Can a Fanbase Ever Be "Owed" Something?

Sep 24, 2008
2,461
0
0
Canadamus Prime said:
The Rogue Wolf said:
No. The problem with fans is that they invest themselves in a franchise, and this makes them believe that they have ownership of it, and thus control. It's "theirs", in their minds, meant ONLY for them, and must follow their whims and desires, or they have been "robbed".
This, pretty much. Fans aren't owed anything really. At least in so much as if the entertainment they consume does not live up to their lofty expectations, the creator is not obligated to "fix" it or fine tune it to their whims.
I disagree in part.

You're talking about a subset of Fans, those who think they own it. I don't understand that mentality, but I get that it is not correct. We fans support what we love, we do not have ownership.

However, Fans are owed certain things when a creator or distributor expects compensation for their work. Faithfulness to the established Lore, A quality put together product, general appeal. Simply put, a fan is owed only the same that any customer is owed in a business transaction: A product worthy of paying.

If a fan is displeased, they have two options on how to handle it. Do not pay for it and complain. That's it.

However.

As I keep saying, this is a two way street.

Why Fans are not owed anything, Developers and Creators are owed nothing as well.

When backlash over Metro Exodus reached its fever pitch, the narrative designer apologized to the fans, but asked them to stay loyal.

Glukhovsky finishes by saying "again, we're all very sorry that you're hurt," and asks players not to "betray" the developers, "just as we will always stay faithful to you."
(Source [https://www.pcgamesn.com/metro-exodus/metro-exodus-dmitry-glukhovsky-statement])

2k asks Fans for help to make sure they can keep Loot Boxes legal so they can keep milking us [https://www.pcgamesn.com/nba-2k19/2k-asks-belgium-fans-for-loot-box-help].

In Marvel vs Capcom, a game built on Fan hype to see their favorite characters fighting it out, it was asked why fan favorites were left out. The response was thus [https://www.eventhubs.com/news/2017/jun/24/if-you-were-actually-think-about-it-these-characters-are-just-functions-capcom-talks-about-representing-character-playstyles-mvci/]:

When GameSpot asked Peter and Mike about missing characters like Magneto and Sentinel, they gave a response.

"If you were to actually think about it, these characters are just functions. They're just doing things," said Peter Rosas.

"Magneto, case and point, is a favorite because he has eight-way dash and he's really fast, right? Well guess what, Nova can do the same thing, Captain Marvel can do the same thing. Ultron can do the same thing."

"It's just the function that people are associating with the character, and there's no shortage of that. We made sure that all proper playstyles can be represented with our current roster."
It can not be both ways. It can not be "Fans are owed nothing so shut up and take what's coming", and then "Hey fans, we need you. You might not be getting what you want, but be faithful to us and don't let us down, ok?"
 

Xprimentyl

Made you look...
Legacy
Aug 13, 2011
6,210
4,482
118
Plano, TX
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Fans are owed only due respect, an acknowledgment that their fandom makes the product the success that it is, and a creator?s commitment to considering the fans? expectations with future endeavors. I say ?considering? expectations because ?meeting? them is always going to be impossible, e.g.: I?m a huge Halo fan who loved Halo 4 and hated Halo 5; you don?t have to look far to find an equally huge Halo fan who feels exactly the opposite.

So no, if a creator gives an earnest effort to make their fans happy, they ?owe? nothing, operative phrase there being ?earnest.? That shit that Blizzard pulled, collecting all those diehard Diablo fans together, fans who spent their time and money to be there to hear something, anything, about the next installment of Diablo on PC, only to spit a mobile Diablo game in their collective faces, and back that shit up with an incredulously snide ?you guys have phones, don?t you??, was nigh unforgiveable. Hell, I don?t give two shits about Diablo, and I was offended FOR Diablo fans. Mobile gaming is the literal antithesis of PC gaming, so for Blizzard to think Diablo fans would be excited to hear they?d been working on a new Diablo for everyone BUT the PC fans shows a level of tone deafness bordering on impossible.
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,343
358
88
Eacaraxe said:
CaitSeith said:
Now that's revisionism, like reaching to a conclusion and then looking solely for clues that support it.
A story in three videos.

