Why are gamers never satisfied?

[Ace of Spades]

That's true of all things. People like to complain, myself included. I'm glad that things like FF13 exist so I can use them as references of how not to make games. However, I immediately lose respect for anyone who unconditionally hates Portal. It had an interesting game mechanic and did a good job exploring the facets of said game mechanic. Even if you don't like it, the tutorial being woven throughout the game is something to be admired.

 

[Yeq]

Depends on what you mean by satisfied. When somebody says a game isn't perfect, are they unsatisfied? Because I don't think any game has been perfect; it can perfectly execute what it was intending to do, but those intentions are necessarily limited to the game's subjective, ultimately partial structure and approach, and of course the technology to hand. Even if you have a favourite movie, even one you'd go so far (in what, I believe, to be intrinsically hyperbolic terms) as to say it's perfect, you don't therefore stop watching movies except that one for the end of time, and you're certainly not "satisfied" that the medium of film's potential has been reached and everyone should put down their cameras.

I guess, though, it might be a little more acute for gamers; we tend to get a little whiny. The medium, I think, is still in its adolescence, with a few signs of creative brilliance but offset by a great deal of repetitive experience or tunnel-vision perspective. Maybe we just need to ask more from developers creatively, but criticise more effectively and don't get surprised when the fruition of the industry's creative potential doesn't happen tomorrow.

 

[Casual Shinji]

That video was so fucking pathetic, I could only stand to endure 5 seconds of it.

Anyway, human beings will never be satisfied with anything.

 

[Juk3n]

because companies that make games overlook simple ass design features that should be the norm.

is the only correct answer

 

[Madkipz]

I found this [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7VAhzPcZ-s&feature=related] review on YouTube and I can't help asking why are some of us never satisfied? A few years ago people were still guessing about graphics and the realism games were inevitably going to have. Now that we're there (at least somewhat) we're still not satisfied but what's worse some people seem to be unable to follow their own train of thought. Criticising the gaming industry for a lack of new gameplay mechanics but then without giving reasons denouncing 'Portal' seems utterly backward to put it nicely. Does anyone else feel like regardless of how advanced and innovative the games industry becomes (disregarding the 80% of games which are garbage) there will always be annoying elitists who will complain for no good reason?

he is not criticising the gameing industry itself, he is critisising the people who call themselves gamers yet play games that require little to no skill or that cry about being pwned in a game that requires slightly more of a brain than pong. Portal did introduce a new mechanic but its not a game. Mass effect is not a game, its an interactive story disguised as a game. Does that make them bad? By all means no, but the people who soledly play these games are not gamers.

 

[ThreeWords]

No one's ever satisfied completely. These people simply aren't socially adept enough to accept that things will never be perfect and just shut up about it.

On the other hand, it could be a kind of status symbol. Denouncing Portal could be like denouncing twilight or Bieber; it become 'cool' to do so, and thus people go out of their ways to pour out hatred and bile when it's irrelevant to the subject at hand. Thus, moaning about games makes you look cooler, cos you're 'too clever to be tken in by their corporate tricks' or whatever

 

[Nazulu]

Elitists that complain for no reason don't exist, there is always a reason for complaints and the people who disagree and use words like elitist come from opposite land. Besides, complaining is fun and why the hell should no one be able to complain? And what is so great in your opinion to stop people from criticising? What is this perfect game that keeps people forever satisfied?

Also, he didn't denounce Portal, he just said it's retarded to say it's the height of all gaming experience as well as comparing the story from GTA4 to The Godfather.

 

[Casimir_Effect]

The only thing I can agree with in that video is his stance on being talented enough to do something. I hate the culture of telling everyone that they can do anything if they try hard enough. No they can't. Many things are out of reach for most people and throwing Disney-esque bullshit at them only serves to delude.

Regarding his arguments about the state of gaming, he's an elitest idiot. Anyone who thinks every game should be an unforgiving piece of repetitive crap like Contra should go out and get a job. Then see if they enjoy replaying the same part of a game countless times in the scant hours of free time they get every day. Unless they're a special type of masochist, they'll soon move onto games with checkpoints, of even better quicksaves.

If it was up to me checkpoints would be removed entirely, getting replaced by quicksaves in every game. They allow more freedom and can be tied to difficulty level either by the game or the player. For example, the FPS Vietcong gave you an amount of quicksaves per mission based on what difficulty you played it on, culminating with only getting a single mid-mission save on the hardest level (which was impossible for me anyway). I'm not sure if I'd call this a great idea, because so few people played that game it is hard to tell if it worked. But I'd like to see more try it.

 

[Something Amyss]

Does anyone else feel like regardless of how advanced and innovative the games industry becomes (disregarding the 80% of games which are garbage) there will always be annoying elitists who will complain for no good reason?

Why, it's almost like "gamers" are a group, not a single person. A group riddled with differing opinions and feelings on each matter, who will be vocal in their dislikes even if the majority are satisfied.

Nah....That would just be crazy.

 

[Unas]

Keep in mind that that video is part of (or actually intro, if I remember correctly) a pure pwnage episode and is more of a spoof/homage to Yahtzee's ZP than an actual review. Though there are probably some true concerns of the makers in there, I believe most of it is done in-character, and a not too bright character at that. I mean talking one moment about how games used to be about "challenging to explore new game mechanics; about learning and solving new puzzles" (0:55) and then ripping on Portal for being short and not having MP is hypocritical to say the least (as the OP mentions). Then again, the main character, Jeremy, was never the greatest of thinkers nor the most likeable protagonist.

 

[Eisenfaust]

because some people tend to make sweeping generalisations about us, mainly because of youtube videos...

everything needs criticism, ever successful medium so far has been criticised... just look at it as a right of passage, and ignore the fact that you're complaining about people who complain

 

[Unas]

Also, to answer your question: Expecting everyone who plays games, or even just those who consider themselves to be gamers to have the same expectations and demands is short-sighted. Some of them will want nice graphics, good story line, and immersion (not necessarily correlated btw), while others value innovating gameplay and challenging puzzles, while yet others just want to kill the shit out of everything and have big explosions. There will always be people who aren't satisfied (not just in gaming, but just about everything). And this isn't a bad thing either. If we all would be satisfied with what there is in terms of games, there wouldn't really be a need (or at least a far smaller one) for new games and thus the industry would not make any money. Now the way in which this dissatisfaction is expressed is a different matter altogether...

 

[AndrewF022]

Uhh.. that video was kinda a comedy sketch/spoof of Zero Punctuation (as mentioned above and at the end of the clip), all done by an actor in an Internet show where he portrays a pseudo-professional gamer who only cares about 'owning noobs' and multiplayer, I don't think those are his actual opinions, just those of the character.

Funny to watch though haha, I do agree that portal is overrated, you cant call a 3 hour game that is 80% tutorial the height of games design.. It's just an awesome little puzzle game that came with my Orange Box, nothing more, nothing less. Now Portal 2 on the other hand has the ability to be what people claim Portal 1 to be.

edit: As for the question itself sorry.. Gamers will never be satisfied, and we never should be, the minute we do, the quality of games will drop because designers will stop and say "ohh look, their happy playing CoD 11, lets just re-skin every model and add some new Multiplayer levels in and sell it as CoD 12". I do however think we need to be a little less vocal with our criticism.

- sending an email to the developer = good

- creating a youtube video blasting the game and its developers and swearing to never play one of their games again = bad.

(not ragging on Call of Duty in any way, I love that series to death, just thought it would be a good example)

 

[YesConsiderably]

Nobody that rips off this Yahtzee style thing is ever funny or interesting, mostly because Yahtzee isn't ever funny or interesting.

 

[vociferocity]

I kind of want to punch the guy in the video. just punch him in the throat until he stops breathing. what a twat.

 

[matt87_50]

'The Internet' is never satisfied. that is all. I know many gamers who a perfectly satisfied, thus, they don't post on the internet.

its like saying Christians are never satisfied. no, idiot loosers who form 'lobby groups' and ruin people's funerals with 'protests' are never satisfied.


he begins with the argument that he's more interested in new game play mechanics. but this is confusing the issue. he wants games to be more difficult - a not uncommon, and reasonable complaint - so when he says he wants new game play mechanics, he means he wants the challenge that something new brings, not interested in the novelty. thus, in the case of portal, it may be new, but even with an unseen mechanic, its still not difficult (unless you play the extra maps). which is why he SEEMS hypocritical, but only because he confused his argument.

with portal, its always only fair to remember that it was only one of 3 games you got for the price (if not cheaper) of one normal game. which justifies its length, not to mention the length was necessary to achieve its overall awesomeness.

he is a 'core' gamer (or at least the character is, pure pwnage fyi), more than that, he's a twitch core gamer, even though he's more RTS than FPS, this is still fairly twitched based compared to the slower puzzle solving of portal.

its just a case of "mainstream n00bs taking over and dumbing it down for everyone"

 

[beniki]

I'm sure I'll take flak for this, but I'm going to use Mass Effect as an example. Bioware is hit and miss with me, and Mass Effect felt like a crappy Gears of War (I played Mass Effect first and I still feel that way) with a couple of colors and a few very shoddy RPG elements thrown in. The dialogue selection method was nicer than a straight list at the bottom of a paragraph, but something like that doesn't make up for poor gameplay when a different game has done it fantastically. Rip it off if you have to, Darksiders was fantastic.

Interesting point... although they have similar play styles I wouldn't really compare game play between Gears of War and Mass Effect, because they're different genres. Gears of what is a game which focuses on shooting skill, whereas Mass Effect is an RPG where the focus is more on being allowed to role play.

They are similar, but they're coming at it from different sides... GoW from the traditional FPS, and ME from the old top down RPGs. This essentially means that whilst GoW should be all about the alien shooting, ME is about being tricked into believing you're this awesome space captain. Best example I can give for that is the bullet time when you're an Infiltrator. It allows you to easily get those head shots, letting you think you're the galaxies best sniper, without you actually having that skill.

So yeah, different games with different ideas in mind. If you liked GoW better it's probably because you're more proud of your own skill rather than experiencing something larger than your self.

Which is why gamers are never satisfied... we all want different stuff out of a game

 

[The Rockerfly]

Don't take that guy seriously
He's arguing that people shouldn't play games if they are so shit and games are to easy

I'm sorry but video games are a luxury, you can play on them as much as you want.
You want a hard games? Play guitar hero 3 or Ninja Gaiden 2

Yes people are buying COD every year but that has been the same for every sports game and COD since the playstation era, this is nothing new.

Don't listen to an idiotic elitist. You will achieve nothing but think every good game becomes shit due to some stupid fault

 

[Engarde]

Because young, overentitled overgrown children need to grow the fuck up, that's why.

Hah, excellently surmised, sir. With the use they recieve, a standard becomes established and a desensitizing occurs. Then they need more and more for something to be 'original' or 'creative'. I like to just be satisfied with what I have, however. Makes life much nicer.

Would you be satisfied with a microwave whose only functioning part was the clock? I mean it's a great clock, but you paid for a microwave. Granted I'm taking a small part of what you said and applying it to my own context.

You have a point, but things a rarely so problematic. It tends to be a case of 'this game is boring, this gun is imbalanced, this bit is to easy' not 'crash crash smash crash'. Though that can happen.