Hating Your Customers Okay?

[zarguhl]

Why is it that in some industries it seems the norm and quite accepted for companies to at the very least have contempt for, but often pretty much straight out dislike or hate their customers openly?

The thread about Origin banning people for modding ME3 single player made me think about it:
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/344/index/9917845/2#10648995

So it ends with this Thomas Abram guy, a rep from Bioware just saying "To confirm, YES you will be banned if Origin picks up that you modified SP which it scans for on ME3 launch. Locked."

Now I've done sales for several companies and now run my own. I can't picture a situation where hundreds of customers contact me with a complaint and I reply "This 'problem' is a design decision and you will be penalized if you use our product incorrectly. There will be no more discussion on this matter. Further attempts to discuss this matter will result in you being banned from discussion entirely." (i.e. "Locked")

But in the gaming industry the norm seems to be that customers - especially the customers who really like your product and therefore discuss it - are considered to be an annoying burden to be squashed.

Now we won't even go into the realm of Ubisoft, who appear to loathe all humanity with such vigor that I suspect they may be plotting mass murder or genocide. But even ordinary game companies are starting to act that way. Certainly 10 years ago they wouldn't have been quite so overt about how little they care.

It seems to be a symptom not of gaming specifically, but of all businesses related to copyrighted works. Film and music companies have a similar attitude of contempt/disdain. Now that gaming companies are getting bigger, they seem to have taken it on.

Now it's all well and good for a company to suck, plenty do. But usually they suffer for it eventually whereas this certainly doesn't seem to be the case for gaming companies (or movie or music).

I suspect I know why. If a car company is known to treat their customers like crap, people buy other cars. Same with just about anything else you'd buy.

However when you get into the category of art, you're suddenly in a different environment. If you like a song by John Smith, but his recording company are arseholes, you can't just go and buy a song by Jane Doe and have more or less the same thing. If you like one kind of art, you have to buy it from who supplies it.

Now it's true that if there's one car/TV/couch/whatever you REALLY REALLY love then you're stuck, but for the most part this isn't the case. But with music for example, no one who loves Beyonce will go "Eh, screw it, I'll listen to Taylor Swift instead!"

Movies and TV shows are the same, if you want to watch Game of Thrones, you won't settle for another show instead just because you don't like HBO.

And of course it's the same with games. Companies make a game they know people will want and there is no real alternative to that game. You can play Modern Warfare instead of Battlefield (or vica versa), but if you prefer one to the other, it's not really a viable choice. You don't want to waste 100 hours of your recreation time playing your second favorite game just because you hate one company.

And so entertainment/art companies have that stronger position. They can hate you, show contempt for you, rip you off, sell you a faulty product, abuse you, berate you and people will just keep going back, because they have the product that is desired.

Is there any escape from that trend? Probably not, without taking each individual and making them sane and thus less likely to operate in that manner.

So until that occurs, the enmity between customers and gaming companies is unlikely to be resolved.

 

[LiquidSolstice]

You know, without fail, it seems to be that the only people who have issues with EA and Ubisoft are PC gamers. I know this sounds like flamebait, but every time I see one of these Fuck EA or Down with Ubisoft type of threads, I always have to think back as to what EA or Ubisoft Xbox game has ever made me disappointed or angry at the game industry, and I can't really seem to find out.

 

[zarguhl]

I always have to think back as to what EA or Ubisoft Xbox game has ever made me disappointed or angry at the game industry, and I can't really seem to find out.

That's probably true to some extent. Perhaps part of the problem is that they resent having to cater for the PC gamer market as it is far more complex for fewer sales than the console market.

 

[Fappy]

I always have to think back as to what EA or Ubisoft Xbox game has ever made me disappointed or angry at the game industry, and I can't really seem to find out.

That's probably true to some extent. Perhaps part of the problem is that they resent having to cater for the PC gamer market as it is far more complex for fewer sales than the console market.

Console market comes with built in security and control. Only thing they hate about consoles is used games and it looks like they have already taken care of that aspect... at least EA has.

 

[CrazyBlaze]

Console market comes with built in security and control. Only thing they hate about consoles is used games and it looks like they have already taken care of that aspect... at least EA has.

Ubisoft is doing it too. I mean ACR came with an online pass and then look at the DLC with it. I mean ACB we got new, maps, new characters, new single player DLC and new modes all for ten bucks. This time its characters for ten, three new maps and three recycled for ten and single player (with those horrible first person puzzles) for ten.

OT: It is not okay to hate your customers. Eventually even the people who don't regularly check for news on games will get tired of these shengiagns and will start to see a drop in quality and leave that publisher. At least that is what I hope is true. I mean I like the AC series and Raymond:Origns was fun but if Ubisoft keeps up dick moves then I will no longer buy their products.

 

[Fappy]

Console market comes with built in security and control. Only thing they hate about consoles is used games and it looks like they have already taken care of that aspect... at least EA has.

Ubisoft is doing it too. I mean ACR came with an online pass and then look at the DLC with it. I mean ACB we got new, maps, new characters, new single player DLC and new modes all for ten bucks. This time its characters for ten, three new maps and three recycled for ten and single player (with those horrible first person puzzles) for ten.

OT: It is not okay to hate your customers. Eventually even the people who don't regularly check for news on games will get tired of these shengiagns and will start to see a drop in quality and leave that publisher. At least that is what I hope is true. I mean I like the AC series and Raymond:Origns was fun but if Ubisoft keeps up dick moves then I will no longer buy their products.

I actually don't think I have bought a single UbiSoft game on console this generation now that I think about it

 

[Bostur]

They want to control their products even after they are sold, so they do what is necessary to reach that goal.

I think they are dicks for doing it, but I understand why. It's the same reasons consoles were made the way they were, completely locked systems with no user control.

They don't hate their customers they just do their job, everyone from the support worker to the suits in the boardroom. It's us the consumers that needs to tell them that it isn't cool.

We probably can't change the ways of EA, UBI and MS, but we can help create a market for new developers and publishers with a more customer friendly philosophy.

 

[Wolfram23]

You know, without fail, it seems to be that the only people who have issues with EA and Ubisoft are PC gamers. I know this sounds like flamebait, but every time I see one of these Fuck EA or Down with Ubisoft type of threads, I always have to think back as to what EA or Ubisoft Xbox game has ever made me disappointed or angry at the game industry, and I can't really seem to find out.

That's because the PC was never so hobbled. I used to be able to choose where I got my games, whether from a retail store or Steam or Direct2Drive or whatever else. There usually wasn't DRM besides a CD Key or a quick activation check on installation - none of this "always on" stuff that means if a server goes down *cough*UBISOFT*cough* you can't play - not to mention if your own internet is down.

PC gamers were never banned from multiple purchases on an account due to modding. Cheaters/hackers in multiplayer games might get banned - from the multiplayer of that game. Or more often, from the specific server they were playing on. Whoever heard of revoking someone's right to products they bought because they decided to manually change a config file or something? It's preposterous and illegal (or at least, an American court decided modifying copyrighted software for personal use is legal*).

Consoles already have all the DRM they need built in, so that's never been an issue. It's also nearly impossible to modify a game for a console, so again, non-issue. Consoles have to buy retail or from 1 specific online store (Xbox Live Marketplace, Sony Store). Basically, console gamers never had freedom so they don't really have anything to ***** about.

Console gamers are finally seeing some lose of freedom because of used sales and the now infamous activation codes that you must buy to get online. I think that it is important for console gamers to stand up against this sort of shit along with the PC gamers who have been dealing with worse and more draconian policies for a while now.

*EDIT: Source of claim
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_copyright

Fair use is a defense to an allegation of copyright infringement under section 107 of the Copyright Act. This section describes some of the uses of copyrighted software that courts have held to be fair. In Galoob v. Nintendo, the 9th Circuit held that modification of copyright software for personal use was fair. In Sega v. Accolade, the 9th Circuit held that making copies in the course of reverse engineering is a fair use, when it is the only way to get access to the "ideas and functional elements" in the copyrighted code, and when "there is a legitimate reason for seeking such access".

 

[Hazy992]

You know, without fail, it seems to be that the only people who have issues with EA and Ubisoft are PC gamers. I know this sounds like flamebait, but every time I see one of these Fuck EA or Down with Ubisoft type of threads, I always have to think back as to what EA or Ubisoft Xbox game has ever made me disappointed or angry at the game industry, and I can't really seem to find out.

I'm not a PC gamer and I don't like EA. Come on dude, you knew that was potential flamebait. You said it yourself.

 

[Strain42]

Companies are allowed to hate their customers all they want, and vice versa. So long as people are buying their games, they don't care how we feel about them, and I don't see how we should care how they feel about us.

If I woke up tomorrow to see a letter from Atlus that said they hated us and thought that every single person who played their game were nothing more than useless weaboos who will only cuddle their Japanese love pillows and live in their Mom's basement...well...the first thing I'd do is check if we'd gone back in time to April 1st, the second thing I would do is probably giggle because I'd assume it's a joke

and the third thing I'd do is...nothing. Even if every single employee at Atlus hand wrote me a letter telling me I sucked and they hated me, it wouldn't stop me from buying their games. Because they release good games.

 

[krazykidd]

You know, without fail, it seems to be that the only people who have issues with EA and Ubisoft are PC gamers. I know this sounds like flamebait, but every time I see one of these Fuck EA or Down with Ubisoft type of threads, I always have to think back as to what EA or Ubisoft Xbox game has ever made me disappointed or angry at the game industry, and I can't really seem to find out.

I'm not a PC gamer and I don't like EA. Come on dude, you knew that was potential flamebait. You said it yourself.

That unfortunately proves nothing . And i always find it funny that people always use that argument to disprove something. " well i'm an expetion so you must be wrong".

OT: that sounds about right , but there is one sentense that i find fundamentally wrong:

"And so entertainment/art companies have that stronger position. They can hate you, show contempt for you, rip you off, sell you a faulty product, abuse you, berate you and people will just keep going back, because they have the product that is desired."

This i don't agree with at all . IF that is the case then eveyone should just stop complaining . Complaining about a product and still going back to it time and time again is the dumbest thing a person can do . And in all honesty , if this is what people are doing , they deserve to get ripped off . Either shut up , take it like a man and buy the product or complain and refuse to buy the product until you personal gripes are fixed . But for the love of all thats holy , don't complain and still buy it . That accomplishes nothing and actually worsens the situation.

 

[Hazy992]

You know, without fail, it seems to be that the only people who have issues with EA and Ubisoft are PC gamers. I know this sounds like flamebait, but every time I see one of these Fuck EA or Down with Ubisoft type of threads, I always have to think back as to what EA or Ubisoft Xbox game has ever made me disappointed or angry at the game industry, and I can't really seem to find out.

I'm not a PC gamer and I don't like EA. Come on dude, you knew that was potential flamebait. You said it yourself.

That unfortunately proves nothing . And i always find it funny that people always use that argument to disprove something. " well i'm an expetion so you must be wrong".

He said that only PC gamers seem to have a problem with EA. I said I'm not one and I still have a problem with EA. I was using myself as an example, and I don't see the problem

 

[RatRace123]

Sure you can hate your customers, you can abuse them to hell and back, but there will come a breaking point where they get tired of it and start abandoning you.

Frankly in EA's case I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet.

 

[Sarge034]

Now I've done sales for several companies and now run my own. I can't picture a situation where hundreds of customers contact me with a complaint and I reply "This 'problem' is a design decision and you will be penalized if you use our product incorrectly. There will be no more discussion on this matter. Further attempts to discuss this matter will result in you being banned from discussion entirely." (i.e. "Locked")

But in the gaming industry the norm seems to be that customers - especially the customers who really like your product and therefore discuss it - are considered to be an annoying burden to be squashed.

Do you sell physical goods or intellectual property (IP)? Let me clarify some things. First, for the duration of this post even a physical copy of a game will be considered IP. Second, when I address "consoles" I am really saying X-Box 360 and PS3.


The big difference, and I'm not saying it is right or wrong, is that we only buy a license to use the software (game). It is because of this loop hole that publishers are allowed to make us (the consumers) sign a EULA, or the equivalent of, and have any legality at all. Both of these steps make sense on paper as a way to protect the IP from reverse engineering and simple pirating. On consoles the issue of SP modding is moot because the respective makers of the hardware have already put a "no modding at all" clause into the contracts for their online services. The PC community is then the only place where this would become an issue. The EULA would then give the company the right to do whatever the EULA said they were going to do in the event you were found to be modding.

Back to your example though. The companies that sell physical goods don't have to worry about the same problem as a company that sells IP. The best metaphor I can think of is a car dealership. The dealership doesn't make me sign a contract saying I won?t do something illegal because it does not affect them if I do. The cops will arrest me and the dealership already has its money. Whereas IP can be distributed to the entire world for the cost of one copy.

The solve media thing thinks I have rambled on long enough and told me to "whoa there". I will comply.

 

[Savagezion]

Why is it that in some industries it seems the norm and quite accepted for companies to at the very least have contempt for, but often pretty much straight out dislike or hate their customers openly?

Because the consumers actually support the action.

Companies play the "victim" card and point to consumers... First, allow me to point out that the problem a company faces is never "consumers" fault. The point of a business is to supply a demand in the market. If consumers do not meet your supply, then that isn't their fault, oits your fault for not fulfilling a demand.

Again, Companies play the "victim" card and point to consumers as the problem. People like whipping boys to make a big deal out of such things, so they end up lashing out at fellow consumers and siding with the company on false pretenses. They have so many consumers "eating out of the palm of their hands", "thinking their shit don't stink" and "complaining while voluntarily taking it up the butt" that it doesn't matter if they irritate a few people. The general consensus among gaming consumers who don't like it is "What can we do about it? Even if I don't buy it others will." Because those who support it aren't sympathetic to fellow consumers but to the "victim" company. "It doesn't effect me, so I think its a great idea."

Tah-dah, companies who have a thumbs up by their consumers for hating their consumers, its like magic isn't it?

 

[Valanthe]

Do you sell physical goods or intellectual property (IP)? Let me clarify some things. First, for the duration of this post even a physical copy of a game will be considered IP. Second, when I address "consoles" I am really saying X-Box 360 and PS3.


The big difference, and I'm not saying it is right or wrong, is that we only buy a license to use the software (game). It is because of this loop hole that publishers are allowed to make us (the consumers) sign a EULA, or the equivalent of, and have any legality at all. Both of these steps make sense on paper as a way to protect the IP from reverse engineering and simple pirating. On consoles the issue of SP modding is moot because the respective makers of the hardware have already put a "no modding at all" clause into the contracts for their online services. The PC community is then the only place where this would become an issue. The EULA would then give the company the right to do whatever the EULA said they were going to do in the event you were found to be modding.

Back to your example though. The companies that sell physical goods don't have to worry about the same problem as a company that sells IP. The best metaphor I can think of is a car dealership. The dealership doesn't make me sign a contract saying I won?t do something illegal because it does not affect them if I do. The cops will arrest me and the dealership already has its money. Whereas IP can be distributed to the entire world for the cost of one copy.

The solve media thing thinks I have rambled on long enough and told me to "whoa there". I will comply.

