Are gamers becoming worse today?

Post Reply New Topic

I'm not talking about skill level, I'm talking about the amount of self entitlement that people have. People whining about if a game is 1080p, if its 30 or 60 FPS, who makes the game, who publishes the game, the DLC, and blah blah blah.

Its like, am I the only one who plays games for fun these days? I don't care what system a game is on, what the graphics are like, the framerate, etc. As long as I'm having fun and I find the game to be good, I'll play it. Sorry for the rant, just sick and tired of people whining about stupid things.

The Squid thinks that gamers choose these talking points about their games, because they are the style or quality of games they prefer. If you asked the Squid, he would say he hates the Call of Duty/ Battlefield games and their spawn. This does not make them bad games, we simply don't find any enjoyment in them. Some gamers find that having over 30 FPS or having HD graphics makes or breaks a game for them, and we understand. For the Squid, we don't care about graphics but we do care about a good storyline, and LOTS of game time and replay value. And we do care about the system the game is on, since we cannot afford all three console systems and a PC.

I can agree with pretty much all of this.

Particularly when you get people whining about things like graphics, how they were looking forward to such-and-such game, but now wont buy it because it lacks some obscure technical aspect to the graphics, or lacks a resolution that they wouldnt ACTUALLY notice a difference in regardless, or other things like that. I always want to scream at them "WHO FREAKING CARES?!? Those things dont change the game whatsoever! It still has the same gameplay regardless of wether or not there's reflections with water or how shiny the main character's shoes are!". It gets even worse when dealing with alot of indie titles; indie developers tend to either not have the resources to pull off "big" graphics, or they just dont give a fart and will make the game THEY want to make, dammit. So it's absolutely inevitable that someone will come and pester everyone else, telling them what fools they are for buying such a crap game, because graphics. It could be a game with a great aesthetic to it, and look very good, but "ZOMG it's 2D and has pixels that's like playing old Atari games so it sucks!!111one1eleven!".

Whereas I honestly will take the old Atari 2600 games over alot of the crap being released lately. Which is exactly what I do, an ancient 7800 console sits next to the keyboard here and gets frequent use. Graphics just cant impress me anymore. I've always had super high-end PCs, and have seen the best stuff possible, as graphics go. So I tend to have a "been there, seen that" response to graphics in newer games. They need the GAMEPLAY to back it up... to me, nothing else matters. If the game has that, then I'm good to go, really.

But most just arent like that, and.... yeah. It's super irritating. Particularly when they jump into communties for things like indie games just to be insulting jerks.

What about the dramas regarding a video game review scores?

When these games get a high score from mainstream reviewers (from 7 till 9), they felt okay & wouldn't care about it.

But when these games get a low score (lower 6), everybody loses their minds.

Like me, I've been making such an e-drama regarding a game review scores while others like to sit there & take it as a laughing matter like trolling & harassing me especially on gamefaqs till it gets me offended. Now I kinda regret over my foolish move and I need to move on with some self control even though I have an asperger syndrome in my whole life.

I don't really pre-order any games in my whole life. I've been doing some research including previews, trailers and of course reviews. IF not so, I might end up jinxing it.

That aspect does get a bit silly. Particularly when you consider that reviews, in the end, are mostly opinion. They can be worth reading when they at least partly explain HOW the gameplay or whatever works, instead of what the individual thinks about it... that sort of info is useful. But the opinion part really isnt.

To really get an idea of what a game is like and if you'd like it or not, you have to play it for yourself, or at least perhaps watch a friend play it for awhile, something like that. I can think of a big pile of games that I love where, if I'd listened to the pro reviewers, I'd never have tried them, and that would be rather sad, to miss out on something really nice just because some guy said otherwise.

Dear folks, let's keep it civil, please.

The reported post and the response to it has been removed.

The thing really isn't that gamers are becoming worse its just that gaming is a bigger hobby than it ever has been, and as something becomes incredibly popular at a rapid rate then the community ends up being pretty toxic. Also it kind of depends on the game and platform too, some platforms and games have much better communities than others (IE Steam has a much better community than PSN)


Also in response to people saying FPS and graphics don't matter, I want you to try and play a game you like running at 4 FPS or with a distorted ass FOV, having a really bad field of view can actually make you motion-sick

It has gotten pretty horrible. Players feel the need to bag out all the other consoles. By far my experience has been the worst with a certain division of PC gamers who feel the need to call themselves "Master race" like they are some sort of Nazi like movement. Sure many will say it is a joke, but if it is its in poor taste, and I am sure that there is a pretty good bunch of them that actually believe it, and calling console players "peasants" really just a grab to try and demoralise another group and make yourself feel superior.

Next is that so many people have felt the need to crap on the Xbox One, for no real reason, it has gotten to the point that many of them so badly want it to fail that they jump at every opportunity to say there is something wrong with it. Followed by hate against Nintendo, where many just go against it for not conforming, highly ironic with all the complaints about nothing changing. It goes back to what someone said above about people just ignoring fun factor.

Another horrid thing is the way that "true gamers" have acted recently, and by that I mean people who are likely guys, who want to exclude others from calling themselves gamers, either get upset or pretty much ignore any really problems of gender inequality, and pretty much attack anyone who raises a point against them. They have used horrid language and have threatened women who they have seen as the enemy, and have felt the need to try and insult anyone who tries to defend people or use reason as SJW (Social Justice Warriors). But this whole issue is supposedly recently be about journalist corruption, where they have felt the need to attack all game journalists that have the slightest connection to game developers, and surprised that different journalists would decide together when to do certain stories. And then no surprise certain journalists got upset and wrote angry articles saying that the community was bad, which was followed by the elitists getting more upset that they were attacked despite the fact they did it first.

Way too much of an extreme example to actually count as a counter-arguement. No games actually START with a warped FOV (they'd never sell if they did, because MOST people would get headaches; if a game DOES start with it, it's gotta be a PC game, and there's something wrong that's causing it to do so, whatever that may be). When people say stuff about framerate, it's typically the difference between 30 and 60, or maybe 45 and 60. To me, 30 isnt even the slightest problem. And yes, I can tell the difference; the idea that the eye cannot tell past a really specific point is incorrect. My "able to tell" range goes up to about 90-100, which actually bother me because they're TOO smooth. 60-75 is about where I prefer it, though it doesnt have to be there, really. 30 though is just fine. LOTS of games run at 30, both old and new, and unless they're told otherwise, most people wont actually notice this as they're absorbed into the gameplay, not paying attention to that aspect.

No, what is typically meant by "graphics dont matter" is graphical processing power. All that gibberish like bump-mapping or HDR or bloom or all of that crap. Doesnt. Matter. Has NOTHING to do with actual gameplay. But people will think a game is terrible JUST because of a lack of those, without trying it, or even seeing anything beyond screenshots. Bloody stupid, really.




Yep.

That stupid "master race" thing always bugged me. Dont get me wrong: I'll always put the PC ahead of the consoles. ALWAYS. But this has nothing to do with graphical power. Since I tend to have extremely powerful PCs, I've already seen the best of the best as far as graphical power goes, and it seriously stopped impressing me long ago. So I dont give a crap about that part. What it is for me is the selection of games. Consoles dont give me what I want... the PC does. Simple as that. That's not to say I dont HAVE consoles, either; hell, I picked up a Wii U recently, AND a 3DS. Alot of PC gamers though think that other PC gamers HAVE to stick to JUST PCs. It gets even dumber if you're into mobile/tablet gaming. Ugh, that one's probably the worst, since games like Angry Birds and such have created the idiotic illusion that there's only easy, casual stuff on there (not even remotely true; those are just the ones that are easiest to FIND. I could point out LOTS of very hardcore games on there, really...). And of course then there's the eternal war between the consoles themselves, and the handhelds, and.... argh.

I always wanna say... JUST PLAY THE DAMN GAMES ALREADY. If you want to tell people that you think a certain console/system/thing/wombat is really good, then hey, that's fine. Ramble about it all you want. But if you're gonna sit there and INSULT them, or things like that, that's being a total asshat.

As for that bit you brought up about true gamers... my entire opinion on that issue can be summed up with "feh". That issue is WAY too inflated... but at the same time, this is the internet, bastion of the insane. You're GOING to get loopy jerks saying things like that no matter what you do. Or what the subject even is, really. Though yes, the "real gamers" bit really is bloody stupid. Personally I think that "real" gamers would just sit down and play the blasted games instead of doing what those jerks do, but what do I know?