Chapter 1. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As0F9Bq2kGk]
Chapter 2. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdnH4rVBXT8]
Chapter 3 (only the first two minutes are pertinent, but the money shot's at 0:40). [https://youtu.be/qQTPVlh3Zzk]

Shall I continue?
Yes, continue; because that doesn't counter the rest of what I said:

ME1 presented the organic/synthetic conflict, but it wasn't the driving theme. It presented the Reapers as eldritch gods, keeping their motives obscure on purpose; but they may as well had been hacking the Geth as the AI equivalent of indoctrinating people, and just using them for their own unknown agenda. In ME2 the conflict had very little emphasis in the main missions and most of the side missions (so little that the exposition on Geth's ideological leanings towards organics is optional), with the collectors taking the place of the geth as the Reapers' assault force (and this time the Reapers' hinted motive was to be simply to create more Reapers). Only in ME3 the writers decided that the Reapers' motive was purely the organic/synthetic conflict.

Attention was paid (it's the abundance of attention that made ME3 ending such a big deal). ME3 didn't just had synthesis ending, did it? A good ME3 ending would had synthesis always happening, but your actions decided what happened afterwards. ME2 ending was pretty good in giving as sense of control and consequences; ME3 ending dropped the ball in that regard.
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
ObsidianJones said:
Canadamus Prime said:
The Rogue Wolf said:
No. The problem with fans is that they invest themselves in a franchise, and this makes them believe that they have ownership of it, and thus control. It's "theirs", in their minds, meant ONLY for them, and must follow their whims and desires, or they have been "robbed".
This, pretty much. Fans aren't owed anything really. At least in so much as if the entertainment they consume does not live up to their lofty expectations, the creator is not obligated to "fix" it or fine tune it to their whims.
I disagree in part.

You're talking about a subset of Fans, those who think they own it. I don't understand that mentality, but I get that it is not correct. We fans support what we love, we do not have ownership.
Is that not what we were talking about?
ObsidianJones said:
However, Fans are owed certain things when a creator or distributor expects compensation for their work. Faithfulness to the established Lore, A quality put together product, general appeal. Simply put, a fan is owed only the same that any customer is owed in a business transaction: A product worthy of paying.

If a fan is displeased, they have two options on how to handle it. Do not pay for it and complain. That's it.

However.

As I keep saying, this is a two way street.

Why Fans are not owed anything, Developers and Creators are owed nothing as well.

When backlash over Metro Exodus reached its fever pitch, the narrative designer apologized to the fans, but asked them to stay loyal.

Glukhovsky finishes by saying "again, we're all very sorry that you're hurt," and asks players not to "betray" the developers, "just as we will always stay faithful to you."
(Source [https://www.pcgamesn.com/metro-exodus/metro-exodus-dmitry-glukhovsky-statement])

2k asks Fans for help to make sure they can keep Loot Boxes legal so they can keep milking us [https://www.pcgamesn.com/nba-2k19/2k-asks-belgium-fans-for-loot-box-help].

In Marvel vs Capcom, a game built on Fan hype to see their favorite characters fighting it out, it was asked why fan favorites were left out. The response was thus [https://www.eventhubs.com/news/2017/jun/24/if-you-were-actually-think-about-it-these-characters-are-just-functions-capcom-talks-about-representing-character-playstyles-mvci/]:

When GameSpot asked Peter and Mike about missing characters like Magneto and Sentinel, they gave a response.

"If you were to actually think about it, these characters are just functions. They're just doing things," said Peter Rosas.

"Magneto, case and point, is a favorite because he has eight-way dash and he's really fast, right? Well guess what, Nova can do the same thing, Captain Marvel can do the same thing. Ultron can do the same thing."

"It's just the function that people are associating with the character, and there's no shortage of that. We made sure that all proper playstyles can be represented with our current roster."
It can not be both ways. It can not be "Fans are owed nothing so shut up and take what's coming", and then "Hey fans, we need you. You might not be getting what you want, but be faithful to us and don't let us down, ok?"
You are right though, a consumer or "fan" of media is entitled to a quality product well made. Although what that might look like might vary from person to person.
 
Sep 24, 2008
2,461
0
0
Canadamus Prime said:
Is that not what we were talking about?
Well, I want to say that's up to Hawki. Because the words used were 'Fanbase' and 'Fans'. To me, that applies all. And since we all are fans of something, we know not all fans are like as I described earlier.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,684
2,879
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Xprimentyl said:
Fans are owed only due respect, an acknowledgment that their fandom makes the product the success that it is, and a creator?s commitment to considering the fans? expectations with future endeavors. I say ?considering? expectations because ?meeting? them is always going to be impossible, e.g.: I?m a huge Halo fan who loved Halo 4 and hated Halo 5; you don?t have to look far to find an equally huge Halo fan who feels exactly the opposite.

So no, if a creator gives an earnest effort to make their fans happy, they ?owe? nothing, operative phrase there being ?earnest.? That shit that Blizzard pulled, collecting all those diehard Diablo fans together, fans who spent their time and money to be there to hear something, anything, about the next installment of Diablo on PC, only to spit a mobile Diablo game in their collective faces, and back that shit up with an incredulously snide ?you guys have phones, don?t you??, was nigh unforgiveable. Hell, I don?t give two shits about Diablo, and I was offended FOR Diablo fans. Mobile gaming is the literal antithesis of PC gaming, so for Blizzard to think Diablo fans would be excited to hear they?d been working on a new Diablo for everyone BUT the PC fans shows a level of tone deafness bordering on impossible.
I'm actually playing Diablo 3 right now. Mobile Diablo never interested me, but I have no comprehension for hating that moment. I didn't care one way or the other.

But I never once considered Diablo 4 a thing. They're on Season 17 of Diablo 3 and I doubt they'd give that up. I thought it might be just a new character. But honestly, couldn't have cared if it was a new announcement or not. Mobile Diablo is fine if they find the audience for it. That audience won't include me but I'm not going to take Mobile Diablo away from those who want it.
 

Xprimentyl

Made you look...
Legacy
Aug 13, 2011
6,210
4,482
118
Plano, TX
Country
United States
Gender
Male
trunkage said:
Xprimentyl said:
Fans are owed only due respect, an acknowledgment that their fandom makes the product the success that it is, and a creator?s commitment to considering the fans? expectations with future endeavors. I say ?considering? expectations because ?meeting? them is always going to be impossible, e.g.: I?m a huge Halo fan who loved Halo 4 and hated Halo 5; you don?t have to look far to find an equally huge Halo fan who feels exactly the opposite.

So no, if a creator gives an earnest effort to make their fans happy, they ?owe? nothing, operative phrase there being ?earnest.? That shit that Blizzard pulled, collecting all those diehard Diablo fans together, fans who spent their time and money to be there to hear something, anything, about the next installment of Diablo on PC, only to spit a mobile Diablo game in their collective faces, and back that shit up with an incredulously snide ?you guys have phones, don?t you??, was nigh unforgiveable. Hell, I don?t give two shits about Diablo, and I was offended FOR Diablo fans. Mobile gaming is the literal antithesis of PC gaming, so for Blizzard to think Diablo fans would be excited to hear they?d been working on a new Diablo for everyone BUT the PC fans shows a level of tone deafness bordering on impossible.
I'm actually playing Diablo 3 right now. Mobile Diablo never interested me, but I have no comprehension for hating that moment. I didn't care one way or the other.

But I never once considered Diablo 4 a thing. They're on Season 17 of Diablo 3 and I doubt they'd give that up. I thought it might be just a new character. But honestly, couldn't have cared if it was a new announcement or not. Mobile Diablo is fine if they find the audience for it. That audience won't include me but I'm not going to take Mobile Diablo away from those who want it.
Oh, I?m not saying Diablo fans are ?owed? anything after the fact like Blizzard undoing the mobile Diablo game or that it never should have been a thing; that was just my example of a creator missing, in grand fashion, all three points I feel fans ARE owed (underlined above.) What Blizzard should have done is NOT hype an ominous ?Diablo? announcement if all they had was a shitty mobile game and not made that announcement the denouement of BLIZZCON. I mean, you?re fucking Blizzard; at BlizzCon of all events, you can?t expect fans to be excited to learn you?ve been developing a same-y mobile game with a Diablo skin, then be snide when it?s clear you fucked up. That be like Valve at ?ValvCon? hinting a Half-Life announcement, unveiling a Half-Life themed Candy Crush knock-off, then saying ?well fuck you ungrateful bastards; who doesn?t like Candy Crush??
 

Gordon_4_v1legacy

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,577
0
0
It obviously behooves a creative to put out the best possible product they can to entertain their audience; but they don?t owe fans every fantasy and desire for the property?s direction: that?s madness. They don?t owe us anything and we don?t owe them anything.
 

Eacaraxe_v1legacy

New member
Mar 28, 2010
1,028
0
0
CaitSeith said:
Yes, continue; because that doesn't counter the rest of what I said:
You learn exactly what Sovereign is before you even leave Eden Prime. It's Giger-inspired aesthetics invoke biomechanism from the very start, you fight converted biomechanoids the whole way through, Geth aesthetics subtly link Reapers and Geth in the player's mind, then at the very end the Prothean beacon message subtextually confirms it by displaying quick-cut (almost subliminal) images and videos of biomechanics. Biomechanism being a literal synthesis of organic and synthetic.

Then you go to the Citadel. Scan keepers, biomechanoids. Rogue gambling AI, get the first hint of organic/synthetic conflict in the trilogy which acts as a basic subtextual roadmap and foreshadowing for both the main conflict of ME1 and the entire trilogy. Meet Tali, learn about Geth, but not everything in her story adds up and it becomes clear Geth are a subversion of "rogue genocidal AI" trope; this is actually important, because it's the strongest reinforcement of the organic/synthetic conflict themes in the entire trilogy because it paints organics as an aggressor. Geth exception is reinforced on Feros, when Shepard sees Geth worshiping iconography evocative of Sovereign and the Reapers.

In the meantime, transhumanism, augmentation both cybernetic and genetic, its implications on the "human" state, and through subtext what defines humanity, are explored through dialogue with Kaidan, Ashley, and Joker. How Kaidan is a biotic, how being biotic isn't natural to humans but rather an engineered trait requiring cybernetic and VI augmentation and years of experimentation and training to harness, the human cost and ethics of developing human biotics, and the impact this has on the victims (the biotics themselves). How Ashley is what would pass for a cultural conservative, how she is genetically engineered being the recipient of gene therapy to cure congenital conditions and as a member of the Alliance military, and whether and how deeply genetic engineering conflicts with her beliefs and the ramifications for humanity at large. How Joker is disabled and the limitations of human medical technology, but despite this his genetic and cybernetic palliative care allows him a high quality of life and military service despite a condition that in the past would have proven terminal at an early age.

That's not limited to main characters; these are conversations that can be had with minor characters, and as part of (marked and unmarked) side quests through the entire game. The main characters are simply the case example. All of which intended to frame to the player the ME universe is already exploring the limitations of the organic state through means ethical and unethical, up to and including cybernetic and VI enhancement, pushing the character to question in the back of their minds what defines being organic.

In the middle of all this you run into the Luna rogue AI mission, but more on EDI later. Yes, that's EDI. And, no, that actually cannot be handwaved as retcon, being that mission's completion is one of the many flags carried through the trilogy in save conversion, and completion/non-completion of that mission actually changes dialog later in the trilogy. It just happens to be the case, since that was the class specialization mission, almost everyone completes it and therefore never notices.

Anyhow, you get to Virmire. Dialog between Rana and Saren lay pretty much the entire thing out. Reapers are biomechanoid and they convert organics to biomechanoids to suit their purposes, but their activities are limited to culling sufficiently-advanced organic species. On Ilos, you learn Keepers (who you, the player, already knows to be biomechanoid) are Reaper slaves. Having fought husks the entire game, the player is drawn to the conclusion biomechanism is equivalent to Reapers. Except, here's where the game (hell, entire trilogy) pulls its smartest trick: you're introduced to Indoctrination and Vigil, after constantly hearing Shepard repeat "Reapers are machines to be destroyed" the whole game.

Indoctrination introduces the notion nothing associated with the Reapers is to be trusted. Vigil tells the player understanding the Reapers is irrelevant. Shepard constantly reiterates how Reapers are only machines. Meanwhile, what the player is shown is in complete disharmony with what they're told; they're shown what's actually going on, but told to ignore it. It's all very Lovecraftian, since the game doesn't actually play on fear of the unknown to cultivate horror; the game plays on the player's experienced cognitive dissonance to cultivate horror. Simply put, the Reapers aren't scary because they're "eldritch horrors"; the Reapers are scary because they aren't.

You see, the people who wrote the game actually read and understood Lovecraft, unlike nine out of ten people who played it and claim to have. The essence of Lovecraftian horror isn't actually "The Unknown" or "Eldritch Horror", that's just what people who don't understand Lovecraft think it is; the essence of Lovecraftian horror is cognitive dissonance, and Mass Effect plays this to the hilt perfectly, toying with popular sci-fi tropes to construct a metatextual facade that builds Lovecraftian horror by inverting the equation. I could write for days about how genius ME1 is on this basis alone.

So, ME2. You're right, there's not much to say there. Except that Shepard's literally brought back from the dead as a cyborg monstrosity, pals around with a literal test tube baby, a buddy cop duo of a Quarian and Geth who basically reveal everything you were told (but not shown) about the Geth in the first game was propaganda, Joker again, and an AI with Sooper Dooper Double Seekrit Totally Not Reaper Augmentation that allows them to...think like an organic? Meanwhile you're fighting even more biomechanoids and eventually see how far Reapers' ability to biomechanize organics go, because at the end of the game you fight a giant husk.

Meanwhile, Miranda continues the line of transhumanist musings started by Ashley in ME1, Jack continues Kaidan's musings, and Joker continues being Joker. The wild card here is EDI, because dialog with her focuses on relations between organics and synthetics, organics' purpose for existing and synthetics' purpose vis-a-vis organics, and the inevitability of conflict.

But you're right, nope, nothing to see there.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,684
2,879
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Xprimentyl said:
trunkage said:
Xprimentyl said:
Fans are owed only due respect, an acknowledgment that their fandom makes the product the success that it is, and a creator?s commitment to considering the fans? expectations with future endeavors. I say ?considering? expectations because ?meeting? them is always going to be impossible, e.g.: I?m a huge Halo fan who loved Halo 4 and hated Halo 5; you don?t have to look far to find an equally huge Halo fan who feels exactly the opposite.

So no, if a creator gives an earnest effort to make their fans happy, they ?owe? nothing, operative phrase there being ?earnest.? That shit that Blizzard pulled, collecting all those diehard Diablo fans together, fans who spent their time and money to be there to hear something, anything, about the next installment of Diablo on PC, only to spit a mobile Diablo game in their collective faces, and back that shit up with an incredulously snide ?you guys have phones, don?t you??, was nigh unforgiveable. Hell, I don?t give two shits about Diablo, and I was offended FOR Diablo fans. Mobile gaming is the literal antithesis of PC gaming, so for Blizzard to think Diablo fans would be excited to hear they?d been working on a new Diablo for everyone BUT the PC fans shows a level of tone deafness bordering on impossible.
I'm actually playing Diablo 3 right now. Mobile Diablo never interested me, but I have no comprehension for hating that moment. I didn't care one way or the other.

But I never once considered Diablo 4 a thing. They're on Season 17 of Diablo 3 and I doubt they'd give that up. I thought it might be just a new character. But honestly, couldn't have cared if it was a new announcement or not. Mobile Diablo is fine if they find the audience for it. That audience won't include me but I'm not going to take Mobile Diablo away from those who want it.
Oh, I?m not saying Diablo fans are ?owed? anything after the fact like Blizzard undoing the mobile Diablo game or that it never should have been a thing; that was just my example of a creator missing, in grand fashion, all three points I feel fans ARE owed (underlined above.) What Blizzard should have done is NOT hype an ominous ?Diablo? announcement if all they had was a shitty mobile game and not made that announcement the denouement of BLIZZCON. I mean, you?re fucking Blizzard; at BlizzCon of all events, you can?t expect fans to be excited to learn you?ve been developing a same-y mobile game with a Diablo skin, then be snide when it?s clear you fucked up. That be like Valve at ?ValvCon? hinting a Half-Life announcement, unveiling a Half-Life themed Candy Crush knock-off, then saying ?well fuck you ungrateful bastards; who doesn?t like Candy Crush??
I'd wager that they it was going to be received like Fallout Shelter. That series made a similar transition and Shelter dramatically helped the franchise and hype. Blizzards misstep was ONLY providing a mobile game that could be played while you're waiting for the majot game to be finished. Id point to ES:Blades which is somewhat well recieved, filled in how the white gold concordant happen and why the Thalmer couldn't press the advantage. But it wasnt connected to a future game that we were waiting for (we know TES6 is happening but... probably not for years.)

Also, Blizzard did handle the backlash terribly
 
Sep 24, 2008
2,461
0
0
trunkage said:
I'm actually playing Diablo 3 right now. Mobile Diablo never interested me, but I have no comprehension for hating that moment. I didn't care one way or the other.

But I never once considered Diablo 4 a thing. They're on Season 17 of Diablo 3 and I doubt they'd give that up. I thought it might be just a new character. But honestly, couldn't have cared if it was a new announcement or not. Mobile Diablo is fine if they find the audience for it. That audience won't include me but I'm not going to take Mobile Diablo away from those who want it.
It didn't bother me that much, but I get the outrage. Especially for those people at Blizzcon directly.

Tickets to the Con started at 230 dollars on the low end, 750 at the top pass.

Blizzcon was held Thursday and Friday, November 1-2nd. I can't tell how much those nights would have been at Hotels, but searching for next month, I see a range of 215-500. so, let's split the difference and say an average of 375 (I'm not saying the average of those two numbers is 375, but I feel that's a comfortable midpoint).

Getting time off of work (again, it was in the end of the week, but not on the weekend), all that travel hassle... to be told the Keynote event has nothing to do with what your interests might be at.

That would rile me up.

But again, they weren't promised anything. You go to these things with the HOPE of what you want to see. But it doesn't come guaranteed with the price you paid.

