60°

PSUni: 5 Signs You’re an Entitled Gamer – Stop Whining

"The word “Entitlement” is thrown around a lot these days, be it as an argument on what is ruining our youth or how it is ruining our games. It is becoming increasingly obvious that gamers feel that they deserve special treatment, be it from the outcry to change the Mass Effect 3 ending or unceasing bemoaning about Skyrim on the PS3. This type of behavior is starting to make developers nervous, fearing that an innovation or new story direction will be crushed by the tidal wave of whine."

EdgarNygma4174d ago (Edited 4174d ago )

I dont know man, seems like you are going to make a lot of ppl angry lol. If I could approve it though I would.

coolbeans4174d ago (Edited 4174d ago )

-"The problem is that the money you spend for a game is just buying access to the game, not everything on the disk."

Gamers have the right to express their views about corporate greed when it comes to this. The very notion that every consumer must now know that shiny disc they just paid $60 for withholds content is insulting. The reason your argument for this does 'seem' to go against common sense is because...it DOES go against common sense. Since the "on-disk DLC" is really just a key to unlock the rest of the disk, rather than being "downloadable content" (you know...like it should be), posters are constantly wondering about the legality of it.

Since the developers don't NEED to immediately appease fans with DLC, there's no real reason for defending them in this situation.

-"[ME3 controversy]. . .If you were happy for this artistic compromise because you (the most special-est consumer ever) paid for a video game then you might be an Entitled brat."

I was cautious about that at first, but now I can't really find this compromise WITH art to be a compromise OF it. If a group of fans feel distaste for an ending they were hyped about and incessantly moan about it isn't a completely unreasonable action. In fact, their vitriol combined with how fast Bioware came in to promise more shows that, as a group of artists, Bio wasn't satisfied either. The artists themselves never tried to stand by their conviction of the possible thematic elements of what they had produced.

In that case, I don't believe the art was compromised.

EdgarNygma4174d ago (Edited 4174d ago )

As for your first point I think that it is less about corporate greed and more about personal greed. As the article states some things on the disc and somethings that are available as DLC immediately are not produced when the game is originally made; instead they are add after the game is rated and going through the finishing phases of production. These are additional works and as such asking the developer to include them because they didnt sit on their thumbs while the game was being finished seems assine and selfish.

As for the legality of it, this should not be questioned. Like the article says you are buying access to the game, not access to everything on the disk. Buying the Game as a digital copy is the same as buying it on the disk, both are access to their IP.

Developers may not "need" to release stuff immediatel; but working on new content when their is time and wanting to keep fans appeased with content is obviously desirable. Developers wanting to pleases their customers seem a noble goal to defend.

In regards to the ME3s art compromising I think that you are confusing writers with the heads of the development team and their owners EA. If fans dont like an ending then fine, it was a bad ending. Feeling entitled to having it changed to fit your vision; come on it has entitled in the sentence.

Their outcry and the immediate change offers no real insight to whether the writers were dissatisfied but rather points to EA thinking "we are going to milk this series with 30 more games we need their continued support". Furthermore how much the original artist tried to defend their work is impossible to know for certain. They are employees, if their employer says we are doing X then it is their job to do it.

The important part is being missed here in regards to this though: not liking something does not give you the right to change it. In the future it might, heck in the present maybe it does, but I feel that sets a bad precedent for gaming

coolbeans4173d ago (Edited 4173d ago )

"As the article states some things on the disc and somethings that are available as DLC immediately are not produced when the game is originally made"

Yet they're still pre-planned as being included with the original cost of the game. No guilty party (that I've seen) has ever stated separate funds or manpower were required in order to produce this disk-locked content.

Even what you've stated has often come under question: Bioshock 2's Sinclair Solutions DLC was $10 and only ~100KBs of MP goodies; Gears of War 3's Horde Command Pack was $10 for co-op extras; and Capcom's business in just about every game.

With these examples, and more, of sleazy business dealing it's not out of the question to wonder if disc-locked content was done during that "down time" or finished content before certification that publishers decided to lock out for extra profit.

-"Developers wanting to pleases their customers seem a noble goal to defend."

Well there's several questions surrounding this notion of "pleasing" the fanbase. Rather then extend the life of a title through adequately-placed DLC over time, why "give" locked extra content to the fan at launch...when they're actually playing the core content? Publishers understand the need to force DLC or profits will sink dramatically.

So, we have the possibility of some disc-locked content being original content locked out to the consumer (making the writer's argument completely flawed), a questionable means of understanding whether the intention is to actually 'appease' the fans at all, and no proof that this 'additional' content demanded additional or separate costs.