As for the REVIEWER bit.... ugh. THAT one is stupid. Particularly BECAUSE of the internet. Dont get me wrong... I dont trust the big reviewers either. Particularly with asshat publishers like EA, Capcom, and Activision running around, as it's EXACTLY the sort of thing they'd do, paying someone to get a review score heightened a bit. But the solution is so freaking simple: Just dont read stuff from those guys! It's the damn internet! There's about 10 billionty other reviewers out there! Go watch stuff from Total Biscuit or someone like that! It's not like you HAVE to read/watch IGN or whatever! Argh. Just... so dumb.

That is essentially my view. It is pretty obvious that many big reviewers are biased that you should not trust them unless you wanted to like the big brands, as essentially they are obviously supposed to be selling that sort of lifestyle. Some even have conflicting interest, but it is not like other parts innocent, the movie industry apparently has a big issue where the movie rating board is in the pocket of major studios and more indy or small studio movies get a higher age rating, and bullied from major releases.

The modern gaming industry as a whole disappoints me, not just the gamers who buy into it.

Totally agreed. Whole thing can be just downright... unpleasant.

And I just dont see that much quality stuff coming from the big guys anymore. Though plenty will disagree with me, I'm sure. Though there are exceptions, I'll buy a major game every now and then. But usually I end up with mostly indie stuffs.


And some of those publishers... ugh. The sorts of things they do sometimes, just outright wrong.

Honestly, as a gamer (and an amateur game dev), I don't really encounter this kind of stuff. I wonder if just some subculture I just avoid? People who whine about those things aren't really enjoying what they claim to enjoy, are they? Most gamers are alright folk I would say. Those who aren't are fairly easy to filter out.

The industry can act like a giant turdstain though. Some developers treat their fans like absolute garbage (I'll just say this: I'm glad I'm not a megaman fan :U). Others just never deliver. Others still think they can cut corners and people won't notice. It feels like a disrespect to those who enjoy the games. There are quite a few developers who don't do these things, but some are just TERRIBLE. And some indie game developers are complete as*holes. Look at how Phil Fish reacted when people didn't like his game. If people don't like your game, it's not their fault, it's your fault for not making a good game! At least the guy who wrote ET and Pac Man for the Atari 2600 get the fact that they made a game that people didn't like.

And don't even GET me started on gaming journalism. Recent issues aside, I've always hated the tone that they've had towards games that they don't like. The problem here is that journalists should be impartial to things that they don't necessarily like in their reviews. They tend not to be, and games that I like, like Pokemon, are often criticized on things that reflect that the reviewer simply doesn't like the style of game as opposed to a problem with the actual gameplay. If you don't like games like Pokemon, you really shouldn't be reviewing them by yourself - instead, get several reviewers working together to review the title so that a less biased opinion is released. But no, everyone just wants to piss on a franchise that I and many others really enjoy... It's fine if you don't like it but don't be a damn prick. Also, your readerbase isn't "stupid" if they don't agree with you, they have a different opinion. The entire gaming journalism industry has acted like little babies for years. I haven't read these "video game journalism" websites in years and I'm glad - it seems like the problem has only gotten worse and worse.

But yeah, I honestly think that gamers are the least of the video game industry's problem. There are annoying ones but they're aren't prolific. Anyone who is into video games moderately has probably encountered a few, but they tend to take the spotlight for the people who actually treat others like complete garbage, i.e. some developers/publishers and many video game "journalists".

I'll admit, the other I was watching one of my friends play Assassin's Creed IV, and it actually looked pretty neat. There aren't very many games about pirates and seafaring, so for a game from a AAA cash cow "dudebro" franchise, it actually looked pretty compelling. I want to get into the series, and I own the first game, but I've heard that the first game sucks and that you need to play it anyway to understand the later games. Is it actually a bad game, or do people just complain about it because they like the newer ones better? I'm pretty open-minded, but I don't like games with slow beginnings.

It was not too long ago I watched a completionist review of the first game, and I think that it gave a pretty good idea of the first game. The first one was good for its time, it was some good ideas, but pretty clunky compared to later games. Playing the later games then coming back to this will probably feel pretty bad, it does lay a foundation. It is a little slower to bring up how to play

Whether it is needed to play later ones, I don't think it is necessary, Black Flag will actually have a little bit of catch ups in it and from my understanding it is made as kind of an entry point, the only problem will probably be understanding implications of organisation and artefacts. Still if you have the first, give it a try, get past the epilogue and maybe first boss to see if it is for you.

I see the recent review of Alien Isolation but it got panned by two mainstream reviewers (Ign & Gamespot) but others gave a good score.

Last edited by jafri on 15 Oct 2014, 2:29 am, edited 1 time in total.