Why would you pre order anything without knowing a thing about it? As a consumer, that's one of the worst possible ways to spend your money. Short of giving it to a Nigerian prince who will totally give you $30 billion zillion dollars in return.
Jimquisition: Previewed, Preordered, Prescrewed
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Hit the nail on the head again, Jim. It's repulsive that a game as shit as Colonial Marines is going to wind up making so much money solely because Gearbox SCAMMED so many people into preordering it by LYING to them about the fucking game! If you make a shit game, you deserve to LOSE money, not laugh all the way to the bank by abusing the trust of your customer base! Gearbox can go and fuck themselves.
I understand the your reason but I don't believe that would ever happen, The game can and will be shipped out early but not because of your reason. The people who make the game do not get paid depending on how well the game sells. The producers or company make more money depending on how well the game sells. So yes, the producers could push out the game early if they wanted just the pre-order sales.barbzilla said:
That being said I don't believe that a game will suck because they got lazy because of pre-orders. They game would have sucked weather they got pre-orders or not.
I do realize that games having the option to pre-order like a year in advance could possible lead to what you were talking about but I don't believe that it would ever happen. The game would suck not matter if it was pre-ordered or not. Don't count your chickens before they hatch, is a saying that works here. No company is going to say that they are just happy with the pre-order sales and they don't want to make more money.
I get what you are saying but i don't believe that would ever happen and really Gearbox only has one good game series (Borderlands). Jim said that the company had good will. Really? All I see is a group of people doing knee jerk reaction to one game that sucked. It is like my friends pre-ordering ff13-2 and getting mad at pre-ordering because his game sucked. FF-13 sucked.
I guess I am just really careful with with my pre-orders. The only risk I took was with Halo 4 and I am having lots of fun with it. I guess the lessen is be carful pre-ordering and know it is a risk but the bane of gaming? I didn't think so
Pre ordering itself isn't all bad. They want to know how many people are going to want their game when it releases.
I never understood why you would pre-order unless you're super impatient.
The inevitable upcoming flood of DLC people who buy the "complete edition" of the game later get for free while paying less pretty much guarantees you're getting screwed over.
A donation is what pre-ordering is and I see worthier causes for that than large companies with shitty anti-consumer business practices.
The inevitable upcoming flood of DLC people who buy the "complete edition" of the game later get for free while paying less pretty much guarantees you're getting screwed over.
A donation is what pre-ordering is and I see worthier causes for that than large companies with shitty anti-consumer business practices.
What's funny about all of those things is that if you are not happy with the final "product" you can take your product back for a refund...Aardvaarkman said:
Kickstarter is less like a pre-order and more of an investment, however.
See, the problem is just that. People have begun to interpret Kickstarter as a pre-order hub, when in reality it is merely a more accessible way for the average consumer to become an investor in a product or idea proposed by an entrepreneur. That's why Kickstarter had to revise its terms of service to illicitly state that supporting a Kickstarter is not the same as reserving a copy of the object or service being pitched.Grouchy Imp said:
In that regard, I believe Jim would probably be supportive of crowd funding, though once again, it is an entirely different animal than what the general public has misconstrued it to be. Still, who knows? The man can speak for himself, as I'm sure he will one of these days.
I've pre-ordered a few things over the last two years but honestly, the need for pre-ordering died out years and years ago, back when there wasn't a guarantee that the game you wanted would be there.
Now we have a gajillion different online sources to purchase new games that will ALWAYS be there, hence why they sweeten the deal with numerous bonuses that no one but pre-orders will get.
Overall the practice does need to stop, so I agree with Jim here.
Now we have a gajillion different online sources to purchase new games that will ALWAYS be there, hence why they sweeten the deal with numerous bonuses that no one but pre-orders will get.
Overall the practice does need to stop, so I agree with Jim here.
You can get a refund on games you are not happy with... since when wasn't this the case? How is this different from the food situation?Lord_Jaroh said:
Kickstarter is not an investment. You aren't buying shares in the company. You don't get any royalties or dividends if the project succeeds. I really don't understand what you're trying to say here, because it is doesn't match reality.
You know what, Jim?
You are a journalist (or jarnelist, whatever). You feel lied to, and you were. You know what would be productive? Actually digging and finding out about the breakdown between all the studios involved, informing the audience as to what a "verticle slice" is, and - when pre-orders are involved in any game - instead of complaining that the audience shouldn't be pre-ordering, how about finding out if the game merits it?
Yes, that means asking tough questions and having a legal staff.
You know what though? You have the personality to do it. I believe that you can. You're the guy who managed to piss off MS by saying "Herp Derp" to summarize an MS event.
At the very least, a follow up magazine style piece on the practices of PR and marketing vs. finished and unfinished products. ACM is alreadyout. It's already been panned by critics. You can - and should - find out more. You or Destructoid (I know you're reviews editor, not news editor, so that's out). Because you've made this voice for yourself, you're somewhat immune from PR blacklists, because you're the kind of guy who'd point it out and gamers will rally around you.
You are a journalist (or jarnelist, whatever). You feel lied to, and you were. You know what would be productive? Actually digging and finding out about the breakdown between all the studios involved, informing the audience as to what a "verticle slice" is, and - when pre-orders are involved in any game - instead of complaining that the audience shouldn't be pre-ordering, how about finding out if the game merits it?
Yes, that means asking tough questions and having a legal staff.
You know what though? You have the personality to do it. I believe that you can. You're the guy who managed to piss off MS by saying "Herp Derp" to summarize an MS event.
At the very least, a follow up magazine style piece on the practices of PR and marketing vs. finished and unfinished products. ACM is alreadyout. It's already been panned by critics. You can - and should - find out more. You or Destructoid (I know you're reviews editor, not news editor, so that's out). Because you've made this voice for yourself, you're somewhat immune from PR blacklists, because you're the kind of guy who'd point it out and gamers will rally around you.
Unfortunately, what Jim suggests presents a bit of a conundrum that's bound to trap people forever in infinite cycles of hatred, weariness, joy, then love. Frankly I'm quite amazed this is the same Jim as the one who wrote an article several years ago claiming that customers outside the gaming media cycle were smarter than the ones in it, because they chose games based on what looked fun to them, not because of the developer/publisher's name on the box and not because of any sort of hype surrounding them. Jim's suggestion is for us to trust developer's with proven track records of products. Except that's exactly what happened with A:CM. Jim even says it himself. "You can't trust the people that made Borderlands 2, so who can you trust?" So how are exactly are they supposed to earn your money again?
I'm also not sure what he's bitching about with advertisement. They lied to you Jim? Really? A marketing team over-hyped something, or flat out promised something that wasn't in there? Say it ain't so, Auntie Em. Welcome to every other industry ever. The newest Die Hard trailers also promised me it was gonna be the best valentine's day movie ever; how much you wanna bet on the veracity of that statement. I'm quite worried that gamers just don't seem to understand the relationship of the customer in the subjective world of entertainment, and that they're just now realizing "Gee, maybe we shouldn't just throw money at developers or series we like whenever a new one comes out." YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE THE ONE WHO MAKES THE JUDGMENT CALL ON WHETHER OR NOT TO BUY SOMETHING BECAUSE THE COMPANY HAS NO WAY OF KNOWING IF YOU WILL LIKE IT BEFOREHAND. Companies can't decide for you what you should or shouldn't be buying, and their survival depends on convincing you why you should buy their product over others. Now, in a perfect world, they'd accomplish this by putting out the best product. But, since things like Twilight and Transformers can make all the money ever, we know that that doesn't always work. So they have to promote. They have to hype. Especially these days, since games are more expensive than ever to make. And yes, sometimes gamers fall for the advertisements, sometimes they look at the box and just plain make the wrong choice. Does that mean the company is this evil behemoth that's sucked another victim dry? Of course not, someone looked at the information available to them and made the wrong choice (for themselves).
If everyone picked the right game for themselves all the time (hell if they bought the right anything all the time), than we would be the wisest civilization ever. I watched Mama when it was released. I saw the trailers, and the short film it was based off of. It looked good to me. The trailers promised it would be scary, and it was, right up until the last fifteen minutes or so. That ending sucked. But I didn't write to the directors or the producers calling them distrustful assholes who made me pay for something when I had no idea what the final product was. Why? Because it's impossible for anyone to make a game, movie, story, book, food, furniture, TV, computer, car, toy, song, etc. that everyone will like. And to demand that of them? To demand that they put out something no one will have any complaints over is beyond ridiculous. It would certainly be nice if they did, hell even they want to put out something everyone will like. That's the ultimate goal. But it's a nirvana no one can ever reach.
TL;DR: There are lots of products of which require you to pay first before you can experience them. Food? Can't just start sampling that new cereal in the store. And good luck trying to return two-thirds of a six pack you didn't like. Movies? God, A History of Violence was terrible. Games ain't the first one. So suck it up. If you ever bought a game you didn't like, then you made a mistake. Salvage what you can and move on. You'll be a lot happier for it.
(Also I noticed Jim hid his Assassin's Creed 2 statue, and the Skyrim dragon statue; things which either came with pre-orders, or collector's editions which are even worse)
I'm also not sure what he's bitching about with advertisement. They lied to you Jim? Really? A marketing team over-hyped something, or flat out promised something that wasn't in there? Say it ain't so, Auntie Em. Welcome to every other industry ever. The newest Die Hard trailers also promised me it was gonna be the best valentine's day movie ever; how much you wanna bet on the veracity of that statement. I'm quite worried that gamers just don't seem to understand the relationship of the customer in the subjective world of entertainment, and that they're just now realizing "Gee, maybe we shouldn't just throw money at developers or series we like whenever a new one comes out." YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE THE ONE WHO MAKES THE JUDGMENT CALL ON WHETHER OR NOT TO BUY SOMETHING BECAUSE THE COMPANY HAS NO WAY OF KNOWING IF YOU WILL LIKE IT BEFOREHAND. Companies can't decide for you what you should or shouldn't be buying, and their survival depends on convincing you why you should buy their product over others. Now, in a perfect world, they'd accomplish this by putting out the best product. But, since things like Twilight and Transformers can make all the money ever, we know that that doesn't always work. So they have to promote. They have to hype. Especially these days, since games are more expensive than ever to make. And yes, sometimes gamers fall for the advertisements, sometimes they look at the box and just plain make the wrong choice. Does that mean the company is this evil behemoth that's sucked another victim dry? Of course not, someone looked at the information available to them and made the wrong choice (for themselves).
If everyone picked the right game for themselves all the time (hell if they bought the right anything all the time), than we would be the wisest civilization ever. I watched Mama when it was released. I saw the trailers, and the short film it was based off of. It looked good to me. The trailers promised it would be scary, and it was, right up until the last fifteen minutes or so. That ending sucked. But I didn't write to the directors or the producers calling them distrustful assholes who made me pay for something when I had no idea what the final product was. Why? Because it's impossible for anyone to make a game, movie, story, book, food, furniture, TV, computer, car, toy, song, etc. that everyone will like. And to demand that of them? To demand that they put out something no one will have any complaints over is beyond ridiculous. It would certainly be nice if they did, hell even they want to put out something everyone will like. That's the ultimate goal. But it's a nirvana no one can ever reach.
TL;DR: There are lots of products of which require you to pay first before you can experience them. Food? Can't just start sampling that new cereal in the store. And good luck trying to return two-thirds of a six pack you didn't like. Movies? God, A History of Violence was terrible. Games ain't the first one. So suck it up. If you ever bought a game you didn't like, then you made a mistake. Salvage what you can and move on. You'll be a lot happier for it.
(Also I noticed Jim hid his Assassin's Creed 2 statue, and the Skyrim dragon statue; things which either came with pre-orders, or collector's editions which are even worse)
Not exactly news to me. I've never preordered a game in my life. Even if I'm 99% sure that I'll enjoy the game (Skyrim and Borderlands 2 for example).
The thing is, this isn't so much on the developers as it is on the consumers as well. The consumer must surely know the risk they are taking with a pre-order? Aliens is just one of the cases in which the gamble failed to pay off.
Frankly, it pangs of naivety that so many people where surprised when Aliens turned out to be shit; a game in development hell with no previous titles or established series to assure a standard of quality. Sure, the demo might have looked excellent (the demo you weren't permitted to play, that is), but then again so did Duke Nukem - "shit throwing? Ego? It looks like a riot!"
By all means, be impetuous, continue to pre-order and take risks on the titles you want, but recognise that you are the one choosing to take a fucking gamble, so don't complain when you get a bad hand.
Frankly, it pangs of naivety that so many people where surprised when Aliens turned out to be shit; a game in development hell with no previous titles or established series to assure a standard of quality. Sure, the demo might have looked excellent (the demo you weren't permitted to play, that is), but then again so did Duke Nukem - "shit throwing? Ego? It looks like a riot!"
By all means, be impetuous, continue to pre-order and take risks on the titles you want, but recognise that you are the one choosing to take a fucking gamble, so don't complain when you get a bad hand.
I quite liked that. Thanks.Draconalis said:My first ever meme, created in honor of this momentous occasion.
This one's for you Jim.
I still can't get into the pre-order mindset. Are people really that impatient that they have to get a game they could get a month or a year later? I took a look at my Steam library statistics, and it says I have over $1000 worth of games, but the reality is, to acquire all those games I only paid a tenth of that at the most. Just through being a little patient, I can still get the exact game as the people who pre-ordered, but with the assurance of a good critical reception, the bugs patched out, the pre-order bonuses and DLC included in a game of the year edition, and at a fraction of the price.
If you are pre-ordering for pragmatic reasons I don't have an issue with it. I understand that there can be value in pre-ordering as well. I think if a company wants to sell pre-orders they should come with another game or a discount as most steam pre-orders do. This gives you some form of compensation for the product. There also needs to be a lemon law to protect the customers though. Most retailers won't let you return software if a game isn't as advertised.RaikuFA said: