Do gamers expect a master piece everytime?

elmuzzy66.

elmuzzy66.

elmuzzy66.

Soldato
Joined
24 Aug 2006
Posts
10,113
Location
Gibraltar
Reading through the threads and some of the hate dished out to devs and publishers is unreal. Have we gamers become to demanding or have we just become too unreasonable in demands?
I don't see people in the film section dishing out hate to warner brother or directors. I mean if its a bad movie we watching once and thats it but gamers play a game don,t like it but then plough another 50 hours into it.
 
Dont need fancy gfx personally i just want games to work as intended ship with features promised and be bug free on day 1 and never to require a patch.

With the internet being as it is publishers use patches far more than they used to back in the 90s and to an extent the early 2000s. Their attitudes these days are release it at a deadline and patch it later if need be which is often the case these days.

True games get more complex than they used to but tbh the complexity of the games i can live without as the 90s and 2000s games were plenty fine enough for me imo i dont need games to be more realistic or what not as long as there fun and work and are as advertised.

But thats just me.

With regards to a masterpiece. Well that all boils down to what the game is trying to do and if its realistic with a modest budget or not. Games can often promise the world but later get features cut to make a deadline or ran out of budget. These types of games im not too fond of because the hype up too much and mostly misdeliver which is because they planned it badly and hoped an idea with flashy gfx 9 times out of 10 will be enough to get ppl to buy these types of games.
 
Last edited:
Expectation is relative to expense I think, particularly when you're charged high prices for the original game then additional expenditure for DLC, microtransactions and however else the publisher wants to rinse you for cash.
 
I think major problems occur when publishers/developers take a well known and loved franchise and churn out a crappy generic game with that name on it in order to cash in.

If they stuck to making crappy generic games without ruining existing franchises then people would just call it a bad game and move on.
 
grimm said:
I think major problems occur when publishers/developers take a well known and loved franchise and churn out a crappy generic game with that name on it in order to cash in.

If they stuck to making crappy generic games without ruining existing franchises then people would just call it a bad game and move on.
Click to expand...

Cashing in on franchises is not something exclusive to vidoe games.
 
I dont think we expect major innovations, we just expect our games not to be cut & paste models of previous ones and for them to atleast work on release.
Personally, I like playing the junk games sometimes. It makes it all the more glorious when the Half Lifes and the Bioshocks come along.
 
People seem to forget that these companies are out to make money, they don't exist to do you any favors. If everyone rushes to preorder a **** game they've succeeded in selling **** and making a lot of money from it why would they change? Most people seem to throw money at games then complain after, it's a lack of patience everything is available so easily the attitude is very much I want it now! Can't stand the whole 'alpha' thing these days either, it's not an 'alpha' at all it's just an excuse to milk it for everything it's worth as soon as possible because they know people will pay. There are some exceptions ofc.

and that's before you even get onto DLC..
 
robmol said:
People seem to forget that these companies are out to make money, they don't exist to do you any favors. If everyone rushes to preorder a **** game they've succeeded in selling **** and making a lot of money from it why would they change? Most people seem to throw money at games then complain after, it's a lack of patience everything is available so easily the attitude is very much I want it now! Can't stand the whole 'alpha' thing these days either, it's not an 'alpha' at all it's just an excuse to milk it for everything it's worth as soon as possible because they know people will pay. There are some exceptions ofc.

and that's before you even get onto DLC..
Click to expand...

The notion that 'they're only out to make money' is ridiculously outdated and doesn't really apply to the gaming industry. Gamers are probably the most intelligent conumer base you could market to, a lot of us wont take being back handed. Consumers respect honesty and reliability more then anything else.
 
When I pay for a game I don't expect a masterpiece, I do expect to get a finished product not a bug ridden mess, I don't expect company's to release paid for DLC before they have fixed stability issues with the main product & I don't expect a much beloved franchise to forget it's roots & change playstyles or shoehorn in unnecessary multi-player elements just to satisfiy board member who heard from his ten year old that games that don't have multiplayer suck!
If I feel short changed by a game I will complain but it's generally about the issues above & not unreasonable things which seems fair enough to me.
 
robmol said:
People seem to forget that these companies are out to make money, they don't exist to do you any favors. If everyone rushes to preorder a **** game they've succeeded in selling **** and making a lot of money from it why would they change? Most people seem to throw money at games then complain after, it's a lack of patience everything is available so easily the attitude is very much I want it now! Can't stand the whole 'alpha' thing these days either, it's not an 'alpha' at all it's just an excuse to milk it for everything it's worth as soon as possible because they know people will pay. There are some exceptions ofc.

and that's before you even get onto DLC..
Click to expand...


Just because a company "are out there to make money" doesn't give it carte blanche to misrepresent its product via false advertising, lie to its potential customer base and release a sub standard product and shy away from criticism. Every company is out to make money that's just a fact of business and not questionable, what is questionable is how they go about making money. Totally agree with you though about alpha's the definition of alpha / beta / demo has changed considerably over the last 5 years.
 
Last edited:
Customers reserve the right the critisize products they have bought, and games aren't exempt from this- especially if they aren't up to standard e.g smothered in DRM and endless bugs that ruin the entire gaming experience, developers slow the release patches and DLC being released literally weeks after the initial game release further milking the customers for a game they have already paid for.

So no we do not expect too much, far from it. We just don't appreciated having the **** taken out of us.
 
No, I don't but I do expect a game to function as intended. If it advertises multiplayer then that should work, if it offers x y z then they should work, if they themselves raise the bar and promise something revolutionary and visionary then I hold them to their stated target.
 
Also, if you waste £6 on a bad movie, its easier to shrug off than £40 on a bad game, and agree with robmol, peeps rush in and get burned and then blame the software company, if no one did that and we waited and voted with our wallets they'd have to change or go under. Don't get me wrong, I too hate companies that knowingly lie about features and rush an unfinished product to market, and I totally detest DLC/micro transactions, maybe because I was brought up on the spectrum / commodore era, but if we 'saps' keep' pumping in our money why would they change their habits?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom