# Gamers and the Idea of Entitlement



## Ryukouki (Feb 14, 2014)

​Looking back over the past several years, gaming communities have changed drastically. With each new generation of gamers, the complaining seems to increase as people demand more instant gratification. It is astounding to look at some of the gaming community reactions over some developer choices over the past several years, with death threats being considered perfectly common. In some gaming communities, you could have full on "player versus player arguments." This goes into the idea of entitlement. Is there an instance where this sense of entitlement can go so far as to actually be justifiable? Could entitlement be a gray area where there are instances where people should be able to speak up?​​[prebreak]Continue reading[/prebreak]​​*Entitlement Being Not Okay to Do*​​Gamer entitlement as a whole revolves around the concept of the customer feeling that they have a right to something, broadly speaking. This idea has been widened to include game mechanics, features, and customization elements for a particular title. A lot of times these comments appear on the web as users feel that they could hide behind this veil of anonymity and hurl obscene comments at developers who, at the end of the day, are human beings like us; they are beings that have lives and duties to attend to. Part of me is grateful that I never got interested in game design due to the aspect of community outrage. Some say though that the ones that complain are the vocal minority and the majority of players have a vastly better experience. This idea of entitlement can nowadays be attributed to the average consumer who wants what they paid for.​​In one way, customers pay for this item and now, with the age of cloud gaming and downloadable content, AAA titles are appearing on the market half-finished or padlocked behind a cage of paywalls. In one hand I see people who have paid good money for a title, and I do not blame them for asking for the content, but on the other hand, I abhor seeing gamers hurling obscenities over developer decisions and factors beyond consumer control. Look at _Mass Effect 3_ and how the game turned out. Massive fan rioting forced the developers to essentially release an alternate ending as downloadable content. The idea of bowing to public demand here just hurts inside, as the developers had to essentially shoehorn an ending built to satisfy a crowd.​​Better yet, if you want this in more "relevant" terms, look at the releases of Pokémon X and Y and the Pokémon Bank/Transporter applications. Considering the games wanted everything to be on an even footing, the idea failed miserably when several territories did early releases breaking street date, and the issue of the Bank and Transporter not working for over a month in North America/Europe left Japan once again in the seat of domination on the WiFi ladders with their awesome creatures from previous adventures. You even get people complaining about the inconvenience of the procedures used to transfer the creatures around, again underlining the idea that gamers are becoming more demanding and wanting things instantly.​​Looking at another case of entitlement, we need not look further than the GBATemp and MaxConsole forums and the Gateway 3DS debacle. Looking at the release of their beta firmwares, and the issues it has caused, the end result seems not worth it, as communities were in an uproar over the Gateway team not implementing certain features in time, panicking whenever the site goes down, being angry about release dates not being fulfilled, etc. I wonder whatever happened to the concept of "patience," because it certainly appears that people have no patience whatsoever. While some can argue that they paid good money and that they have some right to be able to demand excessively, on the other hand the end decision is in the hands of the developer. The way I see it now, the debacle is just a result of people's impatience and excessive demands placing unwanted pressure on a team to perform. However, can there be ways in which complaining is justified?​​*Can We Justify Being Entitled to Something?*​​From another angle, the entitlement theory can definitely be a gray area which in some cases can be completely justifiable. In one idea, entitlement may be justifiable in the instance of inequality. Game releases that are halted or ceased in one region over another for little explanation could definitely qualify here. With Nintendo, there's the idea of region locking, which many gamers have taken arms over. Seeing games getting released overseas with no hope of seeing the light of day here on the other side of the pond definitely is heartbreaking, especially since some of these games have received such fantastic input from the community. Another case is Nintendo's failure to release _Rune Factory 4 _to the European territories, or the release of exclusive limited edition hardware overseas. As a better example, I'll discuss the latest controversy of the _Puzzle and Dragons_ mobile game. To sum it up, mass rioting in the community pages led to better content for North America.​​Another recent example of gamer entitlement being entirely justifiable is the case of the mobile game called _Puzzle and Dragons, _a small but incredibly complex dungeon crawling RPG with _Bejeweled _elements. Three major territories have seen releases that garner lots of discussion: Japan, Europe, and North America. (I would totally suggest trying this game out if you have it in your area...) Japan is always the territory which receives the best benefits, and having played solely on the North American side, if I had known that I would be neutered with my experiences, I would have never played here. Basically, what happened recently was a huge debacle over the withholding of content, the silence of the North American branch in comparison to other branches, and the absolutely terrible treatment of the North American players in terms of features, events, and loot. For a more thorough rundown, you can go here. In the end, after essentially mass-rioting on the community Facebook page and threatening with boycotts for in-app purchases and the removal of means to access informational archives (a devastating move as the game is almost unplayable without outside help) from almost all communities, the North American branch started to treat the player base better with an event that rivals other territories. To drive the point home, on one side the North American branch does not make enough money as other branches, but on the other hand we are still customers, some of us having paid into the _thousands _for the content. Being treated as the red-headed stepchild and watching as we are fed table scraps while watching our big brothers eat with a gold spoon in their mouths makes for an agreeable justification, no?​​

_I kid you not when I say that people were rioting over this cute egg-shaped creature. Any player of the game knows its immense value, and seeing other communities getting it free while North America was being withheld led to some very serious debate._​​So there we have it. We have cases where being entitled is wrong, and cases where entitlement could be right. In essentiality, we have a gray area again! Personally, I find that entitlement is a double-edged sword that can be useless in getting a developer to give or perform some act that players think they have the right to, and other instances entitlement could be beneficial to put something on a more even footing in the face of inequality.​​Summing this monster of a piece up, where are you guys on the idea of entitlement in gaming? What does the concept mean to you? Do you see gaming entitlement being a necessary factor or something that has no meaning? Do you have any further input to provide on? Whatever you have, feel free to comment below. Keep it clean though!​


----------



## Necron (Feb 14, 2014)

I need to point out that using Gateway as an example is very bad. Them being a flashcard makers, and the "bad" reputation they got, could lead them to disappear without trace overnight, so that is why people were always concerned about the site being down or them not releasing the firm on the date themselves put.


----------



## ferret7463 (Feb 14, 2014)

I have to say the DLC stuff is a croc. When i buy a game, it should be the whole game not just a piece of one. This kinda like buying candles and then the candle seller will say, "You'll want to buy the wicks for those."


----------



## Ryukouki (Feb 14, 2014)

Necron said:


> I need to point out that using Gateway as an example is very bad. Them being a flashcard makers, and the "bad" reputation they got, could lead them to disappear without trace overnight, so that is why people were always concerned about the site being down or them not releasing the firm on the date themselves put.


 

I'm actually not calling them out on anything. I merely used that whole bricking nightmare as an example and the community hostility as part of the discussion at hand.


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Feb 14, 2014)

Stuff like this?







And when people whine that transferring Pokémon from Gen. V to Gen. VI with PokéTransfer is too slow and too inconvenient.


----------



## Ryukouki (Feb 14, 2014)

Pingouin7 said:


> Stuff like this?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

Don't even get me started on that. I could easily have discussed that, but I felt that I was already winding too long. 

EDIT: Now you've tempted me. BRB, collating, collating...


----------



## Necron (Feb 14, 2014)

Ryukouki said:


> I'm actually not calling them out on anything. I merely used that whole bricking nightmare as an example and the community hostility as part of the discussion at hand.


Oh, that makes more sense. Should have read twice there.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Feb 14, 2014)

This may or may not be so much about entitlement, mostly because I don't have any arguments about it because I don't give a fuck about half the shit people whine about because I like playing games, not masturbating over XYZ feature....

But there are a lot of people who seem to think they're entitled to X, Y, Z game company's attention, that they're entitled to get what the want because "we buy your things, therefore you should listen to me (even if I'm in the minority!)" For example, you have those people who get all pissy when "Japanese Game Company Example" doesn't release "Popular Game In Japan, but Nowhere Else Example 12" in the US, or translated in English etc. They think because they and 100 odd people would buy the game, it would be feasible to package it, translate it, and put it out in the US. But the reality is, a majority X/Y/Z game company doesn't give a single solitary fuck about all of their fanbase, they care about money. It's always been about the money, it's always going to be about the money, and it won't ever change. 




ferret7463 said:


> I have to say the DLC stuff is a croc. When i buy a game, it should be the whole game not just a piece of one. This kinda like buying candles and then the candle seller will say, "You'll want to buy the wicks for those."


There's a difference between DLC, and on-Disc/Day-One DLC. I would understand people against day-one DLC, that's fine and all, but being against extra content devs make for their games because they want to give their customers more of their game/want to make money off of it, I see no problem with.


----------



## Ryukouki (Feb 14, 2014)

Tom Bombadildo said:


> This may or may not be so much about entitlement, mostly because I don't have any arguments about it because I don't give a fuck about half the shit people whine about because I like playing games, not masturbating over XYZ feature....
> 
> But there are a lot of people who seem to think they're entitled to X, Y, Z game company's attention, that they're entitled to get what the want because "we buy your things, therefore you should listen to me (even if I'm in the minority!)" For example, you have those people who get all pissy when "Japanese Game Company Example" doesn't release "Popular Game In Japan, but Nowhere Else Example 12" in the US, or translated in English etc. They think because they and 100 odd people would buy the game, it would be feasible to package it, translate it, and put it out in the US. But the reality is, a majority X/Y/Z game company doesn't give a single solitary fuck about all of their fanbase, they care about money. It's always been about the money, it's always going to be about the money, and it won't ever change.
> 
> ...


 

In regards to your second point about people who are entitled to XYZ company's attention, I came up with a rebuttal to that, of sorts, in regards to the Puzzle and Dragons incident. What ended up happening was that North America was being treated like jack shit; Europe was getting far more content than us despite hosting a smaller player base, and Japan was the king of the crop getting everything very quickly. In this case, couldn't we say that the issue is justifiable and that we deserve the chance to argue that our voice means something?


----------



## Punkonjunk (Feb 14, 2014)

This is a bit of a sticky thing. Gamers ranting is important, but market research is JUST as important. I haven't played ME3, but I heard about the terrible ending, and the outcry. 

For me, Deadspace2 had juuuust about the worst ending ever. I looked up some dev's emails and wrote them extremely vulgar emails about how incredibly dissapointing it was. I mean, seriously, spoilers, survival horror game where everything is made of meat and nightmares and body horror and then you fight your fucking girlfriend and some smoke inside your own head? And then you sit down and cry for a while until a helicopter comes and bam, yay, everyone is great!

Now, who knows if that ending was put to focus groups and tested great. Maybe it was a cop out, maybe they just didn't have money for more assets by the time they got to dev work on the end game.
I have no idea, but shit was I pissed.

But.... this sentiment hasn't really been echoed even by my friends, and I haven't seen much ranting about it, either. (even Gamefaqs is pretty clean of rage at the ending) 
When it boils right down to it, it was an amazing game otherwise.

Now, paper mario sticker star, that I have no idea how that made it to the masses in it's current state. I heard some things about miyamoto stepping in and buggering everything up, but I can't find any reasonable source on that. I imagine they either focused on a much younger generation, or.... 
Really I have no idea. I do feel entitled to get a good game out of a series I have loved for a long time, though. 

I also feel entitled to a complete game. DLC should be a bonus, but not a mandate.

It's VERY important to differentiate the extremely loud minority and your target demographic, and it's also important to remember that your target demographic isn't always JUST your fans.... but from my eyes, I always feel like keeping the fans behind you is generally a better idea than trying to expand or hone your demographic in a new direction.
I definitely won't be buying another paper mario until there is a reasonable lets play available for me to judge gameplay with great scrutiny, and I am sure many, many folks are in that same boat.

On the other hand, if another M&LRPG rolled out today, I'd buy it without needing to know anything.

When a game costs 50+ dollars, I'm entitled to be upset if it fucking sucks, is what I'm getting at as a whole. I'm also entitled to contribute to the potential upset on the internet. I don't think I'm entitled to a "fix" for the problem, like ME3 apparently offering a DLC fix'd ending, but.... I have no idea if that ending was literally at the request of almost all the fans.

Our entitlement versus responsible market research is where the whole thing gets really messy.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Feb 14, 2014)

Well people need to realize that a game is someone's child. Gamers need to stop thinking they can do it better because they can't. Someone spent tons of hours crafting a universe, writing a narrative, making levels, and then some random guy just says "NO YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG"? Fuck off.

Consumers are pretty much supposed to be entitled. Not rightfully so but that's typically how business works. "The customer is always right" and shit like that. But I think the fact is that, honestly, gamers are a terrible group of people. Incredibly entitled, more so than other hobbyists, offensive, abrasive, just irritating. They have a right to cry out over shitty business practices but when it comes to something like a narrative, it's not in your hands. That's someone's baby righ there and you're telling them you can raise it better.


----------



## Ryukouki (Feb 14, 2014)

Punkonjunk said:


> This is a bit of a sticky thing. Gamers ranting is important, but market research is JUST as important. I haven't played ME3, but I heard about the terrible ending, and the outcry.
> 
> For me, Deadspace2 had juuuust about the worst ending ever. I looked up some dev's emails and wrote them extremely vulgar emails about how incredibly dissapointing it was. I mean, seriously, spoilers, survival horror game where everything is made of meat and nightmares and body horror and then you fight your fucking girlfriend and some smoke inside your own head? And then you sit down and cry for a while until a helicopter comes and bam, yay, everyone is great!
> 
> ...


 

That is a great response, and I very much agree with what you said about _Sticker Star_. I also agree with how DLC should just be there to augment but not mandate. I just find DLC in general to be a terrible institution overall.


----------



## Gahars (Feb 14, 2014)

As a consumer, you are entitled to certain things. If you make a purchase, you're entitled to a working, fully functional product. If you pay for a season pass, you are entitled to the content that you paid for. I think that's pretty fair.

So take that Puzzle and Dragons example. NA customers, despite fully supporting the game, were receiving a subpar, inferior experience. They were treated unequally despite paying for the game just like customers from other regions. They were justifiably pissed.

However, if you have not bought the game, you are not entitled to anything. Even a preorder doesn't count; technically, you haven't purchased the game, you just put the money on reserve for when the game is available for purchase. The developers don't owe you anything, not yet.

I think the problem just comes from people seeing examples from the first case and thinking it applies to everything. "Those guys got treated this way, so I should, too! All the time, in fact!" There's a million comedy routines out there about kids getting medals for everything, and while there's a lot of exaggeration, there's a nugget of truth there, too. A lot of people believe they're special and expect the world around them to treat them as such. Mix these together and you have a recipe for disaster. You have groups demanding that developers pander to their agendas and wants. You have people harassing volunteer translators (it happens all too often here). It's just a mess.


----------



## avran89 (Feb 14, 2014)

I could agree that *SOME* gamers today act spoiled/entitled/whiny/etc. I'm not stating it as a broad generalization that every video game player is a whiny kid. They can be very picky and fickle over video games over the most silliest flaws and make a big deal out of it. We live in the information age where info can travel around the world in seconds, so some players feels like their games should be instant regardless of the time the devs took to make it and complain about the dates getting pushed back. Some would even complain over free stuff a company might give out even though they don't have to. Maybe it's the culture we live in where parents treat their kids too special that fosters such an entitled attitude towards the video game markets. Maybe it's the players who set their standards too high and need to stop comparing every game to some title they really love as a gold standard. or maybe it's the Internet environment that gives players the platform to vent their frustrations out towards despite how it's perceived. Whatever is the case I would say that some video game fans today are too whiny and have a sense of entitlement like a little kid that crying at their mother for candy.

@ the OP the Mass Effect 3 example is a perfect case of whiny fans who act like children over the most petty reasons.


----------



## Hop2089 (Feb 14, 2014)

The things I'm entitled to is a game without loads of often overpriced DLC or required paid DLC, good gameplay, and high replay value. As an import gamer I can spend upwards of $80 for a console game, I want it to be either one, no DLC, or two, has only optional DLC that's free or at a reasonable price (1-5 dollars US).


----------



## aphirst (Feb 14, 2014)

> Look at _Mass Effect 3_ and how the game turned out. Massive fan rioting forced the developers to essentially release an alternate ending as downloadable content. The idea of bowing to public demand here just hurts inside, as the developers had to essentially shoehorn an ending built to satisfy a crowd.


Oh boy, you never played Mass Effect, did you? There was a LOT wrong with ME3, believe me. Shitty, pulled-out-of-ass ending, and trash writing quality across the board. Tons of the setting's internal consistency was thrown away and ignored.

...argh, I'm too mad to write anything cogent. ME1 was a flawed but promising RPG/TPS. ME2 watered the shit out of the RPG side, and threw away some of the "sense" of the setting, but had slightly more refined TPS elements (not that I gave a shit about that; I was in it for the chance of seeing a genuinely grand SciFi RPG). ME3 was basically a cash-in generic TPS.

Also, there's a fundamental problem with our society, the fact that we can pay for media, but have no right to refund if we genuinely didn't enjoy it. We should have grounds for "not fit for purpose" that account for whether it turned out to either a) be a pile of shit, or b) fail to meet your (yes, your own, not someone else's) standards for what qualifies as "entertaining".


----------



## Pedeadstrian (Feb 14, 2014)

Hop2089 said:


> The things I'm entitled to is a game without loads of often overpriced DLC or required paid DLC, good gameplay, and high replay value. As an import gamer I can spend upwards of $80 for a console game, I want it to be either one, no DLC, or two, has only optional DLC that's free or at a reasonable price (1-5 dollars US).


I've got some bad news if you think you're entitled to high replay value...

Just like you said, entitlement is a grey area. Sometimes it's good, and other times it isn't. Take, for example, Arkham Origins. The developers have been making news lately because they have basically stated "Hey, we know there are serious problems with our game, but we'd rather make DLC because money > customer satisfaction." If you paid for a game, you should be able to finish that game without being stuck at certain parts with no way to go forward. This would be a situation where entitlement is a good thing. It's not like they put on the cover of the game "If you play this game, you may end up being stuck and unable to proceed." Gamers should get working products.

Then, of course, there's all the bitching. I played ME3, but only after the new ending(s) came out. So I can't really comment on all the outrage, but similar outrage is evident pretty much everywhere. There's games like Final Fantasy XIII that deviate from previous installments and people go nuts. Then there's games like Megaman Legends 3, which I'd talk about, but other people in this thread may be more qualified in doing so.


----------



## Ulieq (Feb 14, 2014)

In one way, customers pay for this item and now, with the age of cloud gaming and downloadable content, AAA titles are appearing on the market half-finished or padlocked behind a cage of paywalls. In one hand I see people who have paid good money for a title, and I do not blame them for asking for the content, 

This^

Also, Fox News may have got to you a bit.


----------



## goober (Feb 14, 2014)

The fact that entitlement skyrocketed once DLC skyrocketed, is no coincidence. The gaming industry used to seriously value their customers and didn't overly abuse them. Costs were realistic and fair, even though - technically - costs were higher "back in the day". But those costs went to actual manufacturing (carts, chips, etc.) and distribution costs. Not outsized exec pay and crazy ridiculous overhead.

But really, the basic facts are simple:

Developers are screwing up more with their games and designs. Hello! Diablo 3. Hello! SimCity. Hello! Mass Effect 3. and the list goes on. (Just shut up about the "success" of D3 and SC. The attachment rates after launch and players after launch are abysmal for the sales they have. Which explicitly points at hype and misconceptions selling the game and not the games themselves. Sure, it made them money, but will it continue to be as successful? No, it's already showing that. Just imagine if they did it right, though. The follow-up numbers to that would be amazing)

There's less "new" things to do now that this industry has matured. Therefore, tastes and consumer demands have matured. Thus, higher expectations.

There are more gamers now than ever. Bigger audience means more opinions. Larger demographic spectrum means more differing opinions.

Game companies, and people, went from making games for pleasure and visions to making games for money and more money. That's the biggest, most significant and alarming difference. Most people now make games to make money first and foremost. So instead of being rewarded for making a good game and having good ideas, they're now chasing lottery statistics and trends. Which sometimes makes a fun game, but it also makes a tired industry and the perception of milking. Mix that up with a matured market, and it's a recipe for conflict.

There's less positive passion in this industry because of that. Obviously, people made games before to make money too, but you didn't do it unless you had a PASSION for it because you were very, very likely to struggle and have hard times while doing it. That passion showed in the games and it's proof enough when almost every game follows the basic designs from the earliest heydays of this industry.

When Arcades were super popular people went into that model with the awareness and acceptance of being "milked" for money. It was understood and accepted, and enjoyed. Then home consoles came around and said, "hey, keep your quarters and just enjoy yourself!" Now, this industry is taking the Arcade approach with consoles and people aren't as readily accepting to that because they are traditionalist and didn't sign up for it. The reason why it is working, though, is because there are people who don't care, and most importantly, there's so much new blood and kiddies that never knew how things were. They're also taking over the "old timers".

So, you have those who are "entitled" that want the days of old back and fight screw ups and milkings and then the new kiddies that are, well, spoiled entitled brats on any day of the week. Even the old timers fit that bill because seriously, we're almost out of generations of people that have had legitimate, truly tough, unimaginable times. Instead of cities, towns, and states, it's mostly families and communities. Which is a much smaller scale and indeed affects the country as a whole differently than things like world war, economic depressions where people literally starve because there is no food to BUY, instead of not being able to afford it. Just imagine knowing that even if you had money, you couldn't buy the food anyway. It's an entirely different desperation than knowing there is food out there to buy but you just can't afford it enough.


