"You Must Have Liked It If You Finished It"

[V8 Ninja]

(I was originally going to put this thread in the Gaming forum, but I felt this instance could apply to a wider range of topics.)

Some Backstory:

I was speaking with a friend about the next cycle of consoles and the issue of exclusive games came up. Trying to change my current preference (the Wii U), my friend stated that the new Uncharted game would be on the PS4. Ignoring the fact that the Uncharted series was finished and would probably stay that way with Naughty Dog having already moved onto other projects, I backfired with the statement that I don't liked the Uncharted games. His retort was that I was obviously lying because, " must have liked the games if finished them."

A minute later I told my friend to stop annoying me and talk to me later on that subject, seeing as how trying to play games and formulate noteworthy opinions don't mix. Minutes later I came up with a host of reasons of why I dislike the Uncharted games, but at that time I had not found a reason for why I still played the games despite not liking them.

This got me thinking; do I really dislike Uncharted? After another few minutes, I found several reasons that I liked Uncharted 3, but those reasons solely existed within that game and no others in the series. And to this moment I'm still stumped; why did I play through those games if I didn't like them?

The Discussion Topic:

"You Must Have Liked It If You Finished It" is a popular retort to people complaining about certain experiences that said people have completed/finished. Do you agree with this logic? Why or why not? Have you ever used/been the receiver of this complaint? Has that phrase's use made you change your perception/thinking?

 

[madwarper]

Nope.

In my opinion, you can't rightfully offer a view, be it positive or negative, of a property as a whole unless you consume it as a whole.
Else, you're only forming a partial view of the part of the property you did consume.

 

[Amethyst Wind]

-snip-

You sound easily swayed. I can tell you how to get around that, and improve your love life if you give me $10.

There's plenty of things I've finished that I didn't like. Food, games, films. It's quite easy to sit through something you dislike.

Nope.

imo, you can't rightfully offer a view, be it positive or negative, of a property as a whole unless you consume it as a whole.
Else, you're only forming a partial view of the part of the property you did consume.

It must suck not to be able to offer any views then, since it's impossible to gain anything but a partial consumption on something.

 

[shrekfan246]

I could see either side of the discussion, myself.

Personally, I generally don't finish things that I don't like, because, well, if I'm not enjoying it why would I want to put myself through more of it? But on the same side of the token, there are quite a number of games and television shows that I do like perfectly well but stop playing or watching for whatever reason, and often don't catch back up on.

I think it's a bit daft, but I can understand why people would want to finish something even if they don't like it, either because they're vainly holding out hope or because they don't want to feel like they've wasted money or whatever other reasons. What really just stops me in my tracks is the times you find people who adamantly state they hate everything about a particular film or game, and then state that they've seen/played the thing something like five or ten times. That just... it doesn't make sense.

 

[madwarper]

It must suck not to be able to offer any views then, since it's impossible to gain anything but a partial consumption on something.

Wut?

Someone can't say the Matrix movies were good based on only seeing the first movie.
Similarly, someone can't say the Silmarillion was boring if they stopped reading half way through the Valaquenta.

 

[NeutralDrow]

I find the phrase to be bunk. There's any number of reasons to finish something you didn't enjoy. The ones that come to my mind most readily are politeness ("my friend insisted I play this, I don't want to disappoint them") and optimism ("I've heard this gets good at some point. Surely they're going to take all these potential threads and weave them together, right? ...right?").

There's other possibilities, too. I stopped liking Dark Souls as a whole about halfway in, but I finished it anyway, partly because of the difficulty (so I could legitimately say I hated it for other reasons), and partly out of pure passive-aggression. That's the reason I opted to read the wiki and learn how to join the most destructive covenant, who seemed pretty likely to let me get an ending that would let me extinguish the sun and kill the world.

 

[NeutralDrow]

Similarly, someone can't say the Silmarillion was boring if they stopped reading half way through the Valaquenta.

Heh. Off-topic, but that's where I stopped reading it the first couple of times, myself. Not because it was boring, but because it was so incomprehensible, I didn't feel comfortable continuing.

I did get past and read the whole book (third time was the charm!), so I definitely agree with you.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

If you were to say that you only played one of the Uncharted games, and you finished it but still disliked it, I would believe you. It's pretty common for people to finish games, movies, etc. that they dislike just because they paid for it.

On the other hand, since it sounds like you bought and played all the Uncharted games in the series I have a hard time believing that you disliked them. If you actually disliked them you would have stopped playing the series after finishing one game. After all, would you waste your time and money on 3 games that you dislike (that's like $180 and 30 hours of your life spent playing something you actively dislike)? I don't think so.

So yeah, I'd say there's some validity to your friend's claim. Video games are too expensive and too long to play if you dislike them, especially if you're playing an entire trilogy that you dislike.

 

[Amethyst Wind]

It must suck not to be able to offer any views then, since it's impossible to gain anything but a partial consumption on something.

Wut?

Someone can't say the Matrix movies were good based on only seeing the first movie.
Similarly, someone can't say the Silmarillion was boring if they stopped reading half way through the Valaquenta.

Nonsense. The Silmarillion, and any other novel, is hundreds of pages long. You don't need to read every page to pass judgment on them. If every book had an entertaining first half but a boring first half then they would all be bad books because you would have to read through 150-200 pages just to reach the good part.

Now if you want to talk degrees of separation that's a different story. You'd be far more willing to forgive a boring 10-minute intro to a film than a boring 1-hour first act if the rest was good.

 

[madwarper]

Nonsense. The Silmarillion, and any other novel, is hundreds of pages long. You don't need to read every page to pass judgment on them.

You do if you want to comment on it as a whole. Else...

If every book had an entertaining first half but a boring first half then they would all be bad books because you would have to read through 150-200 pages just to reach the good part.

You're only offering a partial review.

And, there's nothing wrong with a partial review, so far as you're upfront that it is a partial review and why it is a partial review.

Now if you want to talk degrees of separation that's a different story. You'd be far more willing to forgive a boring 10-minute intro to a film than a boring 1-hour first act if the rest was good.

You haven't read the Silmarillion... Have you?

 

[Amethyst Wind]

Nonsense. The Silmarillion, and any other novel, is hundreds of pages long. You don't need to read every page to pass judgment on them.

You do if you want to comment on it as a whole. Else...

If every book had an entertaining first half but a boring first half then they would all be bad books because you would have to read through 150-200 pages just to reach the good part.

You're only offering a partial review.

And, there's nothing wrong with a partial review, so far as you're upfront that it is a partial review and why it is a partial review.

Now if you want to talk degrees of separation that's a different story. You'd be far more willing to forgive a boring 10-minute intro to a film than a boring 1-hour first act if the rest was good.

You haven't read the Silmarillion... Have you?

As I said before, everything is a partial review. It stems from the idea that you or I or anyone has only a partial understanding of anything due to limits of our perception. All we can give are partial interpretations.

(If you subscribe to the idea that objectivity exists at all, I personally do not)

Working from the idea that it does, the best we can do is partial.

Now then, back to the point at hand. Are you really saying that I can't claim that a 365 page book is, as a whole, bad, if I've read through 364 of those pages and they were all terrible? A book that is bad for 364/365 of its length cannot be called a bad book as a whole?

 

[DoPo]

"You Must Have Liked It If You Finished It" is a popular retort to people complaining about certain experiences that said people have completed/finished. Do you agree with this logic? Why or why not? Have you ever used/been the receiver of this complaint? Has that phrase's use made you change your perception/thinking?

Huh, never actually heard that phrase. Seems stupid. I personally (try to) finish everything I start, even if it starts to suck. For example, Heroes the TV show - first season was OK, second started to drop off, third was just bad, fourth was meh - a bit better but still meh (the final battle was pretty much an arm wrestle and the power of friendship...). I should have just stopped halfway in season 2 or so, but I still watched all of it, because that's what I do - I just endure the suckage most of the time.

Of course, I know not everyone is like me. But one might also finish game(s) or movie(s) or something and then realise they aren't appealing. It happens.

Then there is the "exploratory" consumption of media - watching/playing/reading something because it sucks and to see just how much it does. I went through F.A.T.A.L. myself, and of my fucking god, it...I can't even say it's worse than I head of, since I'm pretty sure that's not possible. But it was horrible, it really was as bad as I was led to believe. It's not "so bad it's good" not the slightest, it's really "so bad" period. Similarly, I know other people have, for example, played Sonic '06 with full knowledge of the quality.

I don't think that phrase holds much water, is what I'm trying to say.

 

[madwarper]

As I said before, everything is a partial review. It stems from the idea that you or I or anyone has only a partial understanding of anything due to limits of our perception. All we can give are partial interpretations.

I disagree. It's very well possible to watch an entire movie, read an entire book, play through a video game.

If you simply want to review the latest Spiderman movie, you only have to watch the latest Spiderman movie.
You're not reviewing the entirety of Spiderman, so you don't have to consume everything Spiderman.
But, if you only see the first 30 minutes of the movie, you're only reviewing the first 30 minutes of the movie.

Now then, back to the point at hand. Are you really saying that I can't claim that a 365 page book is, as a whole, bad, if I've read through 364 of those pages and they were all terrible? A book that is bad for 364/365 of its length cannot be called a bad book as a whole?

And, if that 365th page changes your views on the previous 364 pages?

Example: The last 5 minutes of the Usual Suspects changes the whole movie.

 

[Zantos]

I think it depends on what you mean by liked really. As far as I'm concerned if I don't find something appealing enough to make me want to continue then I have no issue with stopping and moving on to something else. However, it doesn't mean there aren't aspects of it I didn't like. For instance in some RPGs, I hate the way NPCs are constantly poised to talk to you like your adventure is an anti abortion bill and they're a Texas senator. I will wish that there was a button to make your character tell them you couldn't give a fuck and to get to the point. However all that means is that I enjoyed other aspects of the game enough to continue enjoying it in spite of the parts I don't like.

So yes, although I've never actually said it, from my perspective I'd assume if you went start to finish with something it was because there were aspects that you liked enough to keep you interested, even if there were plenty of things you didn't like about it.

 

[Rylot]

Well I finished Too Human and I hated the ever loving shit out of that game. It was a combination of sheer stubbornness and having jack shit all else to play. To feel like I'm getting my money's worth I'll try and finish games I hate.

 

[Amethyst Wind]

As I said before, everything is a partial review. It stems from the idea that you or I or anyone has only a partial understanding of anything due to limits of our perception. All we can give are partial interpretations.

I disagree. It's very well possible to watch an entire movie, read an entire book, play through a video game.

You saw every part of the screen at once? You know the intention the author had while writing each word? You were there during the development of how the entire game fits together, every 1 and 0?

Of course not. There is always more to anything than what we experience. Each of us is one being with a limited sensual spectrum and not privy to all the goings on of even our own bodies/souls/minds. How can we possibly claim to {verb} an entire anything?

If you simply want to review the latest Spiderman movie, you only have to watch the latest Spiderman movie.
You're not reviewing the entirety of Spiderman, so you don't have to consume everything Spiderman.
But, if you only see the first 30 minutes of the movie, you're only reviewing the first 30 minutes of the movie.

Now then, back to the point at hand. Are you really saying that I can't claim that a 365 page book is, as a whole, bad, if I've read through 364 of those pages and they were all terrible? A book that is bad for 364/365 of its length cannot be called a bad book as a whole?

And, if that 365th page changes your views on the previous 364 pages?

Example: The last 5 minutes of the Usual Suspects changes the whole movie.

You claim that the ends justify the means?

I say again that it is different for each example. The Usual Suspects would have to do something to make the rest of the movie entertaining without that last 5 minutes or else the influence those last 5 minutes bring about would be wasted on the inferior show of all that lead up to that.

If you want to put all your focus in the finale then prepare for a lot of people to not get that far. You can't make something retroactively good unless it actually was good on its own to begin with. All the last 5 minutes could do was enhance the experience. It cannot flip the switch from bad to good.

Works both ways too. Even before the extended cut I considered Mass Effect 3 a net positive. The ending was bad but the rest of the game was entertaining. 30 hours can't be erased in 1.

On an earlier comment: Yes, I have read the Simarillion. A long time ago. I've basically forgotten everything about it. What point were you trying to make with that?

 

[Amethyst Wind]

Well I finished Too Human and I hated the ever loving shit out of that game. It was a combination of sheer stubbornness and having jack shit all else to play. To feel like I'm getting my money's worth I'll try and finish games I hate.

Oh come on. That's not a fair example. The ending comes where there rightfully should be more game.

 

[madwarper]

You saw every part of the screen at once?

Yes.

You know the intention the author had while writing each word? You were there during the development of how the entire game fits together, every 1 and 0?

Intention/development are irrelevant. You're offering your opinion on what is there, not what was meant to be there.

You claim that the ends justify the means?

If you haven't seen the watched the full 100 minutes of a 100 minute movie, you can't rightfully comment on the whole 100 minute film.
If you walked out after the first 10 minutes, you can only offer your thoughts on the first 10 minutes.

On an earlier comment: Yes, I have read the Simarillion. A long time ago. I've basically forgotten everything about it. What point were you trying to make with that?

Because I specifically mentioned the Valaquenta. Which is one of prologues to the Quenta Silmarillion.

 

[Rylot]

Well I finished Too Human and I hated the ever loving shit out of that game. It was a combination of sheer stubbornness and having jack shit all else to play. To feel like I'm getting my money's worth I'll try and finish games I hate.

Oh come on. That's not a fair example. The ending comes where there rightfully should be more game.

You thought there should be more game? Sweet jesus I muddled through it to the end by sheer force of will and haven't touched it since... That was five years ago.

 

[Zhukov]

I sometimes finish things I don't like in the forlorn hope that they get better.

Sometimes I do it simply because I don't like the unresolved feeling of not finishing something. (I'm getting better at that though, fuck you Assassin's Creed 3.)

So no, "You must have liked it if you finished it" is bullshit.

...

Nope.

In my opinion, you can't rightfully offer a view, be it positive or negative, of a property as a whole unless you consume it as a whole.
Else, you're only forming a partial view of the part of the property you did consume.

Disagree.

If a game gets so bad that you don't want to/can't be bothered to finish it, then that's really all you need to know. "This game was so shit that I couldn't finish it", is a perfectly valid opinion.

Besides, how many games can you think of that were bad for like 60% of the duration, then suddenly became excellent? If a game's development produced 50% crap, it's a pretty safe bet that the other 50% was crap as well.