But on the other hand, we go to restaurants with the expectation of good service. And if we don't get it, we don't go to that restaurant again.

Lastly, being a PC company for near decades now, the optics were that the fans that got them to the level of a gaming company where they are today were being looked over for the new hotness.

Everything is Optics and presentation. Like how at the following day, they made sure to have people who would be more message friendly ask questions because they realized how badly Diablo Immortal went over.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,173
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Xprimentyl said:
e.g.: I?m a huge Halo fan who loved Halo 4 and hated Halo 5; you don?t have to look far to find an equally huge Halo fan who feels exactly the opposite.
Raises hand as to being the opposite.

That shit that Blizzard pulled, collecting all those diehard Diablo fans together, fans who spent their time and money to be there to hear something, anything, about the next installment of Diablo on PC, only to spit a mobile Diablo game in their collective faces, and back that shit up with an incredulously snide ?you guys have phones, don?t you??, was nigh unforgiveable. Hell, I don?t give two shits about Diablo, and I was offended FOR Diablo fans. Mobile gaming is the literal antithesis of PC gaming, so for Blizzard to think Diablo fans would be excited to hear they?d been working on a new Diablo for everyone BUT the PC fans shows a level of tone deafness bordering on impossible.
You do realize that before BlizzCon, Blizzard stated in all but name that D4 wouldn't be shown, and that the existence of a Diablo mobile game had been known about for ages, right?

Also, I wouldn't call the guys have phones comment snide. It was unfortunate, sure, but you can tell from body language and tone that Wyatt was really uncomfortable. If someone's under intense stress (and the Diablo fanbase is an especially vicious one), then yes, I can understand messing up.

trunkage said:
Blizzards misstep was ONLY providing a mobile game that could be played while you're waiting for the majot game to be finished. Id point to ES:Blades which is somewhat well recieved, filled in how the white gold concordant happen and why the Thalmer couldn't press the advantage. But it wasnt connected to a future game that we were waiting for (we know TES6 is happening but... probably not for years.)
In hindsight, yes, but I can't really understand the difference.

Let's take it as writ that Blades was better received because ES6 was revealed. Question is, why? ES6 was confirmed in 2016. All 2018 did was reveal what was known for two years. Like, if there'd be some Diablo IV ES6-esque trailer at BlizzCon (landscape of Sanctuary with a "D4 logo,") then what would that do apart from confirm the existence of a game that had been confirmed in 2018, and hinted at since 2016?

If you're going to do a trailer like Elder Scrolls VI, then the only reason I could get hyped for it if I didn't already know the thing existed.

ObsidianJones said:
Getting time off of work (again, it was in the end of the week, but not on the weekend), all that travel hassle... to be told the Keynote event has nothing to do with what your interests might be at.
Serious question - if you're told a month in advance that something you hoped would be there won't be there, is it still within reason to turn up to an event and be disappointed that what you expected to be there isn't there, despite being given forewarning that it wouldn't be there?
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,343
358
88
Eacaraxe said:
CaitSeith said:
Yes, continue; because that doesn't counter the rest of what I said:
But you're right, nope, nothing to see there.
Did I said there was nothing to see? I said that there wasn't enough cohesivity to make the conflict between organics and synthetics the driving theme of the whole series. Lot's of the stuff you're "explaining" you're actually inferring them from the third game. Reapers are the antagonists in the first two games because they wanted to exterminate all advanced civilization, because that's what Reapers do; but their motives are too ambiguous to arrive to ME3's final conclusion. The people who understood the Lovecraftian stuff in ME1 must had been absent in the ME3 ending (it's like Chutulu's creator appeared as a human child to the professor, quickly explained him that the Ancient Ones destroy worlds to protect the dominant species from themselves and gives him the choice to destroy the Ancient Ones, control them or some kind of middle-ground).

PS: The Keepers and the Collectors are bio-engineered, not bio-mechanical (big difference).
 
Sep 24, 2008
2,461
0
0
Hawki said:
ObsidianJones said:
Getting time off of work (again, it was in the end of the week, but not on the weekend), all that travel hassle... to be told the Keynote event has nothing to do with what your interests might be at.
Serious question - if you're told a month in advance that something you hoped would be there won't be there, is it still within reason to turn up to an event and be disappointed that what you expected to be there isn't there, despite being given forewarning that it wouldn't be there?
Serious answer in two parts. The first one is what I actually meant, the second one will address what I think you're talking about (Diablo 4)

Serious Answer Number 1: The interests I was talking about was PC interests. Blizzard has been a PC company for years. There were some deliances to console with Diablo and Overwatch, but I would put down even money that most who can in attendance at that point expected news that would be in line with how Blizzard has been running things for years.