You see the issue with your example is in your analogy, the example provided by the OP would be the same as taking that car and swapping out parts and modifying it to suit your needs. That is what people are doing to the Singleplayer portion of Mass Effect 3, They are modifying it to suit their needs, they are not redistributing it, they are not hacking the multiplayer to give themselves an unfair advantage (some of them do, but that is not the topic under discussion) and they are -not- damaging the company, or their IP in -any- way shape or form. Unless you would agree with having your car repossesses, and being blacklisted from purchasing or driving another vehicle of that brand for adding some after market parts to it, I cannot figure how you could support it.

And actually the EULA is a piece of trash I simply cannot for the life of me wrap my head around, if a car company made you sign a waiver stating that you would under no circumstances tamper with your vehicle in any way, or if they tried to say "we have the right to reposses your vehicle at any moment with or without warning or reason" -every- single person (or at least the moderately intelligent ones) would flip that company the bird and they would go under. So how is it that a software company is allowed to do -exactly- that, when you buy their product (a disc, inside a box) and get away with it scott free?


As for the original question, I work in retail, and if I ever treated my customers the way big game companies treat theirs, I'd have my arse fired in under a week. I may be cynical and jaded about my customers (comes with the experience, unfortunately) but I would -never- blame them for draconian policies, I would never brush them off and never ever ever would I not only refuse to discuss their complaint, but threaten to take their purchase away if they tried to continue said discussion. To do any of these would be career suicide, and based on my knowledge of how customers react when they don't get their way, I doubt I'd walk away from doing that in one piece.

 

[viranimus]

Sometimes... Hating your customers can actually work in your favor.

See "Dicks"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick%27s_Last_Resort

Dick's Last Resort auditions entertainers to provide the loud and crazy atmosphere while still delivering great cuisine. servers .[2] In addition to the staff, the decor is considered to be "wacky".[6] Patrons of Dick's are expected to be insulted, or placed in uncomfortable situations. Adult bibs and large, fun, hand-made, paper hats are given to diners to wear during their stay.[7] While there are no napkins on the tables, they are generally thrown directly at the customers by the serving staff.[8]

 

[Something Amyss]

White Wolf is big business because of it.

>.>

But seriously, it's fine to hate your customers. It's just...Bad business to let that show, or even to appear to. I don't think Ubisoft are TRYING to be dicks, but being perceived as such is just as bad.

 

[General BrEeZy]

the only customer i've been uppidy with in any way at all was the one that said "they need to get someone who knows what they're doing out here" when i work at a paint company that has SO MUCH EFFING STUFF TO LEARN ABOUT that i've only hit the tip of the iceberg on, considering that I have to learn how to do computer work, paperwork, product knowledge, occasionally, IN-BETWEEN filling orders for Contractors and other fun people during the busy-season.
Yeah, it'd take at least a few years to be semi-efficient at everything. and I even told the guy that there's just so much to learn, but I'll get there, and I'll certainly get the assistance of my supervisors, but no, he had to be a fart about it.

/rant

sorry about that lol

otherwise, i just wish i didn't have to troubleshoot peoples problems and questions. I can almost never answer them. that's why i don't wanna work there too much longer.

 

[Balimaar]

You know, without fail, it seems to be that the only people who have issues with EA and Ubisoft are PC gamers. I know this sounds like flamebait, but every time I see one of these Fuck EA or Down with Ubisoft type of threads, I always have to think back as to what EA or Ubisoft Xbox game has ever made me disappointed or angry at the game industry, and I can't really seem to find out.

I'm not a PC gamer and I don't like EA. Come on dude, you knew that was potential flamebait. You said it yourself.

That unfortunately proves nothing . And i always find it funny that people always use that argument to disprove something. " well i'm an expetion so you must be wrong".

Dude. The guy said the ONLY people who are hating on EA and Ubisoft are PC gamers.

That says all console players are fine with it. The responder states he is not a PC gamer and hates EA. Therefore, the original statement is incorrect