Gamers and the Idea of Entitlement

[Guild McCommunist]

You have all the right to say you didn't like the ending, but to request them to do a new one is stupid. It's their literary work, their child, they have all rights to do whatever they want with it. To dislike it is okay, to disagree with it is okay, but to think you deserve something else from it? Absolutely not.

I paid $15 to see Avatar: The Last Airbender in theaters. Fifteen fucking dollars. Money I will never see again. Hours of my life wasted. It was a shit movie by all accounts. But I don't believe I deserve any sort of compensation for it.

Sometimes artistic mediums don't live up to your expectations. Shit happens. You deal with it.

As for Aliens, thanks for pointing that out.

 

[Sterling]

Doesn't mean we can't protest and ask/demand. That's literally the only recourse we have as consumers who expect more from our product. If that includes asking for a more fleshed out/different ending, then so be it. In the end, I didn't make their decision, they did. Anything was better than that turd we got, even a bigger turd.

I guess we're from two different schools of thought on this one. I got my money back from that movie, because it was bad enough to warrant a fuss of that caliber. If ME3 hadn't delivered on every single other thing I'd expected, I would have been asking for more than a new ending. Just continue being a quiet consumer, okay? Leave the heavy lifting to us.

The above arguments don't advocate the more extreme side of entitlement. I think voicing opinions (whining), and using consumer oriented laws to get recourse is enough. No one needs to have death threats, or anything directed at them. In most cases, we are owed very little. That fact makes it hard to justify acting for recourse. ME3, Colonial Marines, and your example of the Avatar: TLA movie are all things the consumer should lash out over. Not just because of the parts that are terrible, but because they are rife with broken or false promises, and outright lies.

 

[Gahars]

Doesn't mean we can't protest and ask/demand. That's literally the only recourse we have as consumers who expect more from our product. If that includes asking for a more fleshed out/different ending, then so be it. In the end, I didn't make their decision, they did. Anything was better than that turd we got, even a bigger turd.

I guess we're from two different schools of thought on this one. I got my money back from that movie, because it was bad enough to warrant a fuss of that caliber. If ME3 hadn't delivered on every single other thing I'd expected, I would have been asking for more than a new ending. Just continue being a quiet consumer, okay? Leave the heavy lifting to us.

The above arguments don't advocate the more extreme side of entitlement. I think voicing opinions (whining), and using consumer oriented laws to get recourse is enough. No one needs to have death threats, or anything directed at them. In most cases, we are owed very little. That fact makes it hard to justify acting for recourse. ME3, Colonial Marines, and your example of the Avatar: TLA movie are all things the consumer should lash out over. Not just because of the parts that are terrible, but because they are rife with broken or false promises, and outright lies.

The only recourse? Bullshit. I know "Vote with your wallet" is stock advice at this point, but that's only because it's the truth. If you don't like what someone's produced, fine. Refuse to pay for anything else they make. Use word of mouth to warn others. There's nothing passive about that; you don't need your money back to make a statement.

Artists overpromise all the time, but that's not grounds for anything. If it was, Peter Molyneux would be in debtor's prison right now. It's a slippery slope, too. Would you be entitled to your money back if an artist promised that his next work would be great, but you only found it to be good?

I can get feeling disappointed, but that's the risk you take with any piece of entertainment.

I personally believe that if you sit through a movie, no matter how bad it is, you don't have grounds for a refund. You paid to sit in a theater for the length of the film; it isn't the theater's fault you didn't like it. I mean, I sat through Transformers 2 and hated every goddamn second of it. As much as I would've liked my money back, I was in no way entitled to it. I just refused to watch the next film and informed others of how shitty the movie was.

I'd say Aliens: Colonial Marines is the only legitimate example here, not because the game was so bad, but because the advertisements were so blatantly false. There's a difference between a developer saying "We're going to do this!" and coming up short and a developer using fake footage to sell their game.

 

[Sterling]

It is in the case of theatres that have a money back guarantee. Look, I don't do that shit very often, but in a economic climate heavily biased against consumers, you do what you have to. Like it or not, all these things have issues that require backlash... some more than others. You're really not making a convincing argument by saying that I have no right, because that couldn't be more wrong. I'm well aware of my rights, and I'll take full advantage of them.

I can get feeling disappointed, but that's the risk you take with any piece of entertainment.

Entertainment is just like any other product that promises to do something. Sure, it's more taste based than others, but if they don't hold up their end, then I will use whatever available to me to get recourse. In the case of ME3, I've boycotted the next three Bioware games, and let the developer know that they pulled the rug from under us.

I personally believe that if you sit through a movie, no matter how bad it is, you don't have grounds for a refund. You paid to sit in a theater for the length of the film; it isn't the theater's fault you didn't like it. I mean, I sat through Transformers 2 and hated every goddamn second of it. As much as I would've liked my money back, I was in no way entitled to it. I just refused to watch the next film and informed others of how shitty the movie was.

That's where we differ. If the movie is bad enough, I will ask for my money back. Since I strictly go to theatres with money back guarantees, that's always an option. Of course, my bar is pretty low to begin with. I like Adam Sandler movies, and the Transformers movies were entertaining enough. I think of the hundreds of times I've been to theatres, I've asked for my money back twice. One for the new Evil Dead (due to leaving the theatre sick), and for the Avatar movie.

I think your entire argument is personal conjecture. I also say fuck it. If I have options for recourse, and I think I need it, then I'll use it. You just keep using your standard, and I'll keep using mine.

 

[Gahars]

/

It is in the case of theatres that have a money back guarantee. Look, I don't do that shit very often, but in a economic climate heavily biased against consumers, you do what you have to. Like it or not, all these things have issues that require backlash... some more than others. You're really not making a convincing argument by saying that I have no right, because that couldn't be more wrong. I'm well aware of my rights, and I'll take full advantage of them.

For me, it's the same thing as shoppers who yell until they get the manager to throw them a discount. Yeah, you save a little money, but you're being a dick in the process. It's a matter of "should," not "can."

I never said you have no right, and if you walk out of the movie (within a reasonable amount of time, of course) or the movie stops playing, then I think a refund is more than reasonable.

Entertainment is just like any other product that promises to do something. Sure, it's more taste based than others, but if they don't hold up their end, then I will use whatever available to me to get recourse. In the case of ME3, I've boycotted the next three Bioware games, and let the developer know that they pulled the rug from under us.

More taste based? It's entirely taste based. What's satisfying fulfillment for one person is unsatisfactory for the next. And what about advertisement campaigns where the entire point is to mislead the audience? Should the producers of Cabin In The Woods be sued because the entire point was to catch viewers who thought it'd be a conventional horror film by surprise? What about Kojima hiding the fact that Raiden was the protagonist of MGS2? For that matter, can I sue 20th Century Fox because the Prometheus Blu Ray promises that "Questions Will Be Answered" but I don't believe enough questions are answered? There's just no way you could apply a consistent standard for this.

You can define what a functional product is. It's pretty much impossible to define what functional art is.

Of course, refusing to buy the next games and contacting the developer is perfectly reasonable in my book.

That's where we differ. If the movie is bad enough, I will ask for my money back. Since I strictly go to theatres with money back guarantees, that's always an option. Of course, my bar is pretty low to begin with. I like Adam Sandler movies, and the Transformers movies were entertaining enough. I think of the hundreds of times I've been to theatres, I've asked for my money back twice. One for the new Evil Dead (due to leaving the theatre sick), and for the Avatar movie.

I think your entire argument is personal conjecture. I also say fuck it. If I have options for recourse, and I think I need it, then I'll use it. You just keep using your standard, and I'll keep using mine.

That's fine. I just think your standards of "needing it" are far too low. But hey, different strokes, different folks.

 

[Sterling]

That's fine. I just think your standards of "needing it" are far too low. But hey, different strokes, different folks.

I think consumers need to have the option available. I agree it's had to justify the action most of the time, but there are clear cut cases when you're in the right. At the same time, I think placing your standards too high causes the worst attitudes we see in today's game publishers.