They got a crappy phone port. And as the bulk of the audience showed, that is not where their interests lie.

Serious Answer Number zwei: I'm not your typical person. If I bought tickets to an event, I'm ignoring every bit of news surrounding that event. I want to get my money's worth.

Now, for what I believe you mean, that someone told the group not to expect something and people expected it anyway (and you and I don't know what number of people that is, but let's just say it was ten percent). Well, again, personally, I grew up in a society and a situation that learned not to trust what people say until I see the final action. So I always have some skepticism, even while trying to be optimistic.

We can look at Bethesda and see all the things they said was going to be somewhere and going to come out like this, and see the awful truth of the matter. We can see scores of gameplay videos, demos, and 'true to life trailers', and see downgrades galore. We can see denial of modes, features (offline mode being impossible for Sim City due to the game needing the Cloud to process), and inclusions of microtransactions... and have all those things come to reality.

When talking about the Video Game Industry, the Development side is steeped in dubious misdirection. Serious question to you, how should people know when those associated with Game Design and Development are being truthful, and when they are spinning to keep hype going?

The Serious Answer Part Deux is me just playing Devil's Advocate, mind you. Serious Answer Number Ichi is actually what I meant when I spoke of interests. And like I said right after that, they weren't promised anything. So expecting leads to disappointment.
 

Xprimentyl

Made you look...
Legacy
Aug 13, 2011
6,210
4,482
118
Plano, TX
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Hawki said:
Xprimentyl said:
e.g.: I?m a huge Halo fan who loved Halo 4 and hated Halo 5; you don?t have to look far to find an equally huge Halo fan who feels exactly the opposite.
Raises hand as to being the opposite.
Yes, I know; we?ve had a couple discussions about it in the past, hence my ?you don?t have to look far? comment.

Hawki said:
Xprimentyl said:
That shit that Blizzard pulled, collecting all those diehard Diablo fans together, fans who spent their time and money to be there to hear something, anything, about the next installment of Diablo on PC, only to spit a mobile Diablo game in their collective faces, and back that shit up with an incredulously snide ?you guys have phones, don?t you??, was nigh unforgiveable. Hell, I don?t give two shits about Diablo, and I was offended FOR Diablo fans. Mobile gaming is the literal antithesis of PC gaming, so for Blizzard to think Diablo fans would be excited to hear they?d been working on a new Diablo for everyone BUT the PC fans shows a level of tone deafness bordering on impossible.
You do realize that before BlizzCon, Blizzard stated in all but name that D4 wouldn't be shown, and that the existence of a Diablo mobile game had been known about for ages, right?
Yes and yes; the point was was it reasonable for Blizzard to think attendees at BlizzCon, y?know, those largely PC gamers who paid good money and likely travelled to be there, would be satisfied with a chintzy mobile game as the big ?ta-dah!? of the event? I know D4 wasn?t promised, but it was entirely reasonable for fans to expect something of import to Blizzard?s core demographic and entirely understandable that those fans, ?vicious? as they may be, were as upset as they were.

Hawki said:
Also, I wouldn't call the guys have phones comment snide. It was unfortunate, sure, but you can tell from body language and tone that Wyatt was really uncomfortable. If someone's under intense stress (and the Diablo fanbase is an especially vicious one), then yes, I can understand messing up.
Sorry, I can?t afford them that pass. A couple things: 1.) if Wyatt was chosen to spearhead the big reveal on stage, he should have been vetted for a level of professionalism that could handle a negative crowd response. In his case, talking down to his customers was his knee-jerk response to their dissatisfaction, and I should feel badly for him? If he genuinely stood behind his product, the response should have been to win the crowd over, itemize all of the things that are ?so great? about it (if any existed) softening the blow, not questioning the fans? ability to access the product when it?s evident to anyone with two working eyes and ears they didn?t WANT the product! If someone shoves dog shit in your face and you turn your head in disgust, what sense does it make to ask incredulously ?what? You have a nose, don?t you?? 2.) Whether he was or wasn?t vetted aside, it goes to show just how out of touch Blizzard actually was, willfully or otherwise. They either somehow thought they had a product fans wanted and would be excited about or they didn?t care and just put Wyatt out as a sacrificial lamb to herald their cash-grab knowing that SOMEONE would end up buying it and MOAR MONIES! The former being blind to their decades of success, the latter being patently greedy; neither a forgivable offence.

Diablo Immortal would have been fine in a booth, or maybe some filler between events on stage, but as THE reveal to a room full of PC gamers was the tactile embodiment of the aloof, out-of-touch state of the industry today: devs/publishers who want maximum return on minimum effort. Blizzard has enough money to launch a rocket to heaven, raze it to the ground, and erect condos for their accountants to live in luxury as they organize the cash; do you think a mobile game lazily painted in Diablo colors and likely to be rife with in-app purchases is the best use of their time and effort? Do you think that?s what anyone in the room expected to see let alone WANTED to see? And what do I know? I?m a nigh-middle-aged guy in Texas whose extent in videogame development is about as substantial as hope in the ?hope in one hand, shit in the other, see which one fills up first? adage, and I know the answer to both of those questions?
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,173
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Xprimentyl said:
Yes and yes; the point was was it reasonable for Blizzard to think attendees at BlizzCon, y?know, those largely PC gamers who paid good money and likely travelled to be there, would be satisfied with a chintzy mobile game as the big ?ta-dah!? of the event? I know D4 wasn?t promised, but it was entirely reasonable for fans to expect something of import to Blizzard?s core demographic and entirely understandable that those fans, ?vicious? as they may be, were as upset as they were.
Few points with this:

-It's far too broad to go the route of "Blizzard fan = PC fan," or that "BlizzCon attendee = Blizzard fan." As in, at the time of BlizzCon 2018 (and today), Blizzard has five active IPs, only two of which are PC-exclusive.

-It's not a question of D4 not being promised, it's a case of it being stated well beforehand that D4 wouldn't be at the event. Even if we accept that Immortal was the big ta da (which is dubious), if you go to an event expecting something that you were told wouldn't be there, then what am I meant to say? Sorry you didn't get the memo?

The existence of Immortal in of itself is another matter, but I have limited sympathy for people who were upset over the lack of a game that they were told wouldn't be there, and the existence of a game that was known well before BC 2019.

Sorry, I can?t afford them that pass. A couple things: 1.) if Wyatt was chosen to spearhead the big reveal on stage, he should have been vetted for a level of professionalism that could handle a negative crowd response. In his case, talking down to his customers was his knee-jerk response to their dissatisfaction, and I should feel badly for him?
I'm sure everyone who gets up stage is vetted (I know that there's rehersals for these kinds of events) - I don't expect everyone to be 100%, 100% of the time.

If he genuinely stood behind his product, the response should have been to win the crowd over, itemize all of the things that are ?so great? about it (if any existed) softening the blow, not questioning the fans? ability to access the product when it?s evident to anyone with two working eyes and ears they didn?t WANT the product!
First of all, I said that did happen. Second of all, when you have a matter of minutes, hours at most to realize that they didn't want the product, then that becomes a lot harder to react to.

If someone shoves dog shit in your face and you turn your head in disgust, what sense does it make to ask incredulously ?what? You have a nose, don?t you?? 2.) Whether he was or wasn?t vetted aside, it goes to show just how out of touch Blizzard actually was, willfully or otherwise. They either somehow thought they had a product fans wanted and would be excited about or they didn?t care and just put Wyatt out as a sacrificial lamb to herald their cash-grab knowing that SOMEONE would end up buying it and MOAR MONIES! The former being blind to their decades of success, the latter being patently greedy; neither a forgivable offence.
Even if we take all of that as being true, I still don't have any sympathy for the crowd in that specific context.

The closest I've ever been to being angry about the existence of a mobile game cashing in on an IP was Command & Conquer: Rivals, and I couldn't even call myself angry. Just disappointed. And certainly not disappointed enough to make the devs' life a living hell. Then again, the Diablo fanbase did that to Jay Wilson, why wouldn't they do it to Wyatt?

Diablo Immortal would have been fine in a booth, or maybe some filler between events on stage, but as THE reveal to a room full of PC gamers was the tactile embodiment of the aloof, out-of-touch state of the industry today: devs/publishers who want maximum return on minimum effort. Blizzard has enough money to launch a rocket to heaven, raze it to the ground, and erect condos for their accountants to live in luxury as they organize the cash; do you think a mobile game lazily painted in Diablo colors and likely to be rife with in-app purchases is the best use of their time and effort?
Considering that most of the development is being done by NetEase, it's academic.

Do you think that?s what anyone in the room expected to see let alone WANTED to see?
Probably no. But considering that the existence of a Diablo mobile game was known well before BlizzCon, and that D4 wouldn't be shown was well known as well, what people "expected" to see is something I can't comment on, because the whole question of expectation relies on them somehow missing the memos pertaining to both games.