Jimquisition: Gamer Entitlement

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
uanime5 said:
People get annoyed because these reviews affect their decision to buy certain games. They get especially annoyed when a review caused them to spend a lot of money on a bad game.
Again, that's pretty weak. There are multiple reviewers out there, and review aggregation sites.

In any case, a review can't cause you to buy a game - that's your own personal decision. And if a game is "a lot of money" - then maybe you shouldn't be buying games? They are, after all, a luxury product that's totally discretionary.

I can see being disappointed in a game, but being angry about it just doesn't seem rational. If a game is enough to make you angry, then you might be better off either looking elsewhere for entertainment, or looking into anger management sessions.
 

CardinalPiggles

New member
Jun 24, 2010
3,226
0
0
This episode really stood out for me. I'm really glad to see Jim looking at both sides of the coin for any particular topic.

It goes both ways, sometimes gamers blow things way out of proportion and sometimes companies deserve to be called out for their bullshit.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
By and large, nicely put, Jim.

One item, though, where I feel a need to make a distinction. If you're threatening a reviewer (or a game writer, or a programmer, or... whatever), that's just loathsome behavior, straight up. Don't do it.

But I do think there's some leeway where criticizing a reviewer's stance, even if it might seem to an outsider that you're attacking a reviewer for not having the same view as you do, might not be "entitled" behavior. A professional reviewer is, after all, allegedly doing a job- that job being to provide an informed opinion on a product, an opinion preferably informed and well-supported enough that it can help the consumer in putting together their own opinion and off of that make a choice as to whether the product is right for them.

If the reviewer simply fails to note features or facets that strongly influenced the customer's final opinion on the product, I think they have some right to be aggrieved about that, to feel perhaps that the reviewer hasn't done a very good job. Now as Jim says of the whole, this isn't an absolute; it's possible the customer is getting bent out of shape because the uniforms don't absolutely match the uniforms in the previous episode of the series, or the network play takes a few extra seconds to connect to the servers, or some other niggling point that for them makes the game a "0/10!!!!!!!!" but for the reviewer, and most people who play the game, simply went under the radar because it wasn't that important. But it's also possible the reviewer never played the multiplayer, or wasn't aware that the creators made promises that went unfulfilled, or didn't give heed to a widely-reported bug because they were one of the lucky few who never encountered it. Perhaps that isn't reason to try to destroy them and their career (mistakes happen, we're all human, etc.), but I'm not prone to say it shouldn't be "called out".
 

step1999

New member
Mar 11, 2010
91
0
0
uanime5 said:
Jim is wrong when he claims that criticizing the opinions of game critics is being entitled. If a critic claims a game is the "game of the year" but it turns out that this game is awful then anyone who relied on the critics appraisal has every right to criticize the critic for providing such a misleading review. This is especially true when the critics are paid to review a game on behalf of their audience, since they're not doing their job properly. Examples of this are reviews of games such as Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2, and Spore where the majority of critics praised these games but the majority of people who bought these games hated them. These gamers aren't being entitled for criticizing the critics, they're just annoyed that the critics didn't do their job.

Finally it's not being entitled to point out that Anita's arguments are heavily skewed rather than informative and that due to their inaccuracies these videos adding nothing to a debate.
Unless it's literally unplayable (Game Tycoon 1.5 coming out with no .exe) no game is ever objectively awful. It's a matter of opinion, and if the critic believes that that's the GOTY then he should be allowed to say so. If it's different (i.e. they don't think it's goty and are being paid by the devs/publisher to say so) then you can criticize. (although I think in that situation the devs/publisher should get most of the blame)
 

Silly Hats

New member
Dec 26, 2012
188
0
0
I just... *sigh*

I find it so strange that games are just treated and viewed as 'products' by the gaming community - rather than embraced like in the forms of other creative media like Music/Art/Movies. Games are just 3d generated artworks with a narrative infused for entertainment. In no way would it ever be acceptable to start slandering record companies like 'EMI' or 'Roadrunner' like what the gaming community has done. Like with anything on the internet, people will always feel the need to justify their own little opinions and interests and whether or not they like a game becomes way more significant than it needs to be. Constructive Criticisms is valid, just don't confuse it as as 'customer's always right'. They aren't. The Internet does amplify negativity and when it carries more volume then more people start noticing which only just inspires Bandwagoning.

Just stop putting way too much weight on things unnecessarily. I can't wait until I stop hearing about EA or Activision, I just don't care anymore and it doesn't make you an expert of the Industry.
 

StriderShinryu

New member
Dec 8, 2009
4,987
0
0
step1999 said:
uanime5 said:
Jim is wrong when he claims that criticizing the opinions of game critics is being entitled. If a critic claims a game is the "game of the year" but it turns out that this game is awful then anyone who relied on the critics appraisal has every right to criticize the critic for providing such a misleading review. This is especially true when the critics are paid to review a game on behalf of their audience, since they're not doing their job properly. Examples of this are reviews of games such as Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2, and Spore where the majority of critics praised these games but the majority of people who bought these games hated them. These gamers aren't being entitled for criticizing the critics, they're just annoyed that the critics didn't do their job.

Finally it's not being entitled to point out that Anita's arguments are heavily skewed rather than informative and that due to their inaccuracies these videos adding nothing to a debate.
Unless it's literally unplayable (Game Tycoon 1.5 coming out with no .exe) no game is ever objectively awful. It's a matter of opinion, and if the critic believes that that's the GOTY then he should be allowed to say so. If it's different (i.e. they don't think it's goty and are being paid by the devs/publisher to say so) then you can criticize. (although I think in that situation the devs/publisher should get most of the blame)
Bingo.

I'm really not sure exactly when or where "I don't like this" started becoming the same as "It's bad" amongst gamers. If you find that you don't agree with a reviewer on something, then 99.9% of the time it's just you not sharing their opinion. If you buy something based on someone else's opinion and don't like it, that's not their fault, that's yours for not doing more research of your own. If you somehow find yourself always disagreeing with every reviewer then maybe you should stop trusting professional reviews as a whole and wait for the game to release so you can gauge player opinion.
 

Wulfram77

New member
Dec 8, 2013
43
0
0
If critics work is uncriticizable, then that can only imply that it's impossible to be either good or bad. And thus there's no reason to employ any critics, since they can just link to a random metacritic user review and get something of equal worth.

But of course that's not true. Critics should deliver interesting reviews that help the consumer decide whether to purchase something, and if they fail at that they should be criticised.
 

The Apple BOOM

New member
Nov 16, 2012
169
0
0
Goliath100 said:
The Apple BOOM said:
The Radical Republicans were an extreme because they believed people of all races should have equal rights and everyone who tried to unlawfully take those rights away should be punished
Sorry, that is not an extreme because of the use of word; "unlawfully".
See, you'd think that, but read up on them. They were considered extremists, and many thought of their ideas as ridiculous.
 

Grace_Omega

New member
Dec 7, 2013
120
0
0
Stavros Dimou said:
It's happening everywhere.
PERFECT DARK ZERO played nothing like PERFECT DARK.
DUKE NUKEM FOREVER played nothing like DUKE NUKEM 3D
WOLFENSTEIN 2009 played nothing like RETURN TO CASTLE WOLFENSTEIN
DUNGEON KEEPER MOBILE plays nothing like DUNGEON KEEPER 1,2
PREY 2 looked nothing like PREY 1
And the list goes on...
OCARINA OF TIME played nothing like A LINK TO THE PAST*
METROID PRIME played nothing like SUPER METROID*
MARIO 64 played nothing like SUPER MARIO WORLD
GOLDENEYE played nothing like WHATEVER CRAPPY JAMES BOND GAMES CAME OUT BEFORE IT
RESIDENT EVIL 4 played nothing like EVERY PREVIOUS RESIDENT EVIL

Franchises and series have to depart from their roots, otherwise those properties become stagnant. Many of the most acclaimed games of the modern era came about because developers weren't afraid to step out of the shadow of the past and do something different. We would never have gotten Mario 64 if Nintendo listened to opinions like this. And sometimes updating a classic franchise goes horribly wrong- believe me, I'm a Silent Hill fan, I know all about that. But people still have to try.

If they didn't we'd just get an endless cycle of the same thing over and over again, with slight variations in story and gameplay. Not only would customers get bored with this eventually, the developers themselves would get tired of making them. That's something a lot of people often seem to forget, just because you want something doesn't mean developers have to make it.

Hell, in at least two of these examples you're making comparisons with games that came out well over a decade ago. I would hope a modern incarnation of a franchise wouldn't play much like something that came out when PCs were still using floppy drives.

There's only one real criticism you can lay at the feet of all of those games you listed: they're all terrible. And they're terribly because they're *bad games*, not because

*(Some people are probably going to take issue with a few of these, and while it's true that OoT and Metroid Prime held onto a lot of gameplay structures from their 2D predecessors, there were enough changes made that the experience of playing them still felt very different)
 

Nixou

New member
Jan 20, 2014
196
0
0
I disagree with Jim's stance about the "Game companies are businesses" argument. When I, for one, say "X is a business", what I mean is not "Shut up and be grateful to these Hallowed Jobs Creators"; what I mean is "You should never expect a for-profit company to do the right thing without strong outside pressure".

Semantics aside, there's a seldom mentioned effect on hardcore gamers entitlement: how often it translates into misaimed complaints and outrage.

For instance:
How the Mass Effect series caught a lot of hate for giving an ending that did not pander to its audience power fantasies, yet few complained about the staggering number of glitches and bugs in the PS3 versions, or about the level design becoming increasingly simplistic and CoDesque as the series progressed.

Or
How Nintendo has been under constant fire for refusing to suicidally re-enter the hardware arms race, but received virtually no criticism for remaining understaffed even said understaffing led them to release a new console running on an unfinished OS

When one is presenting peccadillos, or worse, deliberate choices in design as unforgivable blunder to the point of completely ignoring much larger problems, it's very likely that one is indeed indulging in entitlement.

***

I've never seen anyone mention the entitlement issue ever since the ME3 crisis. It pretty much went away a few weeks after the extended cut.

The thing about Mass Effect 3's ending was that there were actually two very distinct groups of complainers:
One disliked the ending because it was in their view too short and not detailed enough. After over a hundred hours of game, they wished and expected for something akin to FF6's ending.
The second group despised the ending because they wanted a triumphalist conclusion [http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2012/03/16] to their power fantasy.
One group was providing legitimate criticism, the other one was indeed a bunch of entitled manchildren pissed because their collective masturbatory power-fantasy about being an invincible Space Marine was pretty much shattered when Harbinger crippled Shepard at the end, and this group was waaaaaaay more noisy than the rest, to the point were an outside observer could be forgiven if she concluded that the second group was the only one to exist.

Thankfully, the extended cut gave a more satisfactory conclusion to the first group while giving a resounding Fuck You Very Much to the second group in the form of the fourth ending. This affair ended miraculously well because Bioware managed to address the thoughtful complains without caving to the whims of the vociferous entitled group and pulling an I Am Legend.
 

Nieroshai

New member
Aug 20, 2009
2,940
0
0
00slash00 said:
A world where I can say that I love the Fina Fantasy 13 series and that I was satisfied with the Mass Effect 3 ending, without being attacked? Do I dare to dream?
Let's go claim an uncharted island and populate it with our favorite maligned treasures. I swear, so often in the gaming community, I get maligned like a leper for liking unpopular games. Hell, I always felt like the ME3 endings had several important points to make, and even the game as a whole. For starters, sometimes the universe doesn't give a damn if you don't want something to happen. You aren't God, and happy or sad endings to a journey aren't always based on whether or not you deserve them. Even so, every choice ou made in the series ever has colored your choice in the final events. Why would you banish the Reapers instead of destroying them and all AI with them? Why would you choose synthesis? Is it not because you were led here, from the very moment you touched the Beacon; to be the Shepard who sacrifices him/herself to ensure the flock can be saved?
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
My thought to this use of "entitled" as an insult has always been "Yes, I am entitled. When I hand over $60 for a product, I'm entitled to a quality product. And if a company doesn't want to provide a quality product, they are NOT entitled to my money. I'll spend it elsewhere."

So yes, go ahead and call me entitled because I don't accept the way Rockstar launched GTA V. Call me entitled because I won't pay $40 for the good version of Metal Gear Solid Ground Zeroes. Call me entitled because I won't pay $500 for an Xbox One, which is $100 more than it's more powerful competitor because MS focused on a fancy camera instead of horsepower. Call me entitled because I won't buy digital stuff over a certain price point from Nintendo because they tie digital purchases to the hardware instead of to the Nintendo Network account you can have on both 3DS and Wii U now.

Go ahead because I am entitled god dammit. I bust my ass to earn my money, and these companies had better damn well bust their asses in kind if they want any of it. If I was as lazy and half-assed things as much as these game publishers and platform holders do, I'd get fired so they could hire somebody better to take my place. So why should I just hand over my money for something that's half-assed and not up to snuff?

It's publishers who need to stop acting so entitled, not the gaming consumers. Stop acting so entitled to our money and start fucking earning our money with quality products and services.

Nixou said:
Semantics aside, there's a seldom mentioned effect on hardcore gamers entitlement: how often it translates into misaimed complaints and outrage.

For instance:
How the Mass Effect series caught a lot of hate for giving an ending that did not pander to its audience power fantasies, yet few complained about the staggering number of glitches and bugs in the PS3 versions, or about the level design becoming increasingly simplistic and CoDesque as the series progressed.

Or
How Nintendo has been under constant fire for refusing to suicidally re-enter the hardware arms race, but received virtually no criticism for remaining understaffed even said understaffing led them to release a new console running on an unfinished OS
I've seen both of those criticized before. In fact, I've criticized Mass Effect myself for that very thing: turning into more and more a generic third person shooter, complete with crappy cover and dodge mechanics that don't work well because they map too much stuff to one button. And even if people don't realize it, when they complain about Wii U not having enough games, they're effectively complaining about Nintendo's poor staffing and preparation for HD game development. It's cause and effect. Most people are complaining about the effect, either because they don't know or care what the cause is.

Also, I could point out how you in turn singled out Nintendo for releasing a console with an unfinished OS but conveniently ignored that the PS4 and Xbone did the same thing. I'm actually quite pissed that Sony still hasn't made good on their promise to remove HDCP from the PS4, and I'm flabbergasted that Microsoft just released a firmware update to add hard drive management and a controller battery indicator to the Xbone. This kind of thing SHOULD be unnacceptable. Gamers should be riding Sony and Microsoft (and not in a good way) for this bullshit. Instead, gamers give Sony blowjobs for their latest firmware update which only added the ability for Sony to sell more of their own brand of headsets and forgive Xbone all its shortcomings because OMG TITANFALL IS COMING NEXT MONTH. I mean I know not everyone will care about HDCP as much as someone like me would, but how the fuck did Microsoft get away with not having the ability to manage your hard drive space on day one. Where was the outrage and cupcakes on that one?! >_<
 

BrainBlow

New member
Jan 31, 2013
17
0
0
00slash00 said:
A world where I can say that I love the Fina Fantasy 13 series and that I was satisfied with the Mass Effect 3 ending, without being attacked? Do I dare to dream?
What, someone put a gun to your head when you did? You want complete freedom from having your opinions criticized?
 

loa

New member
Jan 28, 2012
1,716
0
0
"Entitled" is not interchangeable with "bratty and childish".
It is a word that has neither positive nor negative connotation and must be put in context "stop acting like you're entitled to X".
"You're entitled" literally means absolutely nothing.
You always need to be entitled to something, just being "entitled" means about as much as being "searching" or "wanting".

I am puzzled how many people latched onto it as some sort of negative connotation and it is ironic how you call for a stop of the bastardization of this buzzword and then proceed to perpetuate it and stretch if even further by somehow suggesting that people attacking people for their opinions somehow falls under the ever expanding umbrella of "being entitled" which, at some point, will just be synonymous for "bad".

It boggles my mind.
 

Karadalis

New member
Apr 26, 2011
1,065
0
0
Right.. Anita is the only one whos allowed to post her opinions as fact and shut down any discussion by simply not allowing it and never ever answering her critics who bring up valid points...

Once again the Jesus Anita syndrome at work. Shes allowed to do what other people are being told off for on jimquisition as if she was an untouchable defender of justice when in truth she causes more damage for her cause then she does good.

For the rest thought i totaly agree. Hating Players of games you dont like is stupid since it really has no effect on you personaly. Yes its annyoing that everyone wanted to jump onto the CoD train but it certainly didnt stop the attempt of a comeback of the Space sim genre for example (star citizen) or the turn based strategy game genre (Warlock 2 and Age of wonders 3.. cant wait for the latter one)

Same for hating on "game journalists" when they simply enjoy a game. Thought there is a case to be made for reviews.. like a certain dragon age 2 review that gave perfect score totaly ignoring the glaring and kinda obvious issues with the game. You will have to accept that people call you out on your opinon and dispute it, if youre not prepared for that then what are you doing on the internet? BUT outright insulting and name calling goes way to far.

As for entitlement... if i pay up to 60 dollars i am well entitled to get the product as advertised including advertised features (looking at you ME3) simply as that. Just like any other industry out there.. the software industry is no special little flower like everyone makes it out to be. The only special rules are in copyrights and nothing else.
 

00slash00

New member
Dec 29, 2009
2,321
0
0
BrainBlow said:
00slash00 said:
A world where I can say that I love the Fina Fantasy 13 series and that I was satisfied with the Mass Effect 3 ending, without being attacked? Do I dare to dream?
What, someone put a gun to your head when you did? You want complete freedom from having your opinions criticized?
If by that you mean do I want to be free say I like a video game without people insulting me and then trying to convince me that my opinion is incorrect, then yes. Yes I do
 

Evonisia

Your sinner, in secret
Jun 24, 2013
3,257
0
0
I find that most people who attack other people for having counter opinions are just being dick heads. I know because I often fall into that trap (though attempts are being made to stop that). I see your point, though.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Karadalis said:
Right.. Anita is the only one whos allowed to post her opinions as fact and shut down any discussion by simply not allowing it and never ever answering her critics who bring up valid points...

Once again the Jesus Anita syndrome at work. Shes allowed to do what other people are being told off for on jimquisition as if she was an untouchable defender of justice when in truth she causes more damage for her cause then she does good.
The problem with the whole mess is that people can't just disagree with her. I disagree with her on a lot of points. But people, this website included, can't just disagree with her and stop there. They have to attack everything about her, the fact that she's wearing make up, the fact that years ago she said something that means we don't have to take anything she says seriously. Jim doesn't think that Anita is Jesus, I don't think that she's Jesus, but people are reacting to her so violently and viciously that people feel obligated to call out the abuse when they see it. Go ahead and disagree with her points, just argue with a logical and level head and attack her points, not her.
 

Villain Protagonist

New member
Feb 3, 2013
28
0
0
Country
U.S.A.
xPixelatedx said:
Jim, can you really blame people for being mad at the near perfect reviews for games like Mass Effect 3? I know you keep defending other game journalists, and keep saying there is no way anyone is giving anything but their honest opinion and they can have any opinion they want. The latter is most definitely true, but do you really blame people for not believing the former? The reason why I am using Mass Effect 3 is because that thing got pretty high reviews and good praise, while simultaneously being one of the most reviled and hated games ever made. The fallout was so bad the better business bureau was involved and certain places were offering full refunds for the game; even if it had been played. I've never even seen that before...

People were upset at the reviews, and yeah some people acted like spoiled brats and demanded they be changed. That I don't agree with, I'm with you there. People can have their stupid opinions, thats fine, but I don't think other people have to swallow BS either. I have no doubt Mass Effect 3 was potentially a good game for some people, maybe even great to others... but 90/100s, 100/100s, 9/10s and 10/10s!? Jim, are you telling me the kind of game that would create as much negative feedback as ME3 did is deserving of those scores? If a game that badly received is deserving of 10s and inane praise, then we might as well do away with game reviews all together, because there is no longer a use for them. That's why people are upset, this is a confirmation that A:'We are being bullshitted by people being paid to praise things', or B:The rating systems are so bizarre they don't even make any logical sense anymore, so they cannot be used for or applied to purchases of average consumers in any way'.
I agree. I think reasonable points like this too often get lost in the constant back and forth between the two extreme sides. Even, no especially, on the internet, discusion gets drowned out by those way too invested in proving the otherside not only wrong but intellectually or morally inferior to them based on one disagreement. No one can see anyone elses view point it's all just a massive pissing contest.