The best defense mechanism that gamers are entitled to make is "in order to avoid sleazy business practices, let's just gut disc-locked content altogether." These so called 'whiny, asinine, selfish' posters that demand a fairer incentive for the consumer and fan sounds like a much more noble goal.

From the arguments I've seen made, asking internet-goers to sit on their thumbs while questionable business practices are made sounds either like a negligent willingness to lose more money or...sheer stupidity.

-"In regards to the ME3s art compromising I think that you are confusing writers with the heads of the development team. . ."

Bioware writer Drew Karpyshan left around the time ME3 releases and has not spoken a peep against the idea of adding more to ME3's ending. This alone makes your conjecture baseless.

-"The important part is being missed here in regards to this though: not liking something does not give you the right to change it."

Should this be held for EVERY occasion though? The great thing about art forms is there are no rules. I personally believe an audience can inform a creative piece of entertainment and won't set a bad precedent for gaming, especially when artists involved didn't stand for their own creation.

jimbobwahey4173d ago

Utterly stupid article that has the absurdity to accuse gamers of entitlement for expecting a game that they've spent their hard earned money on to work as advertised.

What trash. I pray that this is a joke article written by some tool dwelling in their parents basement that has a poor grasp of satire, rather than a genuinely serious piece.

EdgarNygma4173d ago (Edited 4173d ago )

I am sure that this article wasnt written overly antagonistic and focused on the EA buzz words "entitled gamers" to poke fun at the current industry. Who would ever write something that they didn't really believe on the internet, and then poorly argue for it while people agreed with their true goal.

The best way to counter a trend is NOT to poorly defend it and make people think why it is stupid and attack it. That would just be crazy.

MikeMyers4173d ago

This is the list;
1) It is My Money, It is my Game!
2) These Bugs are Bugging Me
3) But I Want It Now!!!!!
4) $5 for Extra Content = Evil Capitalist Pigs
5) This Game Sucks!

Now for my analysis of each

1. We are the fans, so of course there will be a backlash if we don't like how games turn out. Especially franchises and sequels. We have invested in the games and if they all of the sudden take a strange direction fans will talk about it. Doesn't mean we are all entitled, it jut means we have a voice and should use it. Without fan reaction the developers wouldn't have a clue to what the actual consumer wants.

2. Why ship a game just to meet a deadline? How many movies do we see where audio lines are mumbled or the lighting is terrible? So why should gamers be guinea pigs to beta test a game? I see way more games with bugs now than before and that is largely due to the availability to patch games. They save money not delaying games and having better testing. Reminds me of Microsoft Windows.

3. I do agree patience is thin. People expect things instantly. With that said if it relates to #2 then I would expect games to be fixed as soon as possible. Steam gets patches much more quickly than consoles and that is because of a policy process. Too much management gets in the way.

4. Content should come with a fee UNLESS it's content already on the disc. Nobody likes to buy a product knowing that everything isn't included. Can you imagine buying a car and having to pay extra to unlock the radio. That's why you buy various models, you know what you are getting. Gamers should also know from the start what they are getting. If the content is still being made after the game hits gold status then of course they can charge extra for future content. It's up to the consumer to decide its value.

5. We don't all have the same opinions or tastes but I do feel a lot of people never give some games a chance. They move on from game to game far too quickly. If parent A buys their child 4 games per year that child will appreciate those games more versus parent B who buy their child 4 games per month. The child who worked or earned the money to purchase those game will appreciate them even more.

260°

Microsoft’s Surface and Xbox hardware revenues take a big hit in Q3

Microsoft just posted the third quarter of its 2024 fiscal financial results. The software maker made $61.9 billion in revenue and a net income of $21.9 billion during Q3. Revenue is up 17 percent, and net income has increased by 20 percent.

Read Full Story >>
theverge.com
darthv721d ago

Xbox content + services up 62% while hardware down 31%... seems about right with the way they tout you don't need the hardware to play. People can play on their phones or smart tv or other means. I don't hardly play on my consoles directly since getting devices like the logitech g-cloud and ps portal. Which is to also say I have been playing more digital than physical because of these devices.

solideagle11h ago

you should apply in MS PR team buddy, I think you will do a great job in my humble opinion :)

Sonic18818h ago

I thought darthv72 and Obscure_Observer already work for Microsoft 🤔

dveio8h ago

MS: "Xbox services and content without AB up 1%, with AB up 62%. Hardware down 31%. In total a loss of 350 mill."

darthv72: "Seems about right."

MS: "Excuse m ..."

darthv72: "I don't hardly play on my consoles directly."

MS:

Lightning773h ago

What he said was facts. How he plays games is no concern of you. Don't get too mad about it.

Cacabunga10h ago

I can tell people like you are an absolute minority..

If service is up means their fans and fanboys accepted this model and subscribed to it. The near future you will see a big decline because the service is saturated.

shinoff218310h ago

But that's been ms for years. When things aren't going their way they try to change the way things are said. For instance console sales are down, they stop telling how many sold instead telling us how many hours spent in halo or headshots. So it makes sense console sales down just say people are playing on more devices then previous. What they won't say is how many xbox players jumped ship to ps5.

Cacabunga8h ago

Hardware sales are so bad that Sony and Nintendo are blowing the sales off the water with their hardware.

If Xbox are losers, others aren’t..
Xbox already tried everything with Xbox live then subscriptions went down so much that they had to find something else. Their fans subscribed then reached saturation rather quickly.

Hardware and exclusive games is where it’s at! Keep gamers excited, announce decent software and people will support you

itsmebryan4h ago

@shin
Well keep it simple Sony 's operating income is down 26% and Microsoft's is up 32%. No MS spin there, just facts. 😉
Cheers

romulus233h ago

Odd that a company that touts you dont need the hardware to play is already touting another console in the works.

darthv723h ago

They are not reliant on the HW but still want to maintain a presence (no matter how small) is a good thing. It shows commitment to the craft. It reminds me of SNK and how they made games for their own hardware (Neo Geo) while also making them for others because they knew there was a market to do so. They knew they would sell more to others but also sell to their own niche fan base.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3h ago
purple10113h ago

Xbox hardware revenue tanks to lowest point of Xbox Series generation

Profchaos13h ago

I'm not surprised surface is struggling they aren't relevant anymore

DOMination-2h ago

In the last two years they've started exiting the consumer market altogether. All of the newest Surface products are business models only. They can't seem to work out what they want to do with it.

XBManiac12h ago

Too expensive hardware when others offer the same or more for less? Good work, Green Team.

SimpleDad12h ago(Edited 12h ago)

"Despite some early successes for Xbox games on rival platforms, Xbox hardware is down by a massive 31 percent this quarter."
"Without Activision Blizzard, Microsoft’s overall gaming revenue would have actually declined this quarter."
"Xbox content and services would have only been up a single percent without Activision Blizzard..."
"It looks like next quarter is going to be a similar story for gaming at Microsoft, too."

That is crazy... so A/B/K is carrying the whole Xbox gaming.
Oh and Microsoft will be fine. Windows, Office and Cloud are growing with each pc purchase.

purple10111h ago

Activision: "we gonna need a bigger rucksack/backpack please"

Microsoft: "why's that"

Activision: "to carry yo' weak ass'

Profchaos11h ago(Edited 11h ago)

Top brass have also wanted to start seeing returns on the 100 billion they have put into various Xbox related moves so seeing more multiplatform games is highly likely especially from abk

It's basically saying that PlayStation is the reason Xbox is afloat right now thinks to Ps5 versions of COD

Kornholic10h ago

So basically PS and PC gamers' money is keeping Xbox on life support.

MrDead3h ago

The only growth MS will get out of the console industry is if it supports it's rivals platforms. Xbox is a pointless machine now. I can see them on a big push for live next, and they won't give up on trying to buy Steam.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3h ago
Show all comments (35)
140°

Why Monopolies In Gaming Must Not Be Allowed

As of right now, there are no monopolies in the games industry, and for the sake of the medium as a whole, they never should either.

thorstein22h ago

Shouldn't be allowed in any field.

Inverno19h ago

And yet the biggest tech companies in America are essentially that. They buy up all the small comps only to kill them off and steal what they have, and if they can't buy em they bleed them to death.

jwillj2k417h ago

Eventually they’ll realize the value is with the employee not the company. Buying an IP means nothing if the people who contributed are let go. They’ll get it one day.

MrCrimson17h ago

tech is different because they buy threats and then kill them. Twitter bought Vine and did nothing with it. Despite people seemingly liking it. Could've had tiktok a decade before bytedance. go figure.

Zenzuu18h ago

Monopolies shouldn't be allowed regardless. Not just for gaming.

MrCrimson17h ago

They buy IPs not talent. That's why these buyouts never work and the IPs die. Right now it's too expensive to develop games - but I expect that to shift maybe as AI tools can make it easier. The best games have been indie games for awhile as big developers fuck their ips to death with "games as a service" -

70°

5 Of The Best Narrative Twists In Video Games

GL compiles a list of some of the most mind-blowing video game narrative twists in recent memory, from The Last of Us to Outer Wilds

Read Full Story >>
gameluster.com
Rebel_Scum22h ago

With articles like these cant you tag the games mentioned so that we can know ahead of time if there’s a spoiler to avoid?

Not clicking on your article otherwise.