----------



## Ryukouki (Feb 14, 2014)

goober said:


> The fact that entitlement skyrocketed once DLC skyrocketed, is no coincidence. The gaming industry used to seriously value their customers and didn't overly abuse them. Costs were realistic and fair, even though - technically - costs were higher "back in the day". But those costs went to actual manufacturing (carts, chips, etc.) and distribution costs. Not outsized exec pay and crazy ridiculous overhead.
> 
> But really, the basic facts are simple:
> 
> ...


 

I actually have an article idea planned next with the changes in the gaming industry over the past several years. I miss back in the day when you could just buy a cartridge or disk and not have to worry about excess content being locked behind walls. Very interesting points though with the arcade analogy and comparing to people who want the old days back though.


----------



## Lestworth (Feb 14, 2014)

It's really hard to justify the "complaining" or "Entitlement" in the gaming community these days. The industry has gotten bigger, and the technology has become better. Lets take Capcom, really thats all i need to type ... Capcom. Companies that use those practices deserve to be bitched at and complained at.

Yeah sure, those that went ape all over the Mass Effect 3 ending was a bit insane. I still think the revised ending (aka extended ending) was more fulfilling, and im glad they added more meat to the ending while still making you think. The original ending wasn't horrible, however the revised ending was more meaningful.

I just think the word Entitlement is a nasty word to use. Do gamers bitch and complain when something is viewed as bad in a minority? sure, and does that minority feel like a majority because of the amount of complaining they can produce? Yeah. Does this mean they are entitled ass hats that want attention? Not really. Some of them might actually think that, while others just piggy back off it and blow it up. Its the Internet, and people can communicate with each other in a much bigger and faster way then what others use to be able to do. We rate games these days, and some people actually trust those ratings rather then word of mouth.


----------



## Ryukouki (Feb 14, 2014)

Lestworth said:


> It's really hard to justify the "complaining" or "Entitlement" in the gaming community these days. The industry has gotten bigger, and the technology has become better. Lets take Capcom, really thats all i need to type ... Capcom. Companies that use those practices deserve to be bitched at and complained at.
> 
> Yeah sure, those that went ape all over the Mass Effect 3 ending was a bit insane. I still think the revised ending (aka extended ending) was more fulfilling, and im glad they added more meat to the ending while still making you think. The original ending wasn't horrible, however the revised ending was more meaningful.
> 
> I just think the word Entitlement is a nasty word to use. Do gamers bitch and complain when something is viewed as bad in a minority? sure, and does that minority feel like a majority because of the amount of complaining they can produce? Yeah. Does this mean they are entitled ass hats that want attention? Not really. Some of them might actually think that, while others just piggy back off it and blow it up. Its the Internet, and people can communicate with each other in a much bigger and faster way then what others use to be able to do. We rate games these days, and some people actually trust those ratings rather then word of mouth.


 

Being a media reviewer and all, don't even get me _started _with the inadequacies of the reviewing system found on gaming discussion sites.  There are so many things wrong with the system that it's just inherently flawed at this point and filled with passionless drivel where the score does not match the inflection or passion.


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Feb 14, 2014)

Personally I think some criticism is healthy in any industry, movies, music, books, games.... The death threats are from a very psychologically challenged minority in the "gamer community" yeah that's not healthy criticism and is bad for the industry and should be dealt with as Hollywood has when it had the same problem. (Actual laws had to be enacted to protect people from being killed by random nut jobs.)

On another note, I think it is wrong to take a very small % of a group and use that small % as a label for the entire group.

Using that stick I would say all developers suck balls because Barbie Dream house Party.....

Obviously this isn't true at all we have many many awesome developers on this earth and they deliver many great games!


----------



## grossaffe (Feb 14, 2014)

I have never played the Mass Effect series, but my understanding of the uproar over ME3 was that the series was based on choices, and the ending essentially threw all of your choices away and only changed the color of the sky or something based on all the choices you could have made.
Chrono Trigger managed to have a dozen endings or so with a single game around twenty years ago, why couldn't ME manage endings that take into account the choices you made throughout the series?

On another note, I feel like game makers should feel a semblance of duty to the fans that made their series successful.  I was really disappointed when they came out with Splinter Cell: Conviction, which eschewed the concept of stealth and turned it into an action game with a win button.  And then they followed that up with Blacklist where they ditched the iconic voice of Sam Fisher, Michael Ironside, with some young guy.  All the way back in the third game, they were poking fun at Sam's age, and the training of possible replacements.  At the age of 50, he's voice by a 57 year old, but when Sam's at the age of 57, he's voiced by a, what, 34 year old?  Sorry Ubisoft, but you've alienated this fan who was there from the start.

Of course there's the issue of incomplete games with on disk/day 1 DLC, games that last only three hours, broken/buggy games.


----------



## Apex (Feb 14, 2014)

Just gonna throw this out there:

On the second point, when people complain about regional differences in content, they neglect the fact that it's a two way street.
So you don't get certain monsters in Puzzles and Dragons? Japan doesn't get Xbox One at all.

As far as the Tales of comment goes: It's not a tremendously popular series in America. It takes time and money to localize a game, if there is the threat of there not being a market for it at all, then it's a risk I could understand them not wanting to take. Look at Nintendo, when you pour all of your money and time into something (the Wii U.) and it doesn't do well, it's a colossal blow financially. Therefore people actually showing interest by putting stuff like that in their signatures on Gamefaqs and making silly internet petitions, are a more proactive way of trying to show that there is interest, and it likely wont flop.

If you're really that concerned with Japanese exclusive content, just learn Japanese. It isn't that hard.

By the way, Ryukouki, this article is a lot better than the other one! Good work!


----------



## Ryukouki (Feb 14, 2014)

Apex said:


> Just gonna throw this out there:
> 
> On the second point, when people complain about regional differences in content, they neglect the fact that it's a two way street.
> So you don't get certain monsters in Puzzles and Dragons? Japan doesn't get Xbox One at all.
> ...


 

Hehe, I spent a lot of time on this one and I wanted to make it right. Thanks a ton for the compliment and feedback! I always strive to deliver experiences that make people think twice about a common issue.  And haha, fair point with Japan and the XBOX One. ;P


----------



## porkiewpyne (Feb 14, 2014)

I've got too many Tamadras then I know what to do with really. Got most that really mattered already. Then again, I did get gungtrolled quite a few times so....

I do understand that none of the NA players want to be sidelined too much but they way they whined and bitched really pissed me off. :\


----------



## Black-Ice (Feb 14, 2014)

In terms of games, I'm entitled to my opinion and that's just about it.


----------



## luisedgarf (Feb 14, 2014)

> If you're really that concerned with Japanese exclusive content, just learn Japanese. It isn't that hard.


 

 Except not everyone lives in a country or place when learning Japanese is possible.


----------



## Apex (Feb 14, 2014)

luisedgarf said:


> Except not everyone lives in a country or place when learning Japanese is possible.


 

You obviously have access to the internet, there are tons of resources available online. I didn't learn Japanese in Japan, I learned it in America before I moved here. It's possible, if you really want it.


----------



## Taleweaver (Feb 14, 2014)

Personally, I think the entire entitlement thing from gamers is getting out of hand because of three things:

1. the ever increasing cost to make a game vs the price they're currently sold
2. expected standards of gaming (and electronics in general) that are getting higher with each generation
3. the name "gamer" refers to someone who indentifies him-/herself as playing games


Lemme go into more detail on those...
Inflation means that pretty much everything tends to become more expensive over time. Think of 10 years ago (or ask your parent if you're young) how much an apple, a bus ticket, coke cola, mars or a loaf of bread was worth back then. It was way cheaper then, yet the quality was exactly the same. Nobody complains about it, though. It's just the way things are (you can always choose NOT to buy these things). Electronics do NOT follow these standards. Rather the opposite. Moore's law indicates that processing power doubles every 18 months, and for some years, it has passed the point where extra processing power was absolutely needed for daily work routines. The result is that the not-so-state-of-the-art machines become more attractive because they are cheaper. And not only that: ease-of-use, long term quality, amount of electricity used...all those factors are starting to calculate more into what makes something quality. And that, in turn, changes perception of what to expect from a modern pc. It not only has to be fast, but quiet, all-round, have a good graphics card, and so on.
Games follow that same trend...or perhaps it's more correct to say that they're leading the trend. In any case: games have grown as well. Not only to keep up with Moore's law that sort of pushes all developers into making use of awesome graphics (if they don't do it, another developer will), but on other standards that we have come to expect over the years. RPG-elements, cutscènes, multiplayer, a story*. This puts developers in a very uneasy spot. On one hand, it takes much more money to provide all the things gamers have come to expect over the years while on the other hand the price they're willing to pay is lower than ever. And that last one is pretty hard. Piracy and free games always had an influence, but I doubt it was ever as big as it is today. Back in the old days, it was pretty common to just go out to the store, buy a 70 bucks game** based on its cover only to find out it sucked. But you played it nonetheless because you payed money for it and second-hand sales weren't as common or easy as nowadays. The end result: you hated it less (or even liked it) BECAUSE you spend all that money on it.
Finally...there is this thing called "gamer". We identify ourselves as "playing games" and take them seriously. Way more seriously than we should be. When we go to a restaurant that isn't as good as we hoped, we simply go elsewhere. But when we spend roughly the same amount of money on a video game, that is PERSONAL. It HURTS. Even more that we are somehow to blame, as with all the previews, reviews, demo's, shareware, youtube-vids and so on, we should have KNOWN BETTER. And because we are gamers, that hurts on a deep personal level. And that means we get emotional about it and do things that get...pretty irrational. Instead of just "not buying" the game anymore, we tell the entire internet how bad it is, tell our EXPERT VIEWS (tm) about what is wrong with it and by God, we do it as if we're the director-CEO-vice-president of the company (and the universe) themselves. I admit that these sorts of rantings are also somewhat caused by the anonymity of the internet***, but still...
I'm into S&M. And while that by itself has nothing to do with gaming, I see that same sort of identifying in my community. Believe me: if you have your opinion on how another S&M guy or girl does things, you WILL get a lot of negative feedback. The thing curious people bump into the most is not so much how we aren't the scary weirdo's popular media make us out to be, but the amount of political correctness you need in order to talk to people. Because it is IMPORTANT. Something silly as how to address or what I might or might not like and in what context...the average S&M guy/girl can talk for hours on how (s)he is not what someone else thought (s)he was. Much in the same way a gamer can spend many hours telling how bad some games are (the Spoony experiment, anyone?).

But I digress...the entitlement thing. Lots of gamers seem to have this worry or primal fear that the games they have come to love (or are downright addicted to it) will come to a halt. They fear that the policies companies start to practice in order to keep their books in the green will ruin the fun they have in gaming. And to a degree, that might be true. Games are changing. They follow trends, but the main factor is and will always be that they need to make a profit. Companies that can't afford to keep their programmers, artists, musicians, writers, ... working will stop doing so in the end. Or change their business plan that will make them a profit. They know that no matter what they do, some people won't like it. That's normal. You can't have a million-people audience and please them all. You simply can't. Companies can't simply cater to the one who wants the same game over and over again. I mean...nintendo is trying exactly that and not doing so good with it. 





*of course some genres always had a story-focus. But nowadays even genres that never revolved around it (FPS'es are a prime example) suddenly need voice acting and cutscènes or they'll be seen as "less quality"
**this is adjusted for inflation. The real price was actually somewhat around 40 bucks.
***compare Angry Joe's first rants on the xbone with his face-to-face interview with Major Nelson. It's not as easy being that mad about it when faced when the person doesn't look as evil and cunning as they are in your mind's eye


----------



## jagerstaffel (Feb 14, 2014)

There is a serious increase in entitlement these days than there were before the whole facebook-iphone craze. The kind of entitlement I hate most of all is the kind where these ridiculous gamers think they deserve free things if something gets delayed. The biggest offense I've seen recently was when Pokebank was delayed, and the GameFAQs message boards were swamped with these cretins demanding Nintendo give them free games just because an upcoming serviced faced unforeseen circumstances. 90% of GameFAQs is like this.

There was one guy there who had the gall to call Nintendo demanding why North America does not have Super Mario Bros 3 on the NA eshop yet (he took down the video, but it's the internet, and I have it ). He had a valid question, but..... he called the god damn wrong person (customer service), and he kept saying "it's ridiculous!" and "I don't understand! Waah!". TBD you freak. If you wanted it that bad, send a letter to Nintendo, don't call the poor guy manning the telephones who is very much more informed about 3DS device problems than why a game has not been released yet.

I swear it's sickening these days. There are gamers boycotting a game just because it doesn't get a physical release. Don't they realize it's because of jerkweeds like them that releasing physical copies is a risk that can't be taken by small companies in this changing world? (One Piece Romance Dawn is said to have 160k (or 16k) physical copies in NA alone, and that's a rather large company). Look at that MGS Ground Zeros fiasco. At Gamespot comment after comment lamenting the $40 current gen physical cost of a 2 hour game, when there's a $20 digital last gen / $30 digital current gen version. We had to pay $30 for lesser games during the PS1 days. Show some respect, freaks.

/rant


----------



## luisedgarf (Feb 14, 2014)

Apex said:


> You obviously have access to the internet, there are tons of resources available online. I didn't learn Japanese in Japan, I learned it in America before I moved here. It's possible, if you really want it.


 
Try to learn Japanese WITHOUT the internet or when the only resources are in English. Per example, learning Japanese in Israel or the Middle East is a big pain for them because of that.

Not everyone lives in America, dude.


----------



## Frozen_Fish (Feb 14, 2014)

I think it's absolutely disgusting how anti-consumer a lot of gamers are, the fact that "gamer entitlement" even exists as a concept really shows they just think of games as children's toys and not products with corresponding consumer rights.

"A big portion of our userbase is complaining about the quality of our latest game!"
"What!? There can't be something genuinely wrong with it, they must just be entitled."
And then the video game "journalists" like kotaku jump to their defence because angering gamers = more clicks = more ad revenue and everything keeps snowballing.


----------



## FireGrey (Feb 14, 2014)

Ryukouki said:


> I actually have an article idea planned next with the changes in the gaming industry over the past several years. I miss back in the day when you could just buy a cartridge or disk and not have to worry about excess content being locked behind walls. Very interesting points though with the arcade analogy and comparing to people who want the old days back though.


 
A bit off topic, but for me and my best friend, we had the same console and cartridges for several years (we both skipped a generation) and we would spend hours looking for content "locked behind walls" (God damn Stop n' Swap).


----------



## Apex (Feb 14, 2014)

luisedgarf said:


> Try to learn Japanese WITHOUT the internet or when the only resources are in English. Per example, learning Japanese in Israel or the Middle East is a big pain for them because of that.
> 
> Not everyone lives in America, dude.


 

I've met people from middle eastern countries that speak Japanese better than I do. 

Knowledge is free, and it exists. A majority of countries teach English in public and private schools, so most people will be able to use the fundamentals of english to learn another language if they wanted to.

I don't want to sound rude, but just like anything in life worth doing... If you want to do it, don't come up with reasons why you can't. Just do it.


----------



## Nightwish (Feb 14, 2014)

jagerstaffel said:


> There are gamers boycotting a game just because it doesn't get a physical release


That actually makes sense, since otherwise they aren't buying it, they're renting it at terms that can be revised at any time.


----------



## Qtis (Feb 14, 2014)

I call it the iPhone effect. The perceived value of a product type (i.e. games) diminishes once you have to pay only a few $ or even less. Sometimes even completely free.

The idea of entitlement is an interesting topic. Usually when I buy a product, I expect it to work. Now that I work more and more with the software industry due to my work and Master's Thesis, I can see a problem many people seem to completely miss or misunderstand. A working product is completely different to a product with add-ons. When I buy a physical product like a console, I can easily understand I need to pay for extras such as a controller. The software side is a completely different matter. I expect updates for a broken product, but I don't really expect all future stuff to be free. The "all-for-me-now" ideology affects a lot of people in this way. If something is wrong, people will complain more and more. 

I'm interested in seeing what will happen to all the people who complain about such things as WiiU third party support while at the same time they don't buy the games for the console. The reasons vary from "I play it on the PS3/360 with my friends" to "it costs more so I won't buy it" and "it's inferior because of reason X". There is no easy cure for entitlement in this sense, but I guess growing older gives you a more broad opinion. That's what I think may have happened to me (also, so little time to play compared to before..).


----------



## Clydefrosch (Feb 14, 2014)

Theres  usually good reason for people to complain. If I pay full price for half a game (without being told that on the box), thats a rip off. How much money does it cost to unlock all models in that need for speed game? I believe it goes into the thousands. Or to unlock all the things that were already on disk in SFxTekken? No sirs, thats a reason to complain and lose friendship points with your userbase.
If what should be a simple two step process of scaning pokemon white and moving everything over to the bank, is turned into a complex 8 step process that has to be repeated several times over, all with constant exchange of the game, starting and restarting of two different apps, loading times over and over, logging in to nintendo network over and over, I feel its justified to complain, simply because theres no way they made it this complicated by accident.
Now, an ending fans dont agree with, no idea how much of a problem that is honestly, unless it just made no sense at all. I dont know mass effect, but if, after 3 long storyful games, the ending is something dumb like 'God stepped in and saved the universe' or 'everything up till now was an elaborate plan set up by some mastermind to save the universe' (think the second Panem movie/book. the plan was to save katniss, but mr mastermind gamemaster added so many uncontrollable factors, it doesnt even make sense she survived).

It may be that gamers got somewhat spoiled by a decade or so of innovative and really good gamemaking, that seemed to put the games and users in the center of their decisions, who are now angry when 99% of anything that happens is decided on economic factors and forecasting of supposed experts.
honestly, i deeply believe we're missing out on a million incredible games and ideas, just because most of them wouldn't be suited for a large enough crowd according to 'experts'


----------



## jagerstaffel (Feb 14, 2014)

Qtis said:


> I call it the iPhone effect. The perceived value of a product type (i.e. games) diminishes once you have to pay only a few $ or even less. Sometimes even completely free.


Some also call it the Steam effect. There are thousands of people out there who don't get a game until it goes on sale on Steam. This issue has been brought up not too long ago by a game developer.



Nightwish said:


> That actually makes sense, since otherwise they aren't buying it, they're renting it at terms that can be revised at any time.


Here's where it get's ridiculous: one of the main reasons why people hate digital only releases is because they can't buy it second hand for cheap. Trust me, those kind of people are out there, in the same way there are people out there who prefer to buy physical simply because they can sell the game when they are done for a little over half price. I don't blame them for being cheap, but it hurts the developers because the bottom line shown to investors is not customers but 2nd hand customers. It didn't even take 5 months for Capcom to report earnings for Phoenix Wright DD as within expectations, and now they are working on a new game.
And that hogwash about "renting digital games instead of owning it", I own my SD card with Phoenix Wright DD. If Nintendo takes a giant crap, I got my SD backed up regularly, and the game is there at any time. It's already been tried by other players to restore digital games on the 3DS this way, so there's no risk of loss unless Lady Luck takes a giant crap on your computer, hard drives and 3DS at the same time.


Clydefrosch said:


> If what should be a simple two step process of scaning pokemon white and moving everything over to the bank, is turned into a complex 8 step process that has to be repeated several times over, all with constant exchange of the game, starting and restarting of two different apps, loading times over and over, logging in to nintendo network over and over, I feel its justified to complain, simply because theres no way they made it this complicated by accident.


 
This is an old problem with all the previous gen of Pokemon. Have you tried importing Pokemon from a GBA game to a DS game? You could only migrate 6! And if I recall correctly it had to be either the first box or the last active box in the save file. And they get deleted from the GBA game. So I'm not surprised only the first box gets transferred this time around. See how easy it is for players to forget how much easier it is compared to before? This is where the entitlement comes from: gamers expecting current newer technology to fix the locked down nature of past technology.

I also believe the hurdle was not giving the 3DS too much power in accessing save files. There has already been one DS related exploit that gave way to the Gateway, I think Nintendo was trying to be very cautious as to not repeat that again.


----------



## BvanBart (Feb 14, 2014)

Nintendo is at this moment very strong with protecting the 3DS... What we (the crackers/hackers/modders) did wrong was to try to get money out of it and release it on big scale! (as in World Wide). If this did not happen, and games were only hackable by the few that actually understood some coding/hacking/cracking then we could say that the 3DS was crackable... because the small portion of real people that know how to enable it is peanuts.

Therefore digital Only is nice... even better if the Eshops stunt with prices... but becomes a hell when games are taken out... cause you know.. then you can not play it anymore.


----------



## Crusylicious (Feb 14, 2014)

I can see the good and bad of 'entitlement' as you put it (though I'm unsure that word fits all the examples). And on one hand I'd say the game companies have pushed players into the whiney instant gratification type of entitlement, though on the other hand, even in situations you may think legit, I have no sympathy for my fellow gamer. We have bs like Diablo III, and SimCity (to name a couple, and yes I know EA either has or is going to 'fix' it in SimCity) with the MMO style always online even for singleplayer games. Then so so many games that are unplayable unless you constantly pump money into them. So many games that don't feel like a full game until you -buy- DLC, DLC that isn't even DLC because it was already on the games install media, but you need to pay yet more money to unlock it so that you might have a complete game. I could go on and on about how much I despise the big names in the gaming world, but instead I will explain why I have no sympathy for the gamers...

YOU KEEP BUYING THIS SHIT! That is reason #1. You continue to pay these companies to rip you off and show them you don't mind bending over for them time and time again. #2 You don't do any research! You just go out and buy a game based on the name or pretty graphics. I know alot of people loved Diablo III despite it being a huge PoS. However alot of people were so mad about the always online and the fact that nobody could play the game for like a day, maybe even 2 in some cases. Had you people done any research at all, the info was out there before the game hit the shelves. The always online was well known, but ignored because of the "omg gotta haz it" mentality and only really sunk in when people couldn't play, but guess what? You bought it, so you have no right to bitch about stuff you already should have known before making said purchase. I wont bother getting deeper into the not being able to play day 1 part of the topic as I will leave Diablo alone now. #3 Fanboys, yes, idiot fanboys who defend whatever company that is screwing you over this week just because they've been a loyal fan of said company for however long. Fanboys are probably my #1 most hated people on the internet. Yes, your favorite company CAN do evil, greedy, F'ed up shit, get over it and move on, don't defend them and support the behavior.

Gamers are the downfall of the gaming industry because gamers are greedy entitled pricks with no self control, no ability to say -NO- to a company trying to cheat them. Of course I don't mean ALL gamers, but the vast majority and the majority is what drives the industry in whatever direction it goes. Don't like how or where things are going? CHANGE it, by changing your buying habits, don't just buy the shit game and then bitch about it after the fact. Who cares if you are upset? You already paid, your opinion no longer matters.

edit: I'm not anti DLC, I'm against DLC basically being required for a game to feel complete.


----------



## Steena (Feb 14, 2014)

I think the OP is confusing childish backlash for entitlement. Dead threats have absolutely nothing to do with the ridiculousness (or lack thereof) of a demand. That only says anything about the way a demand/critique is presented.

People complain more because 15 years ago, you actually paid for a full game. A game had integrity. Every version of that game at any point in time was the same for everyone. This is especially troublesome for non-singleplayer games, where balance gets destroyed. Also lately, some publishers decided to include not only pre-order exclusive content, BUT also that content being seller-specific. Which means that you should get multiple copies if you wanted everything.

On top of that, we now start to see cash shop in full priced games. We see cash shop in games that are full priced AND have a monthly sub fee. Practices that nobody even imagined could be viable to the consumer.

Sometimes, like with the very recent case of Dark Souls 2 early access preorder content, people want to NOT have the extra stuff, because it breaks the balance for everyone (and partly defeats the purpose of the experience specific to that game, but that's a matter that would deserve its own thread of discussion). It's not always just about a demand for the sake of obtaining content.

And you're telling me to not to frown upon the pokebank's yearly fee? It's not about the money, it's about the principle. Why does it cost money to begin with? We have countless of storage services that let us store dozens, hundreds of gigabytes for free, but a game developer that constantly makes millions from an established, huge franchise, cannot afford servers to hold a couple megabytes of pokemon data in a database? Gamefreaks would also continue making millions even if the pokebank was free or completely ignored, but the above storage services are a thing on their own - they live off by ads. If you don't use the service, they die. And yet THOSE are free and offer more than the pokebank does in the order of the hundreds? It doesn't make any sense, it cannot be reasonable to ask a person 5USD (or even 1cent) a year for such a negligible service when these other things are around.

The cost of upkeep of these servers compared to what gamefreaks profits off the pokemon franchise (including TGC, merchandise, etc), is probably 1:100000, most likely even less.
It's more of a sign of arrogance from nintendo, and the message that gets through is "we'll still ask you for money because we know you're gonna pay like little sheep, we're going to squeeze you to the last cent if we can". If people were more aware about their own surroundings, and didn't live in a bubble where only one company exists (in the case of pokebank, nintendo), they'd realize that a lot of their ways are outdated, pointless and even exploitative in certain cases.

People grew to complain more and be naturally defensive and overly cautious because companies (videogame companies even more so) will find any physically possible way to squeeze the customer out of their maximum amount of money, even if that gain would be so little to be hardly noticeable, but they would be willing to affect the integrity of their product, and their reputation.

What about sims city 5? Remember? The game that supposedly NEEDED to be always-online because the entire game was built grounds-up with online interactions, and the usage of the cloud for functions that otherwise could not have been implemented with the mere power of offline. Of course, the cloud bullshit was a lie ever since this was announced, reasonable people knew that there was no way that a videogame would seriously achieve something with the cloud that it could not offline, in terms of computing power, in this day and age. And then the game came out and what happened? Hackers exposed their bullshit revealing that the online requirement was mostly DRM checks and almost everything was running fine offline. And what did the developers do? They kept lying about it, they didn't give a shit, even in front of facts. Why? Because the videogame community doesn't really give a shit if it gets scammed. They knew they could get away with it. Why admit a scammy practice if the majority of your userbase won't notice it in the first place?

Another developer, which I believe to be Naughty Dog (I'm not sure), responding to criticism about excessive DLC/preorder bonuses and whatnot, replied "well, games need to eventually make money at some point!", implying that only buying a full priced mainstream AAA title that sells in the millions is not profitable. Which is an outright lie, as facts clearly show us. And everyone in this industry is free to say as they please because this community is passive and gullible.

So in the end I think that a lot of people confuse irresponsible reactions for entitlement, while ignoring for the most part the fact that this industry has several issues. Now don't get me wrong, entitlement is certainly there and people will write unrealistic demands on a whim, but it is extremely blown out of proportions, while the real problems get a free pass because some other people are being unreasonable.


----------



## Jayro (Feb 14, 2014)

I don't know about the rest of the gaming community... but when I purchase a game, I OWN THE GAME. Not a fucking "license to play said game". It's bullshit. DLC is also a crock of shit. Map packs and other add-ons should be free of charge, especially if someone bought the game at the full $60 launch price. I also hate that devs are lazy by not beta testing and debugging their games, they just rush the glitchy turd out the door these days and patch it later. Or in the case of Batman Arkham Origins, never.

Another thing I hate is disc media. Optical parts ware out too fast compared to harddrives and flash media, hence my love for harddrive loaders (Wii, Xbox, PS2), and optical drive emulation (PS3, PSP, PS1/2 emulators reading from ISO). And when a game company teases for a new game with a tech demo and/or trailer, you're damn-right I feel entitled to that game. It's a promise by the developers that the game is coming. When a game gets 90%-100% completed, and then cancelled, I get pissed off (I'm looking at YOU, Starcraft Ghost for PC, Resident Evil for GBC, and Dinosaur Planet for N64).


----------



## Dr1941 (Feb 14, 2014)

Does GBATemp have editors? The flow and pacing of this article is all over the place, it some very clear parsing issues, and the wording could use some attention every now and again.


----------



## Jayro (Feb 14, 2014)

Crusylicious said:


> YOU KEEP BUYING THIS SHIT! That is reason #1. You continue to pay these companies to rip you off and show them you don't mind bending over for them time and time again.


No... This is why I no longer pay for entertainment from big companies. I now only support smaller artists and indie devs. They don't pull this kind of bullshit like the bigger AAA companies do. I will now and forever pirate every AAA game, every major movie, and every CD by big names that I can. That's my passive-aggressive stance at getting them back for the bullshit they bring down upon themselves for ripping us off, and giving us shit. I wonder at what point developers just decide to stop being honest, and turn greedy... Is it after they get rich from their first successful title sales? Is it an ego of entitlement _themselves_..? Either way, it's bullshit.

And people like me don't always have internet at home. I have to borrow from an unsecured wi-fi, and it's unreliable for gaming. So games that require me to be online just to play a single-player campaign are stupid as hell. I'm GLAD people actually crack this shit to play offline, like Steam-rips. Steam's offline mode shouldn't require a bi-weekly phone-home just so i can play my games offline. Until this electronic bullying bullshit becomes illegal world-wide, I'll continue to fight back against the industries.


----------



## Nah3DS (Feb 14, 2014)

whine, complain and bitch all you want, but don't mess around with fan translators


----------



## Nightwish (Feb 14, 2014)

jagerstaffel said:


> Some also call it the Steam effect. There are thousands of people out there who don't get a game until it goes on sale on Steam. This issue has been brought up not too long ago by a game developer.


And people like me (country <-----------) wouldn't even bother buying games if not for sales.



jagerstaffel said:


> Here's where it get's ridiculous: one of the main reasons why people hate digital only releases is because they can't buy it second hand for cheap. Trust me, those kind of people are out there, in the same way there are people out there who prefer to buy physical simply because they can sell the game when they are done for a little over half price.


Amazingly, other media managed to survive just fine in the eBay age. Maybe they should make something people are proud to have?
And how big is that crowd, really?



jagerstaffel said:


> And that hogwash about "renting digital games instead of owning it", I own my SD card with Phoenix Wright DD. If Nintendo takes a giant crap, I got my SD backed up regularly, and the game is there at any time. It's already been tried by other players to restore digital games on the 3DS this way, so there's no risk of loss unless Lady Luck takes a giant crap on your computer, hard drives and 3DS at the same time.


But you no longer have the right to, so you're pirating it anyway. Might as well cut the middleman.


----------



## Lestworth (Feb 14, 2014)

I hate the comparison of "well back in my day". Well of course it was harder back then people. Remember blowing on cartridges to get a game to work for 2 minutes? then get the rubbing alcohol to clean it out with a swab, and pray it works. Then to also make sure you dont bump the machine because you could lose 2 hours of gameplay from a lack of a save system? yeah ...

It's reasonable to think, and even believe that the future will hold better systems, and better programming. For gamers to anticipate bigger and better things is perfectly reasonable. Do people anticipate to much to fast? Hell yes they do, i dont see flying cars, and jetpacks on the cheap right now.

Also most people dont have a reliable or even stable internet access (atm my internet is unstable because of modem is dying, atleast i believe so). Even though internet services are getting better/faster and more accessible, files are also getting bigger (22gb for Assassins Creed Black Flag).  So to complain that a game is not in physical form can be reasonable as well. Its those that bitch and complain that get the oil and attention, this is the same case. Some people actually have legitimate reasons for complaining but get drowned out from the MILLIONS OF IDIOTS ON THE INTERNET.

Its why i still hate the word "Entitlement" it fits some people, but people use it loosely and encompass a massive amount of people under that word.


----------



## calmwaters (Feb 14, 2014)

I'm entitled to the money I earn doing my job. So, if I somehow don't get a few dollars or those 2 hours of overtime, then I get the right to complain that I'm not receiving as much as I should be. On a gaming note: I think if someone steadily plays Nintendo, they have a right to ask for games for the system. But I don't mean complain: I mean ask for them. Like Ryu said, the developers are people who are under enormous pressure making games. The last thing they need is for people moaning and howling in their ears to drop what they're doing and make a new game for them. Would you like it if you were making a game and people were howling over your shoulder to drop what you were doing and make something for them?

Besides, asking for something means you already have an interest in it and there won't be any need for complaining. Now, of course, there are the people who complain because they asked for a game and have been disappointed for quite some time. Then, it becomes the developer's fault if they don't say anything or start working on this game people want. And then there are the complainers when the studio says it will not make the game.

I also like how Ryu mentioned patience. We as gamers are some of the most impatient people in the world, especially the North American ones. I like playing games, so I don't like it when nothing new is coming out; it means you guys will be really upset and that's not a pretty picture. I've always gotten games 2 or 3 years after they've come out with only a few exceptions. That way, I can do more than just complain while waiting for a new one not to be released. There is a very large library which extends back 20 years and will give me countless hours of gaming and not leave room for complaining: well a lot of it anyway. (I want another Wii Music Metroid/F-Zero game...  )


----------



## Tigran (Feb 14, 2014)

Steena said:


> And you're telling me to not to frown upon the pokebank's yearly fee? It's not about the money, it's about the principle. Why does it cost money to begin with? We have countless of storage services that let us store dozens, hundreds of gigabytes for free, but a game developer that constantly makes millions from an established, huge franchise, cannot afford servers to hold a couple megabytes of pokemon data in a database?


 

This right here shows me that you have no idea how anything actually works.

Those supposed -free- places that offer gigs and gigs of data... They don't offer you a damned thing for free. You are constantly bombarded by adds and, and them even having a computer program to go through the data. 

Sure... If you -want- your DS to start playing ads every time you open it up, or want to load a game.. sure go ahead.. suggest that to gamefreak and then -maybe- it'll be free.


----------



## Steena (Feb 14, 2014)

Tigran said:


> This right here shows me that you have no idea how anything actually works.
> 
> Those supposed -free- places that offer gigs and gigs of data... They don't offer you a damned thing for free. You are constantly bombarded by adds and, and them even having a computer program to go through the data.
> 
> Sure... If you -want- your DS to start playing ads every time you open it up, or want to load a game.. sure go ahead.. suggest that to gamefreak and then -maybe- it'll be free.


The core difference is that storage services only live off the storage service itself.
The pokebank is a side-feature that, compared to the profit gamefreak makes, is literally ignoreable. Also, I mentioned the ads in my first post myself.

We had one generation in which transferring pokemon was coded into the game and free. Every other generation did require a link cable but that's because it was not the age of the internet, and the systems themselves were not designed with internet connection in mind (let alone the fact that nintendo jumped onto the internet trend 10 years too late itself). The usage of the feature was free, forever.

Nintendo could have used the sd slot for transferred pokemon, but they chose to monetize it for this and the next generations to come. Since the games come out with 1.5/2 years intervals, you are essentially "locked" into buying a year of pokebank every time a new generation title comes out. Basically, you will be paying an added cost of 5$ with each new game (assuming you want to transfer old pokemon).

Couple this with the fact that gamefreaks -intentionally- makes certain pokemon uncatchable in the new games, and you've got a very calculated and smart monetization plan for the next foreseeable future. All of this for managing a tiny database that holds shit for data (nowadays, the size of pokemon data is pathetic, it could be held in a floppy). They've got themselves a virtual storage that is going to be compatible with every nintendo system from now on, and they will get a constant flow (dictated by the release of new generations) of subscription money out of it.

While I applaud at them for being absolutely smart and efficient on the monetization side, I see them struggling more than amateurs with the stability of the service itself, the failed promises about the legitimacy checks, or the fact that the bank had even less checks than gen V games had. This is where you realize that they are propritizing the monetization of a petty service (that, I repeat, to a company that profits as much as GF does from several things in the pokemon franchise, is irrelevant cost-wise) while everything else is subpar. On top of having had massive delays but that I am not concerned about, it's just like icing on the cake, for the sake of the argument.

It's like, you know? The quality of their service was their least concern. I can see why some people might be a little upset by that.

But no, really, holding a database filled with pokemon data (let's say an average of 100 per user if we're going to be extremely generous), for a major company, in 2014, is a joke. Oh and about your AD suggestion? I could take getting a nintendo game advertisement every time I use the pokebank. Sounds pretty reasonable. Much more so than having a sub fee of 5USD a year which is a completely skewed cost compared to what I get out of it.


----------



## Fishaman P (Feb 14, 2014)

Mass Effect 3 entitlement?  Disgusting.
SimCity entitlement?  Not loud enough.


----------



## Ryukouki (Feb 14, 2014)

calmwaters said:


> I'm entitled to the money I earn doing my job. So, if I somehow don't get a few dollars or those 2 hours of overtime, then I get the right to complain that I'm not receiving as much as I should be. On a gaming note: I think if someone steadily plays Nintendo, they have a right to ask for games for the system. But I don't mean complain: I mean ask for them. Like Ryu said, the developers are people who are under enormous pressure making games. The last thing they need is for people moaning and howling in their ears to drop what they're doing and make a new game for them. Would you like it if you were making a game and people were howling over your shoulder to drop what you were doing and make something for them?
> 
> Besides, asking for something means you already have an interest in it and there won't be any need for complaining. Now, of course, there are the people who complain because they asked for a game and have been disappointed for quite some time. Then, it becomes the developer's fault if they don't say anything or start working on this game people want. And then there are the complainers when the studio says it will not make the game.
> 
> I also like how Ryu mentioned patience. We as gamers are some of the most impatient people in the world, especially the North American ones. I like playing games, so I don't like it when nothing new is coming out; it means you guys will be really upset and that's not a pretty picture. I've always gotten games 2 or 3 years after they've come out with only a few exceptions. That way, I can do more than just complain while waiting for a new one not to be released. There is a very large library which extends back 20 years and will give me countless hours of gaming and not leave room for complaining: well a lot of it anyway. (I want another Wii Music Metroid/F-Zero game...  )


 

I find that patience is a virtue.  Look what happened to Pokémon X and Y. Honestly, I didn't like the game as much as everyone else did, because it felt too rushed, and the pace was jarring, not to mention the lack of endgame and 3D working everywhere instead of a few choice locations. The game felt rushed, and I honestly think they could have done a better job and I would have no problems if they halted the release a few months. 



Taleweaver said:


> Personally, I think the entire entitlement thing from gamers is getting out of hand because of three things:
> 
> 1. the ever increasing cost to make a game vs the price they're currently sold
> 2. expected standards of gaming (and electronics in general) that are getting higher with each generation
> ...


 
You sir are always providing great feedback and I love reading what you have to say in response. Thank you for continually coming back.  But in response, yeah, I agree with what you have come up with. And when I look at this issue, I see that internet anonymity has created such a negative feed vibe that just makes gamers in general look bad. And how the vocal minorities are almost always what comes to mind with us paying little attention to its merits.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Feb 15, 2014)

JayRo said:


> No... This is why I no longer pay for entertainment from big companies. I now only support smaller artists and indie devs. They don't pull this kind of bullshit like the bigger AAA companies do. I will now and forever pirate every AAA game, every major movie, and every CD by big names that I can. That's my passive-aggressive stance at getting them back for the bullshit they bring down upon themselves for ripping us off, and giving us shit. I wonder at what point developers just decide to stop being honest, and turn greedy... Is it after they get rich from their first successful title sales? Is it an ego of entitlement _themselves_..? Either way, it's bullshit.
> 
> And people like me don't always have internet at home. I have to borrow from an unsecured wi-fi, and it's unreliable for gaming. So games that require me to be online just to play a single-player campaign are stupid as hell. I'm GLAD people actually crack this shit to play offline, like Steam-rips. Steam's offline mode shouldn't require a bi-weekly phone-home just so i can play my games offline. Until this electronic bullying bullshit becomes illegal world-wide, I'll continue to fight back against the industries.


 

Yes indie devs are never known for money grubbing.

Just like Mojang.

Just like Double Fine.

Seriously some indie devs are real shit.

Also pirating CDs doesn't hurt anyone, if you want to support an artist, even a big name one, just buy the CD directly from them. Middlemen often take most of the money.


----------



## jagerstaffel (Feb 15, 2014)

Nightwish said:


> Amazingly, other media managed to survive just fine in the eBay age. Maybe they should make something people are proud to have?
> And how big is that crowd, really?


Not every game is pokemon, so yeah. Small crowd for niche games. How to reach that small crowd without losing money? Digital only helped, and it has been proven. Which of course I am in no way suggesting a popular game like Pokemon goes digital only....



> But you no longer have the right to, so you're pirating it anyway. Might as well cut the middleman.


I bought Phoenix Wright DD, on a legit not Brickway system, Nintendo officially says I can backup my SD to my computer and specifically laid out plans how, and you can only restore the games to the system the sd card came out of, so how about them apples. Pirating my ass. No one has an argument against "I don't own the 3DS digital downloads on my system waah". Every time this has been brought up at Gamefaqs they _all_ try to change the subject 



Lestworth said:


> Also most people dont have a reliable or even stable internet access (atm my internet is unstable because of modem is dying, atleast i believe so). Even though internet services are getting better/faster and more accessible, files are also getting bigger (22gb for Assassins Creed Black Flag). So to complain that a game is not in physical form can be reasonable as well. Its those that bitch and complain that get the oil and attention, this is the same case. Some people actually have legitimate reasons for complaining but get drowned out from the MILLIONS OF IDIOTS ON THE INTERNET.
> 
> Its why i still hate the word "Entitlement" it fits some people, but people use it loosely and encompass a massive amount of people under that word.


You have valid concerns. I have severely capped internet, and just barely made it with Phoenix Wright DD (around 600MB). Resident Evil nearly gave me a heart attack by being over 3GB, but I had to suck it up because it was I who decided to get it on sale on the eshop instead of the widely available physical copy.

You might notice in my posts my disgust is primarily aimed at people who complain about prices. It's those people who think a game isn't worth getting at launch unless it's $5 on Steam, slapping the face of those who bought it at launch at $60 and enjoyed their time with the game. Those people need to take a good look around them. You are a consumer. You want something, you are going to have to pay the price the seller is selling it at. These aren't needs, it's wants. I of course take exception to most cases like monopoly pricing, such as Sony's PS Vita memory card pricing model. Now that is crazy.


----------



## The Catboy (Feb 15, 2014)

I am starting feel the same thing that is damaging the video game fanbase is the same thing that is killing the anime fanbase, and that is the fans. Gaming used to be fun, now the community just boiled down to overly opinionated and devided brats who can't even take time to enjoy a game because they feel like they need to crush someone for like a game they don't like.


----------



## Nightwish (Feb 15, 2014)

jagerstaffel said:


> I bought Phoenix Wright DD, on a legit not Brickway system, Nintendo officially says I can backup my SD to my computer and specifically laid out plans how, and you can only restore the games to the system the sd card came out of, so how about them apples. Pirating my ass. No one has an argument against "I don't own the 3DS digital downloads on my system waah". Every time this has been brought up at Gamefaqs they _all_ try to change the subject


But I'm not a Gamefaqs idiot so... I don't know about Nintendo, but you are aware that most digital platforms forced users to accept a change so they can revoke any rights at anytime, surely?
You have valid concerns. I have severely capped internet, and just barely made it with Phoenix Wright DD (around 600MB). Resident Evil nearly gave me a heart attack by being over 3GB, but I had to suck it up because it was I who decided to get it on sale on the eshop instead of the widely available physical copy.


jagerstaffel said:


> You might notice in my posts my disgust is primarily aimed at people who complain about prices. It's those people who think a game isn't worth getting at launch unless it's $5 on Steam, slapping the face of those who bought it at launch at $60 and enjoyed their time with the game.


If they're taking the piss, they're wrong, but again, <--- country, 60€ just isn't an option. And it's not like the US isn't full of poor people either, or that publishers and some content creators aren't entitled as well.


----------



## calmwaters (Feb 15, 2014)

The Catboy said:


> I am starting feel the same thing that is damaging the video game fanbase is the same thing that is killing the anime fanbase, and that is the fans. Gaming used to be fun, now the community just boiled down to overly opinionated and devided brats who can't even take time to enjoy a game because they feel like they need to crush someone for like a game they don't like.


 
I thought Wii Music was fun, but people lambasted me for liking it. I think this a perfect example of the community you speak of.


----------



## Gahars (Feb 15, 2014)

calmwaters said:


> [Victim Complex Intensifies]


 

Really? Because as I remember it, Chavosaur criticized the game, and then you went on a long, patronizing rant... and then just kept going.

Huh.


----------



## calmwaters (Feb 15, 2014)

Gahars said:


> Really? Because as I remember it, Chavosaur criticized the game, and then you went on a long, patronizing rant... and then just kept going.
> 
> Huh.


 
Yes, really. I'm sure that's exactly what happened. You've got an excellent memory for one so young; I'm impressed.


----------



## Vercalos (Feb 15, 2014)

I'm betting this has been said already, but I suppose whether or not entitlement is really justified depends on two things; how much the consumer was promised vs. what they actually got, and uneven treatment of the consumer.

For example, I think Bioware earned the backlash they got with Mass Effect 3.  They promised the ending was going to be a lot of things, but in the end, the ending was exactly what they promised it _wouldn't_ be, and the fans, obviously, and likely justifiably, we're upset.


On a side note, death threats are _never_ justified


----------



## Taleweaver (Feb 15, 2014)

I was going to do an analogy earlier, but I kind of ran out of time.

What if...people bought bread in the same way as they purchased games?

Step 1: in order to make sure the audience will buy their bread, bakers are forced to spread video's and samples on how they're busy baking bread. Most of this is done over the internet, but there are also conventions that were originally meant for other bakers but under pressure of bread-journalists became more of a hotspot for bread-lovers (more commonly known as 'breaders').
Step 2: said breaders get sucked in by the (mostly journalist-created) hype of the new type of bread (e.g. wholemeal bread 2.0) and hope it will be even better than the previous installment of the 'wholemeal bread'-series (because two types are a complete franchise).
Step 3: near release day, breaders get restless and kind of hungry for wholemeal bread 2.0. Some complain that since the bread is baked ('gold'), it should already be for sale. And thanks to the internet, people from around the world complain that this bread won't be made in their region yet and that they'll have to force themselves not to read reviews or youtube-videos about it in order to maintain the surprise.
Step 4: on release day, breaders are the first in line to buy wholemeal bread 2.0. They pay full price and often take a day of vacation just to be able to eat wholemeal bread 2.0. That's usually when the first cracks of reality come back into their minds: the bread isn't as perfect as they'd hoped.
Step 5: since tastes are individual, there will always be different opinions. People who went with white bread 4.0 will laugh and wholemeat bread 2.0-breaders. At best saying that "I just don't like it". This often revokes furious threads about calories, tastes and the amount of slices each bread contains. Depending on the age of the breader, this either goes into namecalling or some kind of passive-agressive stance. They often know their bakers by name and leave no chance unsaid to suggest that wholebread 2.0 is the far better bread over white bread 4.0.
Step 6: despite the suggestions to others that wholebread 2.0 is the best thing since sliced bread, even those breaders have to admit it has its flaws. The taste-to-calorie ratio isn't as balanced as they'd hoped. Or it isn't long and satisfying enough. It's common that breaders feel kinda sad for buying the bread. They say the hype wasn't worth it and that the shareware slice they got didn't quite reflect the entire bread. Some admit that the bread just doesn't mix with their filling. Others take agressive stances on the warning labels that prohibit hackers like that J. Christ guy from making illegal copies of the bread, using shouts like "it's MY bread. I've paid good money for it and therefore I do what I want with it!". Some aspirant-reviewers go at full length in youtube videos pointing pretty much every detail of every ingrediënt in the bread with a suggestion that they're far better bakers than the bakers themselves (in fact, they often claim some bakers should be fired for changing the recipe of their favorite bread TOO MUCH).
Step 7: breaders can also get pissed off when they aren't properly refunded their money when they return the crumbs to get their money back. They don't see it as their fault that previews, reviews, articles in magazines, videos, user reviews, conventions and interviews don't give the right impression on the bread. They're also pissed they bought it at full price when the baker three streets away sells it cheaper...and that THEIR baker refuses to lower the price.
Once the breader gets older and wiser, he is no longer as much interested in the hype. They aren't the first in line at the bakery's anymore. On the contrary: they know that in order to promote wholemeal bread 2.0, wholemeal bread 1.0 is at a discount or sold in larger varieties. And of course with all the ingredient tweaks and proper bag that the bakers have perfected during the time wholemeal bread was the ONLY way to go.
Step 8: it is starting to dawn to most breaders that the first day release breads aren't all that great anymore. They feel as if the bread is rushed out of the oven and wasn't ready for release yet (though complaints are HUGE when a bread is delayed after a "promised" launch day). Worse: with increased knowledge of other bakers, shopping around tends to get all sorts of great breads at a very good price. Take humble bundle bread, for instance: you get five types of bread for any price you want to pay for it. That's a good deal. While it won't (directly) put off buying the newer kinds of bread, it makes sure that breaders have quite a stock of breads they have yet to come around to actually eating...
Step 9: the fact that the average breader nowadays have a wide variety of bread to choose from (not just from the bakers, but also from their own storage room) changes the perception of things. They aren't FORCED to buy those breads they love so much anymore. Bakers have to convince THEM if the bread is good enough. And everyone knows it. To a degree, breaders know that bakers just want to make an earning but it doesn't occur to them that baking bread is mostly just a job for them. They like bread as much as breaders (except for EA executives who probably never ate a bread in their entire lives...which would be the only explanation as to why they're forcing their customers to eat their bread in the bakery), but they are somewhat forced into hyping their breads in order to sell enough to break even from all the marketing and advanced ingredient refining they have to do to live up to nowadays's standards of bread. So today, it's pretty common to see a breader in a bakery sniffing every bread and asking things like extra slices because they had to wait in line. And bakers pretty much have to do it, or those customers will just walk away and pick up a bread from a bargain bin...


So...there you have it. I know it's kind of absurd and could probably have some more consoles in the story ("this bread can ONLY be eaten on nintendo's plates...something a lot of breaders complain about"), but it should give some nice view of the situation. Gamers think they're entitled to their expected standards because they're in a good position to do so.




Ryukouki said:


> You sir are always providing great feedback and I love reading what you have to say in response. Thank you for continually coming back.  But in response, yeah, I agree with what you have come up with. And when I look at this issue, I see that internet anonymity has created such a negative feed vibe that just makes gamers in general look bad. And how the vocal minorities are almost always what comes to mind with us paying little attention to its merits.


That respect is completely mutual, kind sir. While I don't always agree on your ideas, they are always well-written, properly explained and (especially) thought-provoking. I like it when I'm forced to think about my own stance on things.


----------



## Ryukouki (Feb 15, 2014)

Taleweaver said:


> *snip*
> 
> That respect is completely mutual, kind sir. While I don't always agree on your ideas, they are always well-written, properly explained and (especially) thought-provoking. I like it when I'm forced to think about my own stance on things.


 
And people wonder how I can continue to write so much. The answer is community output.  It's why I enjoy the process so much, because sometimes people will completely flatten me and it makes me realize that I lived a fucking sheltered gaming life!  I definitely like to think about issues and pull them out of the box for a bit to get people to think twice about what they've taken for granted, and it never ceases to amaze me how much I can discuss on one particular issue. Often in my editing process I have to cut things out and trim things so I don't sound too much for or against something. I definitely value the feedback because it give me a chance to broaden my horizons on popular issues and maybe why I should think of things from other angles. And hey, there is absolutely nothing wrong with an opinion. It definitely isn't my place to turn around and snub someone for saying something.

Your bread story though... I should frame that somewhere and read it if I ever need a smile on my face. That was great! 

EDIT: OH! If you ever have any ideas or topics that you would like me to go into, you're more than welcome to send them my way! I'm always looking for things to talk about!


----------



## DSGamer64 (Feb 15, 2014)

I attribute a lot of the toxic attitude towards entitlement but also in a world where there are lots of free to play games that thrive off micro transactions, there needs to be a level of accountability from the developers and more open communication between the fans and the PR department. If you look at how Star Citizen is doing it, there is almost no griefing on their forums because the outlook for the game is positive and well, Chris Roberts has a reputation to uphold.

I have played for almost a year now, MechWarrior Online and the entitlement from the players, myself included is amazingly bad. Granted the game has been withheld of any major content skjnce the game went into open beta and it took 5 months after the game went officially live for it to get the new interface which is still horribly incomplete. Yet us player pas money for the premium content. I think I have dropped about 250 into the game and it's only recently started getting better, but it still has problems. But yeah, when you use your wallet and the forums to voice your displeasure, the entitlement is deserved if the developers are doing a crap job.


----------



## jagerstaffel (Feb 15, 2014)

Nightwish said:


> But I'm not a Gamefaqs idiot so... I don't know about Nintendo, but you are aware that most digital platforms forced users to accept a change so they can revoke any rights at anytime, surely?


I don't connect to the internet with my 3DS all the time, so what ever system update or policy change happens, I'll be sure to look that through before flipping the wifi switch . If I was really paranoid I'd get another 3DS purely to leave all games released till now on there, complete non-internet ready.



> If they're taking the piss, they're wrong, but again, <--- country, 60€ just isn't an option. And it's not like the US isn't full of poor people either, or that publishers and some content creators aren't entitled as well.


That's one other thing I can't really blame gamers for complaining about: the different pricing's per country. I hear nothing but bad things from Brazil


----------



## EZ-Megaman (Feb 15, 2014)

I thin that entitlement could be justified in some cases, but some of their complaints baffle me. 

For example, I recall a couple of cases with people complaining about Steam keys.These people already own the game in question. Is getting it on the same system, just with another distributor that important? It's not like there are many benefits, since you're still playing the same game. The only additions are that you get achievements on Steam instead of Desura or whatever, and can see other friends on Steam who have that game, but they're trivial.


----------



## Nightwish (Feb 15, 2014)

jagerstaffel said:


> I don't connect to the internet with my 3DS all the time, so what ever system update or policy change happens, I'll be sure to look that through before flipping the wifi switch . If I was really paranoid I'd get another 3DS purely to leave all games released till now on there, complete non-internet ready.


That's not it, they all, or nearly all, changed their agreements to be able to revoke your rights at will unilaterally, your acceptance doesn't come into it anymore. As soon as they do it for whatever reason, you're already pirating it, even if morally it's not your fault.
I don't think anyone used it that way yet, but they can, so you don't own anything.


----------



## Kikirini (Feb 15, 2014)

Well... I suppose I feel two different ways about this issue. 

As much as I still loathe the ending to Mass Effect 3, the developers certainly weren't required to push out a new (still shitty) ending DLC. There's a reason why people say to turn off the game when Anderson died - because up until that point, the game had all the polish of the previous games. We were sold a complete game and thus had no reason to demand our money back/riot/etc. (Also, it is taking every ounce of retraint not to go into yet another rant about that ending. Grr.)

However, it's becoming a bit of an industry standard to rush out games unfinished, with day-one DLC, story-relevant DLC, and still expect $60 for them. All games have bugs, and DLC that extends the experience are fine, but damn. I don't pay for a book in order to get some half-edited thing with several important chapters available for paid downlaod, so it'd be nice to have video game companies offer the  same kind of respect.


----------



## drakorex (Feb 15, 2014)

Well *EXCUSE* me for wanting more out of my Flappy Bird experience!


----------



## Sterling (Feb 15, 2014)

On a case by case basis, the want of more should be seriously considered. Now, I was one of those guys who subscribed to the indoctrination theory on Mass Effect. The extended cut answered a lot of questions, and I can agree with that ending. But, what we were promised and what we got were incredibly different. You can say that ME3 would never have a satisfactory outcome to all the player's choices. I say there's something called effort, and at least trying. Bioware simply ran out of time, and EA jumped the gun to get it out.

On that front, it's up to the fans to give a company backlash and by extension, results. Backlash does not entail death threats and bodily harm. Boycotts and "e-rioting" are very effective methods to use.

The examples you gave with the Pokebank are cringe worthy and should never happen.

What Taleweaver pointed out with rising costs is moot. There are plenty of games out there that are successful with a fraction of the costs. It's possible to do more with less, and the sooner games companies figure that out, the better.

On the subject of DLC, look at Fallout: New Vegas for a minute. The DLC didn't have anything to do with the story, just a wider view to expand the world around you. The connections are there in the main game. People loved the hints that were dropped, and how the DLC tied everything together. That is how you do DLC.


----------



## naxil (Feb 15, 2014)

we have only 1 entitlement: our money! people MIND!


----------



## Ziko (Feb 16, 2014)

ferret7463 said:


> I have to say the DLC stuff is a croc. When i buy a game, it should be the whole game not just a piece of one. This kinda like buying candles and then the candle seller will say, "You'll want to buy the wicks for those."


 
I hate it too. It's getting to the point where I don't even want to play those games because of the massive amount of money I most likely have to shell out for the DLC. Talking to you Borderlands 2!


----------



## Ziko (Feb 16, 2014)

Ryukouki said:


> I actually have an article idea planned next with the changes in the gaming industry over the past several years. I miss back in the day when you could just buy a cartridge or disk and not have to worry about excess content being locked behind walls. Very interesting points though with the arcade analogy and comparing to people who want the old days back though.


 
Please get that out soon! I would love to read it Ryu.


----------



## Ryukouki (Feb 16, 2014)

Ziko said:


> Please get that out soon! I would love to read it Ryu.


 

It's either that or I roll out my article on digital rights management.  Either way the well isn't dried out yet. 

EDIT: Topic has been unstuck. Thank you everyone for the lovely discussion thus far, and keep it going!


----------



## jagerstaffel (Feb 16, 2014)

Nightwish said:


> That's not it, they all, or nearly all, changed their agreements to be able to revoke your rights at will unilaterally, your acceptance doesn't come into it anymore. As soon as they do it for whatever reason, you're already pirating it, even if morally it's not your fault.
> I don't think anyone used it that way yet, but they can, so you don't own anything.


Wait a minute, why do you keep mentioning such a nazi, anti-consumer policy change? No consumer product company is going to shoot itself in the foot by pulling such a  drastic change. Ebay and Paypal can change policies however they want due to the massive amount of cash changing hands between _members_. If I am recalling this correctly, there must be some kind of guideline or law where current policies/agreements do not affect the ones at the time of purchase.

One somewhat related example is Marvel Versus Capcom 3, it was said that Capcom could not renew the Marvel license, and had to remove the games from sale by a certain date, or else it becomes a violation of agreements. Once the games were removed from everywhere, did Capcom say to everyone who purchased it previously to turn their games in or else they are pirating thieving scum? No. They bought the game before the Marvel license died, they are free to do with it whatsoever the agreements in place _at the time_ stated, except try to brandish it as their own product to cash in on the Marvel name.

I bought Phoenix Wright DD 2013. I have the receipt, the transaction number, and any policy change that comes up in the future damn well shouldn't affect my game, due to having bought the game without such draconian policies in place. No matter how you try to spin it, ownership of 3DS games are absolute unless someone deletes their game or NNID. Due to the nature of NNID's warnings, I am pretty damn sure Nintendo can't do that remotely, despite them having access to those records.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Feb 16, 2014)

calmwaters said:


> Yes, really. I'm sure that's exactly what happened. You've got an excellent memory for one so young; I'm impressed.


 

Y-you really showed him!



Sterling said:


> On a case by case basis, the want of more should be seriously considered. Now, I was one of those guys who subscribed to the indoctrination theory on Mass Effect. The extended cut answered a lot of questions, and I can agree with that ending. But, what we were promised and what we got were incredibly different. You can say that ME3 would never have a satisfactory outcome to all the player's choices. I say there's something called effort, and at least trying. Bioware simply ran out of time, and EA jumped the gun to get it out.
> 
> On that front, it's up to the fans to give a company backlash and by extension, results. Backlash does not entail death threats and bodily harm. Boycotts and "e-rioting" are very effective methods to use.
> 
> ...


 
BioWare promised you nothing. They promised a game. You got a game. And for a majority of the game it was enjoyable. People trying to sue or have any sort of basis of entitlement for the ending is ridiculous.

The thing with the ME3 ending is that, like I said before, it's someone's child. They felt this is how they wanted to end it. It's their artistic work and they could do whatever they want. They could have Shepard jump on a reaper and crash it into the moon for all they care. Poorly received or well received, the game delivered a game and that's the promise you got.

No one sued Gearbox over Aliens: Colonial Marines, and we remember what a shitfest that was. Like that's a game that people were actually duped for, the trailers were no indication of the final product. Still, not as much drama as ME3 was.


----------



## Nightwish (Feb 16, 2014)

jagerstaffel said:


> Wait a minute, why do you keep mentioning such a nazi, anti-consumer policy change? No consumer product company is going to shoot itself in the foot by pulling such a drastic change.


Because it's what it says.


> *Digital Content is licensed*, not sold, from the Content Provider to you solely for your personal, non-commercial use on your Nintendo Device or as we permit through the Network Services, subject to the terms of this Agreement *and any additional terms posted for that Digital Content item in Nintendo eShop* and subject to your payment in full for that Digital Content.
> (...)
> G. Changes to Terms. *We may change the terms of this Agreement at any time without notice.*


So, if you think publishers are going in a consumer friendly way, that's your opinion, but it'll happen to someone at some point. The iStore doesn't let you download things you own that aren't active allready, and noone thought it would get to that either.


jagerstaffel said:


> No matter how you try to spin it, ownership of 3DS games are absolute unless someone deletes their game or NNID. Due to the nature of NNID's warnings, I am pretty damn sure Nintendo can't do that remotely, despite them having access to those records.


Unless they rewrite the agreement, which the courts have already accepted as legal. I doubt that would fly in the EU, however.
No matter how you try to spin it, you don't own it. Note that you couldn't even move the content in case your 3DS goes kaput, although, thankfully it isn't a 360.


----------



## Sterling (Feb 16, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> BioWare promised you nothing. They promised a game. You got a game. And for a majority of the game it was enjoyable. People trying to sue or have any sort of basis of entitlement for the ending is ridiculous.
> 
> The thing with the ME3 ending is that, like I said before, it's someone's child. They felt this is how they wanted to end it. It's their artistic work and they could do whatever they want. They could have Shepard jump on a reaper and crash it into the moon for all they care. Poorly received or well received, the game delivered a game and that's the promise you got.
> 
> No one sued Gearbox over Aliens: Colonial Marines, and we remember what a shitfest that was. Like that's a game that people were actually duped for, the trailers were no indication of the final product. Still, not as much drama as ME3 was.


 

Mmhmm, they promised only the most epic endings to our favorite series. If there was one thing they owed us, it was closure, and that's not something they delivered until the extended cut. Even then, the game was rushed and a lot of story simply cut or skipped. ME3 was a 9/10 game before the last 15 minutes, and a 6/10 afterwards. Not even close to being the end that Mass Effect deserved.

http://alizrak.wordpress.com/2012/03/18/the-broken-promises-of-mass-effect-3-spoilers/

Except people did sue Gearbox and Sega over that Alien abomination. Get your facts straight. Hell, it was even all over the USN!

http://forums.gearboxsoftware.com/showthread.php?t=334296


----------



## grossaffe (Feb 16, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> The thing with the ME3 ending is that, like I said before, it's someone's child. They felt this is how they wanted to end it. It's their artistic work and they could do whatever they want. They could have Shepard jump on a reaper and crash it into the moon for all they care. Poorly received or well received, the game delivered a game and that's the promise you got.


The problem I have there is that the game is built around choices you make and the effect you have on the universe, but then it's boiled down to basically a single ending rendering all of your choices moot.  You could say the choices made by the player make it their baby as they put something of themselves into it as well.  I would imagine that if Mass Effect had a linear story, you wouldn't have the same outrage over the ending as it would have been tailored to the story as they shaped it.  But as it stands, my understanding is that the sum of all of your choices is condensed down into a background color.



> No one sued Gearbox over Aliens: Colonial Marines, and we remember what a shitfest that was. Like that's a game that people were actually duped for, the trailers were no indication of the final product. Still, not as much drama as ME3 was.


Actually... http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...class-action-lawsuit-targets-sega-and-gearbox


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Feb 17, 2014)

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 (Feb 17, 2014)

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 (Feb 17, 2014)

Sterling said:


> 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 (Feb 17, 2014)

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.



Gahars said:


> 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.



Gahars said:


> 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 (Feb 17, 2014)

/





Sterling said:


> 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.



Sterling said:


> 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.



Sterling said:


> 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 (Feb 17, 2014)

Gahars said:


> 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.


----------

