The reason I don't look up these plot details is to allow the dramatic structure to do what it was meant to do and surprise me how it was meant to surprise me.
274: Spoiled Rotten
- Thread starter Michael Thomsen
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Spoilers don't destroy a game for me, but they do detract from the experience. Especially in RPGs.
I had KOTOR's twist totally spoiled. My brother was playing it first since the console was in his room, and when he reached that point he decided the most logical choice of action was to go haul me out of bed at 3am to excitedly tell me what happened. Yeah, it was cool, but I then played through the game picking up on every hint and the actual reveal was pretty "Eh" since I was expecting it. Had I not known, I would have reacted to the twist with a lot more emotion and it would have been a hell of a lot more immersive to suddenly have to reevaluate my character's past completely.
On the other hand, there are some games where I really don't care about spoilers. Both of the AC ending-twisty-things were "spoiled" for me, but it didn't change how I played the game or my reaction at all. Not that I ever want to risk it; if someone's talking about a game I want to play but haven't played yet, I usually have a hands-over-the-ears-lalalala reaction, which seems to avoid most spoilers.
I had KOTOR's twist totally spoiled. My brother was playing it first since the console was in his room, and when he reached that point he decided the most logical choice of action was to go haul me out of bed at 3am to excitedly tell me what happened. Yeah, it was cool, but I then played through the game picking up on every hint and the actual reveal was pretty "Eh" since I was expecting it. Had I not known, I would have reacted to the twist with a lot more emotion and it would have been a hell of a lot more immersive to suddenly have to reevaluate my character's past completely.
On the other hand, there are some games where I really don't care about spoilers. Both of the AC ending-twisty-things were "spoiled" for me, but it didn't change how I played the game or my reaction at all. Not that I ever want to risk it; if someone's talking about a game I want to play but haven't played yet, I usually have a hands-over-the-ears-lalalala reaction, which seems to avoid most spoilers.
If the game told you right in the beginning that Atlas controlled you with "kindly" do you think that it would be as meaningfull as it was? The suprise made the game awesome, it would be cooler for you if you played the game without knowing what was coming, then getting mind-blowned with the twist. Your reaction would be "OMG, WHAT THE HELL!? AH, AWESOME!!!"Dorkmaster Flek said:
, and now its just "Ah, cool...".
It does make a difference, also, you can only experience the first option ONCE, dont let an idiot take it away. You can experience the other option as long as you want
I hate spoilers, in every medium. You know it isn't the same to play Mafia and not know the ending and play it and know exactly what to expect. There is no emotional impact. Mafia ending was so shocking to me and I know I wouldn't have liked to know the ending before I experience it for myself because that's exactly what happened with Red Dead Redemption. Some asshole on another forum posted the ending without spoilers. Because of that asshole I didn't care about the ending when I got there. I hope something bad happens to that guy.
Someone spoiled LOST Season 5 finale for a friend of mine. He kicked the shit out of the guy. And I understand why. If someone did that to me I wouldn't be responsible for my actions. That was probably the biggest mind fuck in the entire show.
Someone spoiled LOST Season 5 finale for a friend of mine. He kicked the shit out of the guy. And I understand why. If someone did that to me I wouldn't be responsible for my actions. That was probably the biggest mind fuck in the entire show.
...I knew Aerith was doomed.
The basic argument is: "If you know what is coming, then you can study it as it approaches and appreciate it more."
1) You can also play a game twice. Or three times, as some of my Bioshock obsessed friends have. I enjoyed the shock, as I'm sure I would enjoy studying the build up a second time through the events, immediately after hitting the credits or maybe a couple years latter.
2) The creative writers, artists, designers, and programmers, level designers, and testers have all tried to create this specific experience, designed to be enjoyed with fresh eyes first and then replayed by a smaller subset of the hardcore fans. Why work contrary to the artists vision? Yes, you can appreciate art by reading about it, studying it, and absorbing a massive amount of knowledge from scholars, and finally go see it in person. You can also just walk up and look at it, getting your own opinion first, and then going back to the research material.
Director's Commentary is a great, new addition in games, but I certainly don't want to turn it on right away.
Basically, I agree that something can be appreciated if you understand what is happening going into it. But by having something spoiled, it only removes the option of surprise; it does not remove the ability to go back and have the new experience.
In Bioshock, I appreciated the twist, and realized how it had been built up over time as it was revealed. It just became clear, made sense, and gave me a motivation to finish the quest (game). I felt a connection to the character, and a new motivation for my actions and rebelled against the soulless gameplay mechanic of a guiding arrow and minimap. I imagine this emotional draw rather than gameplay mechanic was working exactly as designed, and would not have occurred if I knew what was coming.
1) You can also play a game twice. Or three times, as some of my Bioshock obsessed friends have. I enjoyed the shock, as I'm sure I would enjoy studying the build up a second time through the events, immediately after hitting the credits or maybe a couple years latter.
2) The creative writers, artists, designers, and programmers, level designers, and testers have all tried to create this specific experience, designed to be enjoyed with fresh eyes first and then replayed by a smaller subset of the hardcore fans. Why work contrary to the artists vision? Yes, you can appreciate art by reading about it, studying it, and absorbing a massive amount of knowledge from scholars, and finally go see it in person. You can also just walk up and look at it, getting your own opinion first, and then going back to the research material.
Director's Commentary is a great, new addition in games, but I certainly don't want to turn it on right away.
Basically, I agree that something can be appreciated if you understand what is happening going into it. But by having something spoiled, it only removes the option of surprise; it does not remove the ability to go back and have the new experience.
In Bioshock, I appreciated the twist, and realized how it had been built up over time as it was revealed. It just became clear, made sense, and gave me a motivation to finish the quest (game). I felt a connection to the character, and a new motivation for my actions and rebelled against the soulless gameplay mechanic of a guiding arrow and minimap. I imagine this emotional draw rather than gameplay mechanic was working exactly as designed, and would not have occurred if I knew what was coming.
This has got to be one of the dumbest "featured content" posts I've seen.
Yes spoilers change how I view the content. I no longer view it in the way it was intended. It also ruins replay value.
I despite never owning a ps3 or the game, know the killer in heavy rain. What as a potentially interesting experience. Is dead to me. The magic or mystery of it is gone.
~~~~~
edit:
I will admit that I didn't read your article. Mostly because the idea is preposterous. However now as reading posts, then checking your article. You blatantly do it. Knowing people would get upset? Low class.
Yes spoilers change how I view the content. I no longer view it in the way it was intended. It also ruins replay value.
I despite never owning a ps3 or the game, know the killer in heavy rain. What as a potentially interesting experience. Is dead to me. The magic or mystery of it is gone.
~~~~~
edit:
I will admit that I didn't read your article. Mostly because the idea is preposterous. However now as reading posts, then checking your article. You blatantly do it. Knowing people would get upset? Low class.
Didn't even need to read the article to know it was wrong, the pheonix wright series alone would like to have a word with you =P so many moments in that game were ruined for me because of fanboys who wouldn't stfu not to mention the worst kept secret on the internet aeris dies.
It's the same as spoiling a film and makes me want to punch the douche who ruined it just as much.
It's the same as spoiling a film and makes me want to punch the douche who ruined it just as much.
Yea well knowing the twist kinda ruins/spoils the experience in a game. I mean if its like 'Hey dude, it was bowser who kidnapped the princess and then mario saves her' yea its not going to do anything but when its an integral part of the story ie. "Yo uno vader? hes lukes dad" it kinda ruins it...
Disagree completely.
Dragon Age and Massa Effect are great examples. Both were spoiled early on and, atleast to me, were less fun the first day I played them. Bioware are notorius when it comes to spoilers.
Don't know about you, but I think a medium that tries to be more than just a videogame really should take storytelling more seriously than it does now.
My point.
Spoilers suck ass. Stfu.
Dragon Age and Massa Effect are great examples. Both were spoiled early on and, atleast to me, were less fun the first day I played them. Bioware are notorius when it comes to spoilers.
Don't know about you, but I think a medium that tries to be more than just a videogame really should take storytelling more seriously than it does now.
My point.
Spoilers suck ass. Stfu.
Did anyone else notice that this article was simply "Quote from someone who actually has an original/interesting/well-formulated opinion"/Non-committal waffle about tangentially related game?
Like, that's all that happened, throughout the entire thing. I learned nothing from this article that I couldn't have learned from the sources, it read like a BA essay from a student who just stopped caring months ago. A list of links would've been more useful to me. Eh. The conclusion at least was...a little controversial. Not very convincingly argued, though.
I have a suspicion that we'll get a lot of games following Valve's model, easily moddable games with a relatively linear 'main' game. That way, it's best of both worlds - excellent traditional storyline, with predictable learning curve in terms of mechanics, for people who enjoy a professionally crafted narrative, and a near-limitless sandbox/set of story-telling tools for amateurs who think they can do better. Eh? What bias?
Truth is, "telling your own story" is what I do in every day life. It's the filter through which I already see the world. Putting that in a game? It can only detract from the experience. Dwarf Fortress isn't as much fun for me as Dungeon Keeper, even though it's more flexible, because the story develops from your own goals. When my personal life story is already developing from me fulfilling my goals, I don't need to go to a game for the same sense of freedom - it seems like an ersatz sensation.
However, there's a market for the sandbox games, so yeah. I don't object to their presence, as long as people don't start spraying me with spittle in their zeal to convert me to them.
Like, that's all that happened, throughout the entire thing. I learned nothing from this article that I couldn't have learned from the sources, it read like a BA essay from a student who just stopped caring months ago. A list of links would've been more useful to me. Eh. The conclusion at least was...a little controversial. Not very convincingly argued, though.
I have a suspicion that we'll get a lot of games following Valve's model, easily moddable games with a relatively linear 'main' game. That way, it's best of both worlds - excellent traditional storyline, with predictable learning curve in terms of mechanics, for people who enjoy a professionally crafted narrative, and a near-limitless sandbox/set of story-telling tools for amateurs who think they can do better. Eh? What bias?
Truth is, "telling your own story" is what I do in every day life. It's the filter through which I already see the world. Putting that in a game? It can only detract from the experience. Dwarf Fortress isn't as much fun for me as Dungeon Keeper, even though it's more flexible, because the story develops from your own goals. When my personal life story is already developing from me fulfilling my goals, I don't need to go to a game for the same sense of freedom - it seems like an ersatz sensation.
However, there's a market for the sandbox games, so yeah. I don't object to their presence, as long as people don't start spraying me with spittle in their zeal to convert me to them.
When authors write a story, they purposefully put in twists to surprise their readers. When developers build a game, they do the same to surprise the player. That surprise is part of the experience, and as others have said, playing without that surprise robs you of half what the developers had in store for you.
I'm looking at it from the developer's viewpoint. If I made a game and placed some elements to surprise the gamer, I would want him to be flabbergasted. If he simply goes : "I already knew. Next!", I will be disappointed. It's the same when you give a gift to someone, wanting to surprise him and await the moment when he opens it in eager anticipation to see his eyes sparkle and his smile stretch to his ears. If he already knows what's under the wrap, you are disappointed. Being a developer, I would want people coming back to me saying : "That plot twist was sick! I never expected it!"
I believe that spoilers not only hinder your experience with the game/movie/book, but also cripple the way it was meant to be experienced.
I'm looking at it from the developer's viewpoint. If I made a game and placed some elements to surprise the gamer, I would want him to be flabbergasted. If he simply goes : "I already knew. Next!", I will be disappointed. It's the same when you give a gift to someone, wanting to surprise him and await the moment when he opens it in eager anticipation to see his eyes sparkle and his smile stretch to his ears. If he already knows what's under the wrap, you are disappointed. Being a developer, I would want people coming back to me saying : "That plot twist was sick! I never expected it!"
I believe that spoilers not only hinder your experience with the game/movie/book, but also cripple the way it was meant to be experienced.
Every year, I keep seeing articles like these that tell me it'll be EASY to become a paid journalist myself. Unless of course I am not allowed to bring flawless arguments to the table or I have to spit in the faces of gamers with spoilers for the sake of proving a point. I think anyone who is a jerkalurk and annoys others with spoilers (trolling~) are...well...
You're not a good person. lolomegawyrm said:
