Jimquisition: Joy Begets Anger

[spartandude]

There have only been 1 or 2 videos that ive disagreed with our good friend Mr Stirling and this is one of them. I will agree that we do need to conduct ourselves better and that the attacks on Jim arnt justified however people are perfectly entitled to get pissed off or annoyed when a review disagrees with them. Especially when he says that he understands that people get annoyed when a reviewer trashes a game they liked, well then you should understand why people get annoyed when someone likes a game they didnt. Its a two way street.

Take for example the Mass Effect 3 ....uhhh example he brought up. I get that people loved ME3 (some all the way through) even though i personally hated the game (nearly all the way through) but i do find it annoying that reviewers praised it to heaven and back, especially since almost NONE of them mentioned the ending was shit except for angry joe. So consumers get annoyed when there is a huge issue which almost none of the reviewers mention. And while its possible that the vast mejority of reviewers liked the ending, it does show that there might be a problem if the vast majority of reviewers are at odds with the vast majority of consumers they are advising.

Also lets take Dragon Age 2, i was unsure about this game when it first came out, but with lots of good reviews and and absolutely glowing recommendation from the Escapist I decided to pick it up. Yep thats money and time im never getting back. Again I get that other people liked it, but I'm pissed off that these reviewers just gave the game such positive scores and mentioned only one or two of its shortcomings (or failed to see what other people wouldnt like) and even passed off these weaknesses as just meh.

Long story short, We have every right to get annoyed, we just need to learn some manners while we do it.

 

[Toadfish1]

This goes back to the 70's, I think, probably a lot earlier. I remember reading about how Roger Ebert once described people who liked a movie he didn't like as diseased sex criminals.

...why did any of us care what this guy thought of games, again?

 

[Bruce]

I disagree - kind of.

The thing with a negative review is that if you don't buy a game because of the negative review, you're missing out but it doesn't really cost you anything.

If on the other hand you buy a game based on a positive review and it sucks - then you have lost out on both the money the game cost you, and the time it took you to play it hoping it got better.

I think a lot of the rage against reviewers who review positively is more understandable than reviewers who do so negatively, because there is that feeling of being cheated, particularly when you consider the suspicion a lot of gamers have of advertisers buying scores.

People haven't really forgotten what happened to Gerstman, and gaming journalism has always had a bit of a PR-ish edge to it.

This is why I find positive reviews more difficult than negative ones - you have to convey both what you think of a game, and what it essentially is in a way that the audience finds useful, and that includes the stuff that they can find off putting.

Which is pretty hard to do in 300 words or less.

 

[PunkRex]

I like my reveiwers/critics/internet talkie people to be themselves.

I don't expect to like EVERYTHING they do or vise versa, this need for confirmation in ones own tastes is perfetic. I like discussion and debate, having someone agree with everything I say isn't even close... thats just boring.

 

[Erttheking]

People shitting on other people for not liking the same shit has been around since gaming started. You're now just realizing this after all these years.

If he just noticed it, how come he used examples from over a year ago? Why did he say it happened to him all the time and cited a game that was released at the start of 2013? Just because he chose to talk about it now, doesn't mean he was ignorant about it until now.

 

[veloper]

To understand this thing, consider the following.

When you have a comments section for people to comment on a review, people who thought the review is poor instead of good, may also comment.

Some people mistake the use of strong language for real anger, when it usually isn't. It's just a strategy for many posters who want to stand out and not sound too dull or ambivalent. Confusing the tone of a post is an easy mistake to make though.

Also consider that the audience often does expect MORE than just an entertaining piece (ZP may be the usual exception).
What those negative posts are usually NOT about, is whether the reviewer is allowed to like or dislike a game. The intended message is usually about the reviewer not being critical enough, or worse, being suspected of not being entirely honest or fair.

The question of why does game X receive a good score and game Y a bad score, often comes up after the gamer perceives a change in the criteria applied between reviews, so for example one game gets bashed for bugs or for the heavy use of QTEs and for the next game, the bugs and QTEs barely even get a mention.
Some players may get annoyed by this, while for other players, their comment is only intended to be their different take on the game review, only the really short version, where the reader is assumed to already know all the unsaid bits.

Now you know.

 

[xPixelatedx]

I like you acknowledge the fact that people fear and hate others liking CoD because they don't want more CoDs being made... but then go on to say that has no negative effect? Uh... what!? And I think this comes down to the point you aren't getting Jim, the reason why people are upset when things like CoD and movie-games like 'The Last of Us' get high praise. CoD has been more a real, tangible detriment to the industry then any day one DLC, always online or poor consumer relations travesty you've personally complained about. Developers PUBLICLY say "We want the CoD audience". That's because CoD sells, thats because people like CoD. So of course people are going to get upset at you for liking it, in their eyes, you've identified yourself as part of the problem, as part of the reason why some of their beloved franchises have been digested and turned into brown excrement. Your excuses to "pardon" the consumers was flimsy at best, and I think you are going to have to find more evidence why consumers are completely off the hook in this if you want to convince more people.
As it is now, gamers have started to grasp that companies are just companies, here to make money, and they go where the money takes them. This isn't the 90s/20s anymore, no one in 'the industry' (outside of indi) is doing this out of passion anymore. The industry is too big and formal a place now, and too much money is at stake. People have lifted nearly all responsibility off these companies and developers and instead targeted their rage at the individuals directly influencing the decisions of the people who make our games. The idea is: "You like bad things, and thats why we can't have nice things". That's the mindset of the people who rage at others just for their preferences. Sadly, they aren't entierly wrong. Just look at the games that sold last gen, and look at the majority of AAA games now as we enter the new gen. While shitty companies like EA are to blame, so are the shitty people loving and buying their crap. They're the reason why EA still exists and is doing this now, so of course there is plenty of rage to go around.

 

[CitySquirrel]

Yep thats money and time im never getting back. Again I get that other people liked it, but I'm pissed off that these reviewers just gave the game such positive scores and mentioned only one or two of its shortcomings (or failed to see what other people wouldnt like) and even passed off these weaknesses as just meh.

I'm not trying to pick on you here but this is pretty much a widespread issue. Why do people believe that they are somehow owed a good experience? I get that games are expensive but the reaction of anger can only come from a belief that you somehow deserve to not be exposed to something you dislike. You had an experience, you did not like it, you moved on. Imagine going through life being angry at every meal you eat that you don't enjoy, every book you don't like, etc. And worse, being angry at the people who do like them. That is what is basically happening here.

 

[BrownGaijin]

I agree that it's a new thing in video games (or at least it's been growing at an unusual rate), but I think in other forms of media it's taken a good hold for a while. I remember going to YouTube channels featuring rock music and people just out and saying "You like Jus", oh wait make I get this right (clears throat), "YU LEIK JUSTIN PEEBER YO A (insert derogatory gay thing here) DIS IS REEEL MUSIC! SO FUK YU ALL HIP HOP RAP (insert derogatory gay thing here.)"

Does this mean that this behavior is okay? No. It's not.

 

[synobal]

Truth Jim, I've had the most awful things said to me/about me because I said I liked Mass Effect 3 including the ending.

 

[J Tyran]

Brilliant, this needed to be said. Jim didn't just say it though he dropped the hammer, I hope this trend dies away but my faith in the gaming community is at an all time low and I can only see this continuing.

 

[GonzoGamer]

Nowadays, you can't even be happy without it pissing someone off, and it's a damn sad time for all.

I usually don't like to reply directly but you have a legitimate question you deserve an answer for. I personally prefer a reviewer to underrate something than overrate something. Just before I started renting games, I spent $50 on No More Heroes because everyone (even Yhatzee, who is usually a strong critic) was saying it was practically the best thing on the Wii. After playing a few minigames based on jobs so boring we usually give them to immigrants, I felt like I had been tricked. Like some snake oil salesman got me to buy his tonic by getting Gary Null to lift a cart after drinking it in front of me.
That's my reason but I feel that it pertains to poorly put together games that get rave reviews and that seems to happen most at the beginning of a console cycle. If it's a well made game with a lot of good content (like any Zelda game I've played; doesn't include the controversial one you mentioned), then there's no reason for it other than it's "cool" to some people to hate things that are popular...or, yea, envy. I guess I envied the people who got enjoyment out of No More Heroes but only because they didn't feel like they wasted $50.

And thanks for giving me a reason to want a Vita; Tearaway looks like the trippiest thing since the invention of the Katamari.

 

[Bruce]

Yep thats money and time im never getting back. Again I get that other people liked it, but I'm pissed off that these reviewers just gave the game such positive scores and mentioned only one or two of its shortcomings (or failed to see what other people wouldnt like) and even passed off these weaknesses as just meh.

I'm not trying to pick on you here but this is pretty much a widespread issue. Why do people believe that they are somehow owed a good experience?

Because that is what you're paying for. If you didn't think it would give you a good experience, you wouldn't buy it.

To use your food analogy - if you go to a restaurant and the food sucks, you're going to feel annoyed. Particularly if it got glowing reviews.

In fact you may, as a lot of people do, go online and complain about it to a more general audience in order to warn others away from it.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

...sheeple...

Spoiler: Shhh! Do not say that word so loud. D: They'll wake up.

[https://imageshack.com/i/17wakeupsheeple211p]

Anyway, I got to agree with what you said first.
It seems no matter what people in the games industry do, right or wrong, there's always a group of people getting mad at them for something or another.

I cannot believe that this is actually a thing. I think "idiot" is being far too kind to people like that.

I don't know if this thing is really all that new, but it does pop up quite a lot. Especially recently with all the lists being made.

What surprised me though was that Jim has people being bigger jerks to him over positive reviews than negative ones.
Didn't see that coming.
Shame it was not just from "fans", but also Jim's peers.
:/ Kind of a bummer.

 

[Casual Shinji]

snip

Because God forbid people genuinely like these games. After all, how can anyone like something that doesn't reinvent the wheel, or is aimed at the lowest common denominator?

 

[Trishbot]

My only "anger" at positive reviews is when a review, like the Dragon Age II review here, unabashedly praises the game but fails to mention most, or even any, of the problems included in the game itself.

It's the same thing where, for instance, reviews came out for the new Forza and Gran Turismo and several didn't bother informing players that there was less content than before and a gross number of microtransactions in their place. Didn't even get a single mention from many major reviewers, and that's stuff WE WANT TO SEE MENTIONED before we make a purchase.

It's hard to be an informed buyer when reviewers fail to include both the good, and the bad, in equal measure. Give a game a perfect 10/10 if you want... but don't tell me it's a flawless game with absolutely no negative qualities whatsoever.

That mindset made GTA4 the highest rated game on Xbox 360... and, good grief, does that game have problems, to the point it's nowhere near my top 50 games on the system. So, so many bad game design decisions. But you wouldn't know it from reading the reviews.

 

[CitySquirrel]

I'm not trying to pick on you here but this is pretty much a widespread issue. Why do people believe that they are somehow owed a good experience?

Because that is what you're paying for. If you didn't think it would give you a good experience, you wouldn't buy it.

To use your food analogy - if you go to a restaurant and the food sucks, you're going to feel annoyed. Particularly if it got glowing reviews.

In fact you may, as a lot of people do, go online and complain about it to a more general audience in order to warn others away from it.

Except, if it was only the food you didn't like, you wouldn't complain. Anyone who said, in a complaint, "The Lamb and Lentil soup was terrible because I did not like the cilantro" would be considered a complete idiot; you not liking the taste of the dish does not make it a bad dish. I hate seafood, but this does not make people who enjoy seafood inherently crazy. And I won't get angry at them for raving about the fish chowder at the local pub.

Obviously if there is something STRUCTURALLY wrong with the food then there is a difference, e.g. "the food was late", the steak was not cooked the way I requested it", "there was a severed finger in my vegetarian entrée", etc. But you would not get angry at someone who recommended the restaurant, you would assume they had a different experience than you.

And, more to the point, we were not given a certificate at birth stating that we would enjoy everything we experienced. Bad meals / games will happen. Again, why do you feel you deserve never to have a bad experience?

Edit: I forgot to make it clear that a big issue is confusing matters of taste with structural issues. Going back to DA2, I loved it. It is very hard to objectively determine the issues that were structural in nature and the ones that amounted to "I don't like how this tastes."

 

[Acton Hank]

I think I know when this kind of overblown bile started; remember back in 2011 when Dragon Age 2 was released and and got metabombed and everybody was surprised because there was never a such a big difference of opinion between critics and players?

A popular or hyped game getting metabombed seems business as usual now, doesn't it?

It might have stared before this but that was when I first noticed it.

 

[Malisteen]

I rely on reviewers to give me fair, honest review. I bought DA2 after reading the escapist review, and when I was confronted by the overwhelming and very blatant problems with that game, I did not feel that the review I read had been honest about those problems. I don't usually* care about people liking stuff I don't, but I need to get something a bit more than that from a 'review'. Plenty of reviewers have produced reviews that endorse a film or game while still making clear to me reasons why I wouldn't like them, or vice versa.

Not that I've ever felt the urge to post hateful messages or troll forums or comment sections. Being disappointed in a review is no reason to be a dick on the internet. The internet has dicks enough, already.


*On the other hand, there are some games that are just morally repugnant, and when people like those, yeah, it's upsetting. Particularly people I otherwise respect. Again, no reason to be a dick on the internet, and I wouldn't call it 'upsetting', but it does bother me that an individual I otherwise respect like Mr. Sterling would think so highly of, say, Bioshock Infinite. But that's a conversation that's been done to death elsewhere [http://designislaw.tumblr.com/post/70292634713/the-allegiance-of-whiteness-the-games-village-of].

 

[Systemerror]

Obviously if there is something STRUCTURALLY wrong with the food then there is a difference, e.g. "the food was late", the steak was not cooked the way I requested it", "there was a severed finger in my vegetarian entrée", etc. But you would not get angry at someone who recommended the restaurant, you would assume they had a different experience than you.

And, more to the point, we were not given a certificate at birth stating that we would enjoy everything we experienced. Bad meals / games will happen. Again, why do you feel you deserve never to have a bad experience?

I think this is where the analogy fails. In a restaurant, the reviewer gets a different dish than you, so you could have a structurally wrong dish and the reviewer could've had a good one. But a game reviewer playes the exact same game you did, so he should point things out that are objectively wrong with the game. If a reviewer fails to mention that the ending of a game was clearly rushed from a production standpoint(the reuse of color-coded cutscenes in ME3 for example) than you have a right to be angry at the reviewer if you bought the game on his recommendation.

I think a reviewer should say if he gave a game a very positive review because he liked the game instead of it being objectively very good. That would solve the issue.

Everything else was very well said. Even if you wasted money and time on a game because you trusted a reviewer, insulting someone is never gonna help.