STILL complaining about it several weeks later and/or are complaining about it to the point of demanding that they change it.

Excellent first post OP! And welcome to the Escapist!

I like to say, that I'm not mad at Bioware. I'm disappointed, but I'm not mad. I'm pissed off at the fact that the consumers made a legitimate complaint, and now everyone and their mother is treating them like a spoiled child.

If someone makes a complaint against a movie or a book, they are labelled a critic, but if you complain about a game, you're suddenly a spoiled gamer? It doesn't make sense.

Now I'm getting off the computer because having a messed up index finger makes typing difficult.

canadamus_prime:

Was I disappointed by the ending? yes

Was I mad? yes and then the feeling passed.

Am I still mad? Yes but not because of the ending, because I got called an whiny douchebag for complaining about it.

so in conclusion I agree with your entire analysis of the situation.

You're not a whiny douchebag if you complain about it. You're a whiny douchebag if you're STILL complaining about it several weeks later and/or are complaining about it to the point of demanding that they change it.[/quote]

Well thats not what Movie bob, Yathzee and Bioware have said.

in their eyes I am a complaining dipshit for daring to even question the artistic integrity of bioware, so yeah fuck em and fuck bioware.

Welcome to the internet, then.

The "sense of disrespect" is the problem in the first place. People think Bioware betrayed them because they're assuming their intentions, which is always a bad thing to do, and it obviously spiraled waaaaaaaaaay out of control. Once the whole All Corporations Are Evil Empires (C) movement started everyone decided to never trust anyone who makes something, so don't try to paint the fans as victims here. It's the fans that say companies treat us like walking wallets, or say that X is just a cash in, again, by assuming the intentions of the developer/publisher.

Hit a nail on the head. We thought the exact same thing.

This is the entire reason why retake Mass Effect exists. And something that MovieBob fails to understand on a fundamental level.

It's not that fans want creative control. It's not that they're just a bunch of whiny little dip****s who complain at the first sight of everything. It's been a fundamental lack of respect for the fanbase that has supported the franchise up to this point.

This is also the reason why, even as a fan of Mass Effect, that I actually did boycott ME3. Because it was clear that EA and/or BioWare were taking advantage of their fans and disrespecting them.

Daystar Clarion:

Feel free to disregard the incoming onslaught of 'stay out of the basement' jokes.

That's no joke.

OT: So if I'm to understand you correctly, it's the media to blame? Yeah, I'll say that you really shouldn't allow someone with a paycheck to tell you what to do, and in my own personal experience, the ending was worse than just bad. But we've heard all that.

JoesshittyOs:

Daystar Clarion:

Feel free to disregard the incoming onslaught of 'stay out of the basement' jokes.

That's no joke.

OT: So if I'm to understand you correctly, it's the media to blame? Yeah, I'll say that you really shouldn't allow someone with a paycheck to tell you what to do, and in my own personal experience, the ending was worse than just bad. But we've heard all that.

The basement is where all the terrible cliche 'welcome to X' jokes go to die.

Which is quite ironic, if you think about it.

Fappy:

I guess that makes me Liara....

Question: can Asari masturbate?

>.>

What the fuck kinda thread is this.

I like it. Carry on.

OT: The way certain game journalists have 'handled' the whole Retake ME3 (yes, we get it it was a poor name choice. No, it shouldn't invalidate any genuine concerns) is so unprofessional it's quite disturbing. Quite a few have managed to twist an $80,000 charity drive into making it sound like a bad thing started up by entitled, spoiled gamers.

I knew for sure I've been gradually getting less frustrated with the ending but far more frustrated with certain people reporting on it, especially when those certain people flat out admit they a) don't have an investment in the series and b) haven't seen the ending.

Perhaps it's just me but it seems that the ME3 ending situation has changed from people being unhappy with the ending to the people who are unhappy with the ending having to defend themselves from seemingly every bloody gaming publication on the internet.

Sad times...

Daystar Clarion:

Fappy:

Daystar Clarion:

Sounds like something Shepard would say.

Followed by a statement of preference for such things in an advertised format.

"My name is Commander Shepard and this is my favorite derailed thread on the internet."

:D

Nobody derails a thread quite like us :D

I demand a Fappy x Daystar Mass Effect DLC. Anything less and I will file a complaint with the FGCA, which, incidentally, I just made up.

OT: That's a good point. I'm hard pressed to name any mainstream game "critics" who actually give constructive criticism (i.e. - this game could have been better if...), but no, all I see are tidal waves of arrogance. What a pity.

xXxJessicaxXx:

He quickly shot back by saying that "Based on the feedback I've seen, most people are pissed off that it ends, not the 'ending' itself. Maybe that's one and the same, I don't know. That's another thing we're changing in DLC3. We really underestimated how many people would want to keep playing, so that's probably the last time we'll do something like that."

and lo the world did not end.[/quote]

Fallout 3's (original) ending was pretty bad. In addition to that, it didn't make much sense (Fuck you Fawkes, you fucking asshole). That being said, it was significantly better than ME3. The choices you made up until that point had a legitimate outcome associated with them (destroy all irradiated life forms, destroy the head of the Enclave, etc.) and you were at least given an ending cinematic that explained what happened. We didn't even get that with ME3, and I think that's where most of the INTERNET RAGE stems from.

Personally, I don't think they should change the ending. You reap what you sow. However, an epilogue-type addition that explains the consequences of your actions (both before and during the ending) would be great.

anthony87:
Perhaps it's just me but it seems that the ME3 ending situation has changed from people being unhappy with the ending to the people who are unhappy with the ending having to defend themselves from seemingly every bloody gaming publication on the internet.

Sad times...

What's really weird is why are gaming websites so against it. I can get certain individuals disliking it and arguing against it, that's fine though a lot of them speak from intense ignorance (Movie Bob) but the fact that very few seem to be posting any material from people supportive of it. Why is that? Surely a game site would be interested in generating discussion by showing both sides?

anthony87:
Perhaps it's just me but it seems that the ME3 ending situation has changed from people being unhappy with the ending to the people who are unhappy with the ending having to defend themselves from seemingly every bloody gaming publication on the internet.

Sad times...

I believe this whole issue has triggered something bigger than itself.

Gamers are sick of having to defend themselves on all fronts.

We have to defend ourselves against people who don't see games as anything more than a child's toy.

We have to defend ourselves against companies trying to bleed us dry with unfair business practices.

We have to defend ourselves againt dev teams who consider extreme criticism as a form of 'self entitled fanboy whining'.

And we have to defend ourselves against game 'journalists', the one group of people who should have our backs, dismissing us in the same way as the dev teams.

370999:

anthony87:
Perhaps it's just me but it seems that the ME3 ending situation has changed from people being unhappy with the ending to the people who are unhappy with the ending having to defend themselves from seemingly every bloody gaming publication on the internet.

Sad times...

What's really weird is why are gaming websites so against it. I can get certain individuals disliking it and arguing against it, that's fine though a lot of them speak from intense ignorance (Movie Bob) but the fact that very few seem to be posting any material from people supportive of it. Why is that? Surely a game site would be interested in generating discussion by showing both sides?

Well that's the rub isn't it? This is where you get so many people saying that gaming sites are on the take from the companies and whatnot. While it's not an outlook I approve of I can't deny that during times like these it's pretty easy to see things that way.

370999:
What's really weird is why are gaming websites so against it. I can get certain individuals disliking it and arguing against it, that's fine though a lot of them speak from intense ignorance (Movie Bob) but the fact that very few seem to be posting any material from people supportive of it. Why is that? Surely a game site would be interested in generating discussion by showing both sides?

Angry fans don't buy advertising space.

Maybe if the Retake ME3 gang gave their $80,000 to IGN instead of charity they'd have written a few supportive articles. Gotta put food on the table.

Daystar Clarion:

anthony87:
Perhaps it's just me but it seems that the ME3 ending situation has changed from people being unhappy with the ending to the people who are unhappy with the ending having to defend themselves from seemingly every bloody gaming publication on the internet.

Sad times...

I believe this whole issue has triggered something bigger than itself.

Gamers are sick of having to defend themselves on all fronts.

We have to defend ourselves against people who don't see games as anything more than a child's toy.

We have to defend ourselves from companies trying to bleed us dry with unfair business practices.

We have to defend ourselves from dev teams who consider extreme criticism as a form of 'self entitled fanboy whining'.

And we have to defend ourselves from game 'journalists', the one group of people who should have our backs, dismissing us in the same way as the dev teams.

Don't forget we've had to defend ourselves from all the other gamers who are more than happy to roll out the "entitled" or "whiners" carpet.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked