Jimquisition: Why Boycotts Fail Where Whining Tantrums Win

LongMuckDong

New member
Aug 23, 2011
56
0
0
jebara said:
Jim, I was one of those guys who was hating your show when it first appeared on the escapist, but over time it became one of my favorite shows on the internet, I just want to say I take everything back and keep on the good work on being right as always.
I am in the same boat.. I originally hated your stuff Jimothy, but now I find it the most agreeable video show on the internet.

I love how games can't just be shat out now with no repercussions for a sub-standard product.. devs and publishers know they will swing from a branch if they are developing a loved/hyped product and deliver swill to make a quick buck.

The mob is here, and our pitchforks are at the ready...saying that, I would rather keep them in the garden shed than ever have to use them.
 

Sheo_Dagana

New member
Aug 12, 2009
966
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
Sheo_Dagana said:
Lets take a look at another franchise Capcom has/had - Megaman. Megaman is a side-scrolling, run 'n gun, platformer, and all of it's games were pretty much that. Then, Capcom released Megaman Legends - a free-roam third-person shooter with RPG elements and a slightly cartoonish appearance. Legends is nothing like it's roots, yet it is one of the most popular installments in the franchise.
TO BE FAIR:

Few games have been as heavily identified by their gameplay itself as the DMC series. It's always been about stylish, OTT combat and the rest is gravy. While Mega Man was a platformer, it was mostly due to its roots and was hardly defined by it. Each game did have different elements to it, puzzles to solve, bits that made it not a pure platformer. The transition to third person isn't a big deal for a game that had no reason to just be 2D anyway (though I prefer 2D Mega Man titles). Zelda is another example where there's no need for it to be the way it was (though I don't like 3D Zelda, either).
Don't get me wrong, I get what you're saying, but remember that Legends came out during a time where a lot of side-scrollers were making the transition to 3D environments and it wasn't working out very well (Zelda and Mario being the obvious exceptions), so a lot of people were worried it would ruin the series. I dunno about you, but the platforming elements of Megaman define it pretty solidly for me, as a lot of those platforming segments could be pretty ruthless.

The point is that you can be surprised by a game, even if it looks radically different from the outset. I've seen trailers for DmC and it still looks pretty ridiculously OTT to me. If this one doesn't work out, they can always change it later on.

But Capcom is, ya know, really weird these days... so who knows what'll happen. We'll have to wait and see. I always welcome change. Like you, I'm interested in the new concept.
 

Royas

New member
Apr 25, 2008
539
0
0
I will continue to buy and not buy games based on my take on the practices of the publisher and the developer. I will also continue to complain on forums and in public, and I will continue sending emails and snail mails to the companies in question to make it clear as to why at least one customer is telling them to get frakked.

I understand where Sterling is coming from in this, I really do, but I don't completely agree. If the publishers take the wrong message from people not buying their games, then they have a marketing department that is so stupid the company is doomed to die out soon enough anyway. And as for my hurting the developer... Wow, is that ever an ignorant point.

I refuse to go with the whole "it's not the dev's fault, it's the publisher!" bullshit. They signed the contract. They knew what they were getting into, they know who the publisher is, and they signed the contract. They gave up certain rights (such as control over DRM) in that contract, and they did so willingly and knowingly. That makes the devs just as much at fault as the publisher, and they get to eat their ration of crap along with the publisher. Don't like it? Stop doing business with assholes.

My point is this... if you lie down with pigs, expect to get dirty. The devs don't get a free pass on this, they never have in my book. They are just as much to blame as the publishers, because they enable the EA's, the Activisions and the Ubisofts of the world. They enable these bastards to screw with us and our consumer rights, they enable them to publish crap in the guise of games. And we help, by buying their shit every year. We are as much to blame as the publishers and the developers, and attitudes like that promoted in this Jimquisition are in no small part to blame for that.
 

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,651
0
0
So I should spend my hard earned money on bad games just so I could whine about how bad they are, hoping that my voice will be heard and that the developer will fix the bad game? No. Just...no.

And for the record, Bioware didn't fix Mass Effect 3. They didn't even understand why the fans were angry. Fans hate the star brat. And what did Bioware do? They gave us more star brat and even more of his insane logic and a retarded insulting analogy about fire or something like that.

Then there's Dead Space 3. Most fans are raging about it being dumbed down for shooter crowd. Is it gonna change anything? No! Why not? Because there are more shooter fans than horror fans out there. Wider audience and all that.

Did Blizzard patch in an offline mode for Diablo 3? No. Because they sold more than 6 million copies. They don't give a fuck.

Does Capcom listen to its fans when they criticize them for making Resident Evil more action oriented? No! Look at RE6. It's worse than RE5.

Were people supposed to buy Prototype 2 just to keep the studio alive? That studio made the exact same game twice! Why would I buy Prototype 2 when I can play Prototype 1? Bad sales have nothing to do with boycotting Activision. Prototype 2 is just not worth the money. Even newcomers could simply buy Prototype 1 which is cheaper now instead of throwing their money on the same game.

Ubisoft is making another shitty Splinter Cell game. And this time without Michael Ironside. Why? Because a lot of people bought the last one. It doesn't matter that many gamers whined and complained about the short campaign and the more action oriented approach. A lot of people bought it and that's all that matters. A lot of people will buy the new one and once again a lot of people will complain and whine. And it won't change a god damn thing as long as the sales are up.

NOBODY LISTENS! Not really. Because at the end of the day, the publishers don't look at complaints, they look at the number of sales. And then they order the developers to make another one just like that because they don't want to risk losing money if they change something. So why should we still continue to throw our money on things that we're gonna end up hating?

The only reason Bioware is listening to their fans about Dragon Age 3 is because Dragon Age 2 sales were significantly lower than Dragon Age: Origins. If more people bought DA2, they wouldn't give a fuck about complaints. In fact, we'd probably have a DA3 right now. Because that's how big publishers like EA operate.

I don't boycott. I make a choice not to buy a shitty product from a shitty company. If that results in that company closing down one of their studios, so be it. I don't give a fuck.
 

Plunkies

New member
Oct 31, 2007
102
0
0
Prototype 2 was a hideously lazy and terrible console port. Activision or not, can't exactly feel bad for the developers of that hunk of garbage.
 

loa

New member
Jan 28, 2012
1,716
0
0
Why do publishers hold so much power nowadays anyway?
They don't make the games yet their shitty business practices screws the developers over too.
 

leviadragon99

New member
Jun 17, 2010
1,055
0
0
Yeah... I personally despise EA but buy Bioware games despite that, I just don't know precisely where would be best to yell my dissaproval from.

Of course what steams me about the whole ME3 whole mess is that no-one even seemed to mention the bullshit random "booster-pack" gear and character accquirement system for the multiplayer, a practise that combined with free DLC of more stuff to buy with either real money or ingame currency at a far slower rate is actually pretty clever from a business standpoint but shafts the consumer big-time.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
NameIsRobertPaulson said:
Problem is, Jim, you're talking about the difference between Devil May Cry, and God of War wearing a Devil May Cry skin. It's like what the latest Castlevania did: if you're going to remove the free-roam aspect from that, and basically remove Dracula, why even call it Castlevania. If you're going to remove the hectic DMC combat, why call it Devil May Cry?
A) Castlevania STARTED without free-roaming aspects.
B) Symphony of the Night, one of the most well-respected Castlevanias, bears only a number of similarities between it and the original games. In the same way people are saying DmC is God of War, SotN was Metroid. The whole criticism that DmC is a departure from what Devil May Cry is can be leveled at a classic and influential installment in the Castlevania series.
C) Some of the best Castlevanias of recent memory didn't revolve around Dracula at all.

So you see, a series can change all the time. It's just sometimes we arbitrarily give them free passes depending on how we're feeling.
 

ThunderCavalier

New member
Nov 21, 2009
1,475
0
0
It's abso-fucking-lutely scary when what Jim said this episode actually makes a lot of sense.

I honestly don't want to reinforce the stereotype that all gamers are whiny, entitled bitches, but... it does seem to work. ... Sadly.
 

Hitchmeister

New member
Nov 24, 2009
453
0
0
Two things slightly related to this topic.

Brilliant, innovative, creativity presented with a few minor flaws seems to be far worse than steaming piles of bland mediocrity.

Publishers need to realize that virtually no games will ever bee the biggest selling thing in the history of gaming. As such, they need to balance their expectation towards a desirable return on investment and budget games accordingly. "We can reasonably expect this game to make $X million, so we'll give the studio a budget of $Y million to make it. If they can't deliver on that, we'll lose money so they need to find someone else to finance this flop." It's either that or try to sell big budget AAA titles at $100 for the standard edition, but that would probably result in reduced sales to bring the total back down to the same figure.
 

Lord_Gremlin

New member
Apr 10, 2009
744
0
0
You know, I wanted to buy Sleeping Dogs on PS3, but decided not to because it's a port of not acceptable quality.
But after seeing this... I will buy it and follow Jim's advise. It does work, look at Bayonetta - sold primarily as PS3 version, which is not up to standard, result? Next game from it's dev, Vanquish, developed on PS3 first and actually overall looks better than Bayonetta (either version).
 

Sheo_Dagana

New member
Aug 12, 2009
966
0
0
NameIsRobertPaulson said:
I have zero reason to pick it up. Platinum Games remembers what fun, high-speed, fluid combat is, and it isn't slowing the action every four seconds to add "visceral" components you can brag about on your box. Metal Gear: Rising comes out around the same time, and it looks to play a LOT more like Devil May Cry then this new game.
Fair enough, as Jim says, buy what you want (always been a proponent of this). Metal Gear Rising does look awesome. But think about what you're saying right there; Metal Gear Rising is a HUGE departure from the series. Stealth and tactical action replaced by button-mashing hack 'n slash? Blasphemous. I personally think it's going to be cool, but it's basically (in your terms) Devil May Cry with a Metal Gear skin.

So... it's okay for one series to change it up, but it's NOT okay for another series to change things in the exact same way?
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
Even talking about boycotts is discouraged by people who say "you'll ***** and moan and buy it anyway". Those people do more harm than anyone else I think because you can't organize a boycott or even encourage others to do it if you can't fuckin' talk about it.

Also, boycotss are useless without bitching and moaning. Do you think Nintendo knows why I didn't buy NSMB 2 if I haven't made my reason known?
 

irishda

New member
Dec 16, 2010
968
0
0
Jimothy Sterling said:
Why Boycotts Fail Where Whining Tantrums Win

Continuing on from the argument that one can love games as art but hate them as a business, Jimquisition this week focuses on how gamers can best express their distaste for the latter while still supporting the former.

Watch Video
Or, and this is a super novel idea, boycott the products that represent your problem with the company, rather than just lump everything the company does under the sun into a "this must be evil" category.

I mean for fuck's sake, is it so hard to exercise some goddamn discretion? "Gee, this product isn't even remotely similar to the fare which I feel is detrimental to the industry. Fuck it, better boycott it anyways CUZ ACTERVISIONZ MAKE EVIL!!!!"

Not to mention the biggest problem with whining, a problem which you mentioned in the very beginning of your video in fact: Gamers can't stand united on anything. Now lets throw into the mix that the thing they stand for is usually completely subjective (this color scheme is cartoony/this ending is lame/game's too hard). How united are they on that? Mass Effect 3 had a huge variety to their ending complaints, and each sect believed theirs was the only one. Anytime someone responded to one complaint, the others returned with a cacophony of "you just don't understand the real issue".

Look at WoW. The most popular PC game for the better part of a decade, yet the forums are constantly filled with "this is wrong, that is wrong, this class is OP, my class is underpowered, game is dead, why isn't any blues responding to my complaints, etc.". I think Penny Arcade even made a joke about how being a forum moderator was one of the circles of development hell.

The point is let's try to make an effort at not being one of the shittiest customer bases on the planet by not being the only customers who buy a product, then demand it be changed to what they want. Everyone else on the planet learned to just look for other products that suit their tastes, why is it so hard for us?

Honestly, Jim, for a guy who touts his superiority (a character, I know), this character sure does have the exact same viewpoints as everyone else on the internet.
 

FoolKiller

New member
Feb 8, 2008
2,409
0
0
Irridium said:
So... who's up for throwing the biggest damn tantrum in the world to get Crytek to make a new Timesplitters game?

Or to make Lucasarts make Battlefront 3?

Because I'd be down for that.
I'm in.

As for the boycotts. I'm a massive jerk about how I do it. I'm a console gamer and I will only buy 3 or 4 publishers stuff used. I don't care for multiplayer and in most cases I don't lose out that much.

For Mass Effect 3, I feel no guilt anyways because I started the story before it was an EA franchise or EA had crushed their own reputation under their greed.


Finally, in many cases the boycotts I take part in ARE where the publisher is the developer. Capcom, EA, Konami.
 

Sheo_Dagana

New member
Aug 12, 2009
966
0
0
NameIsRobertPaulson said:
Sheo_Dagana said:
NameIsRobertPaulson said:
I have zero reason to pick it up. Platinum Games remembers what fun, high-speed, fluid combat is, and it isn't slowing the action every four seconds to add "visceral" components you can brag about on your box. Metal Gear: Rising comes out around the same time, and it looks to play a LOT more like Devil May Cry then this new game.
Fair enough, as Jim says, buy what you want (always been a proponent of this). Metal Gear Rising does look awesome. But think about what you're saying right there; Metal Gear Rising is a HUGE departure from the series. Stealth and tactical action replaced by button-mashing hack 'n slash? Blasphemous. I personally think it's going to be cool, but it's basically (in your terms) Devil May Cry with a Metal Gear skin.

So... it's okay for one series to change it up, but it's NOT okay for another series to change things in the exact same way?
That's why they did what fans have been asking of Team Ninja to do with DMC this whole time: they changed the name. Metal Gear: Solid is the stealth games starring Snake. Metal Gear: Rising are the action games starring Raiden. For all intents and purposes, it's a different series, in the same universe.
The game was always called Metal Gear Rising, even back when it was being worked on by Konami before being given to Platinum games. I understand the difference in the titles, although the Metal Gear games were ALSO stealth games before they added Solid to the title.

But see, Castlevania added a subtitle in the same way, yet you complain about Castlevania playing like God of War and not like Metroid (which the originals were not). Lords of Shadow is a reboot and effectively not even a part of the original story. If you're saying fans would forgive DmC for adding a subtitle or something, that seems more than a little silly.

What it boils down to is this:
Jimothy Sterling said:
So you see, a series can change all the time. It's just sometimes we arbitrarily give them free passes depending on how we're feeling.
You are giving Metal Gear a pass for the same thing you are getting upset with DmC and Castlevania about. I guess it just doesn't make much sense to me, but to each his own.
 

Evil Smurf

Admin of Catoholics Anonymous
Nov 11, 2011
11,597
0
0
this makes me worried about Valve nerfing mvm and MANN UP mode. Please don't do it! I like hard!