A Fanboy's Guide to Fanboying

[Lyx]

I find it amusing how many people in this thread have issues with understanding logics.

Of course you can have an opinion on something that isn't released yet. And it also makes sense to have an opinion if you have information on that game. You get to see trailers, screenshots, comments from the devs/studio/publisher, perhaps even got your hands on an early techdemo. You may not know yet what it definatelly will be like when it is released, but you do have information on what according to current information it looks like.

Are we going to not have any opinion on what information studios release before releasing the game? So, what then - no preview articles anymore at all? Or just restating the press releases that the publisher prewrote for us? Or do we do the hidden joke of what shamus mentioned at the end "Only say good things about a game until it is released", which indeed is the most ridiculous option: You may not have an opinion about an unreleased game, but you may have a good opinion of it.... riiiiiiight!

P.S.: In case i didn't explain the difference clear enough: It may not make sense to have a *final* opinion on what the *final* game will be like. But this is not what shamus said: He (sarcastically) said that you may have no opinion at all (but a good opinion) of a game that isn't released yet - and that indeed makes no sense, unless you're simply trying to forbid criticism of something you like (and thus have an opinion about

 

[perpetualburn]

This article is great, but it is made less funny because an agonizing amount of people follow these rules.

 

[Ghengis John]

But this is not what shamus said: He (sarcastically) said that you may have no opinion at all (but a good opinion) of a game that isn't released yet - and that indeed makes no sense, unless you're simply trying to forbid criticism of something you like (and thus have an opinion about

Actually what you said is not what Shamus said either. He said:

"Nobody should say anything negative about a game until they've played it themselves and have formed an opinion. Until then, they should only be allowed to say nice things."

This doesn't limit the stance to games in development. And in that regard (development) I can empathize. It's hard to know where you will cross the line with people and playing the game is rarely an option. I'm always perplexed to run into aggressive, hard-core fans of new IP's before the IP is even released. That's the most boggling fan element for me of all. I was roundly (and rudely) shouted down for saying "I dunno guys, Brutal Legend may not have the kind of gameplay you think it does." Then nobody bought it.

Otherwise, who says you have to say something nice or something negative? There is always the mysterious fourth option. Not saying anything at all. I know, this seems to be a real leap of imagination but just follow me here. What if, instead of saying "this game looks lousy to me" or feeling like you're risking your journalistic integrity by saying "It's great! ... I suspect. Under protest." You just say "I know nothing about it. I will say something if I ever do." Woah. Woah. Shocker. You can do that? Yes.

I mean seriously. You're defending opinions built upon ignorance. Seriously? You've just pardoned every form of bigot in the world then. It's not that hard to display a little tact.

Then again, if you were tactful and they still went into a frothing rage, mock away.

 

[hoockhand]

So I can't judge a story based game by its story.. ok... oh wait you said what if it is about the story later on.. WTF DO I DO?

Don't judge by single player or multiplayer? hm.. so what do I judge a game by? The loading screen?

Don't judge it by bad gfx or good... So I can only judge a game if the gfx are okay not good or bad?

Don't judge a game by its realism? So you are telling me that if a game that wanted a realystic enviroment but FAILED completly that I should just ingore it?

 

[ChupathingyX]

Most games do need a story because they give you reason as to why you're trying to kill that guy or trying to acquire that magical sword. They also add some extra interesting backstory to events and characters to the game which or me makes the game much more enjoyable.

 

[Boba Frag]

heh, brilliant work, Shamus!

The satire is crisp, slightly bitter and delicious.

It circles in slowly like an angel of death....

I think this article should be made required reading before people join the Forums

 

[The Journey]

I loved this. Bravo Shamus! You may be a twisted cynic but bugger it if you don't entertain me.

A story of my own below.

Spoiler

Fanboys aggravate the hell out of me. I was at the midnight launch of Reach even though I'm not a Halo fan. I hate 99% of the entire series, but Reach is good. Then get into a massive argument (x2 if you count my best mate there with me having the exact same thing happen to him just over my shoulder) as a Halo fanboy comes and accosts me and begins telling me how deep and meaningful the story is and how it's the best game ever.

I eventually told him to shut up unless he had something else to talk about except Halo. Apparently I was a CoD fanboy for not loving the Halo series off the bat.

 

[whaleswiththumbs]

What else am I going to do? Let them continue being wrong?

i thought i remembered something like that.

OT:
Nice Shamus, we should all get to work on setting the haters right. Hopefully their feeble minds can stand our amazing games.

Although i think one or two on the first page actually do make alot of sense. I'll go back and find which ones i'm thinking of.

EDIT:
Turns out just one...

You're not allowed to have an opinion on a game until you've played it.

-snip-

.... I don't know what is wrong with you... Or how to fix it..... I'll just leave it at, your post is a swing and a miss.

 

[little bear]

hehe...shamus you crazy kook and ur thick satire.
EDIT: how many people missed the point of this, 5?

 

[drivel]

Brilliant.

When you think about it, the level of discourse on the Internet about the latest Halo game isn't all that different from the political discourse on Fox News, or the political arena in general.

Guest on show: I respectfully disagree with you.
Beck (douche): Well you must be a godless, socialist Nazi, then!
Guest: Nazis and Socialists aren't one and...
Beck: Only a Socialist would know that... or a Nazi...

 

[TerranReaper]

Satire at its finest. There is some truth to this though, sadly enough. One thing I find irriating, is people criticizing a multiplayer-oriented game for having a horrible storyline or the single-player for being terrible.

 

[nipsen]

..well, you know.. the real satire is that the people inside the industry would read this story and go: "of course, that makes so much sense! It's like I've always said, we need to have no opinions, and go the way of the least amount of resistance to please everyone! And that's how a good game is made - and noise on the internet proves it!".

To everyone else, something like this will seem a bit strange. After all, why spend time pointing out that the only way to please everyone, according to this very well known logic, is to say absolutely nothing? Everyone understands intuitively that you just will not be able to please everyone all of the time - no matter how much you whore yourself to popular suggestions.

But promoters in the industry do not understand it. And will probably read something like this with extreme interest, and use it as a baseline for their next marketing push.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Nice bit of satire there. Although I really do think people should try to not form opinions until playing a game. I've seen games that looked bad be good and games that look good be bad you really can't tell till you've tried.

 

[someotherguy]

You lost me at "it's not about the story" OFCOURSE it's about the story - games and we have evolved so far luckily that we can, and should, demand a good story and storytelling from games. I don't care if the game has incredible gameplay mechanics like Modern Warfare 2, if the story is horrible then I have no reason to play it. Same goes for movies and books, if the story isn't there, I'm not watching/reading any further, no matter how good the technical side is.

I lol'd. You just failed it. And MW2 has incredible mechanics? Since when is dying every 3 seconds a mechanic?

 

[someotherguy]

Leave reviews to the fans? Haha, no. Fans reviewing their games is just as bad, if not worse, than when a hater reviews a game. Fans are biased and they already have a predetermined opinion of what a game in their series SHOULD BE. They want the series to stagnate and be as safe and familiar to fellow fans as possible.

If a game can only appeal to fans, then it's not a good game.

Count is at 2 now, Shamus.

 

[Sir Prize]

I pretty much agreed with that, apart from the games don't need a good story thing...that I REALLY disagree with, but I'll leave at that.

 

[someotherguy]

Besides, games aren't about story. Their stories don't need to be good. If you want story, go read a book.

Do people actually believe this?

Keep posting please. I'm getting some good laughs.

 

[tetron]

Nice buildup, at first I didn't see the satire but later on I was like ok yeah this is getting ridiculous lol. Really liked the article, hope you don't get too much hate from people who don't get the joke.

 

[drivel]

LOL'ing at the people who didn't understand that this was satire. Then again, they're probably just kids, so I'll cut 'em some slack.

I'm pretty sure this was Shamus's plot to out all the mindless fans boys. E.g., Hallowed Lady.

 

[Iron Mal]

You lost me at "it's not about the story" OFCOURSE it's about the story - games and we have evolved so far luckily that we can, and should, demand a good story and storytelling from games. I don't care if the game has incredible gameplay mechanics like Modern Warfare 2, if the story is horrible then I have no reason to play it. Same goes for movies and books, if the story isn't there, I'm not watching/reading any further, no matter how good the technical side is.

I have to disagree with this right here, games are the only medium out there that is defined by how interactive they are.

If you refuse to play an excellent game because the narrative is slightly off then I have every reason to call you out on being pretentious and misunderstanding games as a medium, while it is important for games to have good writing and narrative, these issues are irrelevent if the gameplay itself is horrible or just plain painful (after all, if we are in it for the story alone then what is to prevent us from seeking a simmilar experience in a book or film?).

I will forgive a non-sensical or even outright terrible plot if the game is fun to play (gamplay should be the fundamental backbone of what makes games great) and I feel that while a well written narrative is a bonus, it will not save a shit game from a deserving scolding (I don't care how brilliant a story is, if continueing it means having to cope with dodgey controls, broken gameplay and irritating bugs for the next 10-20 hours then I'm afraid that it'll just have to be one story that rightfully remains untold).

Would you still call a well written manuscript a brilliant story if it was written on a series of stapled together napkins with coloured crayons?