Gamers Elitism and Entiltlement Issues.

[HGW XX/7]

This thread can be a continuation of what the Dead Rising CTYD thread was turning into.

If you want to discuss the elitism and entitlement issues of gamers, this is the place for it.

Are 360 or PS3 owners really just HD snobs?

Do Nintendo fans truly believe that they deserve every major release, even if it just isn't possible on their console (in the developers eyes)?

I wasn't trying to stop your discussion, I was trying to get that thread back on track.

Here is where you can continue. Just don't make it or take it personally.

[Coral]

Some people would view me as an elitist, but the core reason I argue about games is because its annoying to see people distort the quality of games. Remove your personal definition of fun, and grade games based on their quality. Its okay to enjoy any game you want, but understand some games are on a higher level than others. Thats just the way it is, just like anything else, such as Movies, Music, Art, Hardware, Cars, and almost everything else in life. Gamers tend to fight about their favourites so much because they become attached to specific series, and titles, and they often ignore the fact that while you may have enjoyed a game it might just not be as good as another game in terms of visuals, controls, gameplay, sound, and tilt/replay value, etc.

[HGW XX/7]

However, if you as a gamer enjoy these so-called 'lower quality' games, then wouldn't ratings on graphics, sound, gameplay, and tilt be worth nothing to you?

Edit: This is also ultimately why review numbers mean nothing to me. Final Fantasy games may look and sound good, but they've never been able to pull me in like some simple Nippon Ichi RPGs.

"Value" is subjective. No matter how much people want their idea of value to be the standard.

[Coral]

However, if you as a gamer enjoy these so-called 'lower quality' games, then wouldn't ratings on graphics, sound, gameplay, and tilt be worth nothing to you?

Edit: This is also ultimately why review numbers mean nothing to me. Final Fantasy games may look and sound good, but they've never been able to pull me in like some simple Nippon Ichi RPGs.

"Value" is subjective. No matter how much people want their idea of value to be the standard.

Some parts of the current review process are subjective, but other things arent as much. You may not like a specific sound, but if youre going to be reviewing for a site that people are influenced by then you need to be able to understand that a sound you dont like might still be quality. Same goes for visuals, and gameplay.

If youre enjoying your brain age, by all means, continue to enjoy it and ignore the reviews, but if you actually care about gaming as a whole I think you need to stress to developers that they should be trying to up the quality and not take the easy way out.

Imagine your Nipon Ichi, just as good as it is now, but better in every category. The only problem that could arise is if to do that it needs to be on a more powerful system. If the developer doesnt want to put it there, then understand that when judged they may be marked down. I know that some gamers feel that because they own a cheaper less powerful system that means everyone should give them a break and dish out the same high score other games get and not critisize the game son that system if they dont compare. If ten years from now someone is making games that look and run like current games when technology allows for much better, sorry but youre being lazy.

[HGW XX/7]

Some parts of the current review process are subjective, but other things arent as much. You may not like a specific sound, but if youre going to be reviewing for a site that people are influenced by then you need to be able to understand that a sound you dont like might still be quality. Same goes for visuals, and gameplay.

If youre enjoying your brain age, by all means, continue to enjoy it and ignore the reviews, but if you actually care about gaming as a whole I think you need to stress to developers that they should be trying to up the quality and not take the easy way out.

Imagine your Nipon Ichi, just as good as it is now, but better in every category. The only problem that could arise is if to do that it needs to be on a more powerful system. If the developer doesnt want to put it there, then understand that when judged they may be marked down. I know that some gamers feel that because they own a cheaper less powerful system that means everyone should give them a break and dish out the same high score other games get and not critisize the game son that system if they dont compare. If ten years from now someone is making games that look and run like current games when technology allows for much better, sorry but youre being lazy.

I see where you're coming from, and I have no problem stating that a certain game looks/plays better than another, but it's still possible to not enjoy a great game regardless.

I've never liked Metal Gear games for example. I recognize why they're loved and great, but I can't stand them.

Nippon Ichi IS on the most powerful system. Releasing 2D games at that (Disgaea 3... okay 2.5D?). Their art style, quirky humor, and depth make the games. Not the graphics (which art style falls under) or sound (which is usually good but not great).

Sure they could make HD sprites or something, but to put those games into a super 3D Eternal Sonata-esque style wouldn't work.

Some games don't need to look/sound better to be amazing. In some cases it can really help, but a better looking Mario isn't going to change the game any.

[Coral]

I see where you're coming from, and I have no problem stating that a certain game looks/plays better than another, but it's still possible to not enjoy a great game regardless.

I've never liked Metal Gear games for example. I recognize why they're loved and great, but I can't stand them.

Nippon Ichi IS on the most powerful system. Releasing 2D games at that (Disgaea 3... okay 2.5D?). Their art style, quirky humor, and depth make the games. Not the graphics (which art style falls under) or sound (which is usually good but not great).

Sure they could make HD sprites or something, but to put those games into a super 3D Eternal Sonata-esque style wouldn't work.

Some games don't need to look/sound better to be amazing. In some cases it can really help, but a better looking Mario isn't going to change the game any.


Thats alright, but if a game isnt as visually impressive or the sounds are basic by choice then i think theres only so high they can score. Its upto the reviewer though to stress that the visuals and or sound arent what make the game special without doing the really stupid:

Visuals : 7
Sound: 7
Tilt: 7
Control: 7
Gameplay: 10


Final Score: 9.5 ( Not an average)

It happens and its stupid.

[MR EPIC]

This is true. Sadly, when you guys hear me refer to a Wii game I always end it up with "For a Wii game it's damn good". I shouldn't have to say that but the fact is that if I were to compare said game to something on the 360 or PS3 nine times out of ten it just doesn't stack up. As Coral says, enjoy what you want (even CTYD) but don't even try to compare it to the awesome experience it was on the XBOX 360. It's not elitism to like nice graphics or online play, as these things have been around on consoles for a while now. But some get defensive when these issues are brought up, mainly Nintendo fans who feel compelled to make excuses about the company living in the dark ages.

That's the point I was trying to make about Chocobo's Dungeon and more specifically why ended up giving up on it. In the beginning I was really jazzed about it being one of the deepest and best games on the Wii, but after time set in I realized that this wasn't the same level of game as a Lost Odyssey, a Final Fantasy, or a Dragon Quest and that in a sense I was lowering my standard. I don't feel that I should have to lower my standard with Wii games but all to often I find myself having to do so in order to convince myself that it's a worthwhile effort.

I'm tired, more later

[HGW XX/7]

Thats alright, but if a game isnt as visually impressive or the sounds are basic by choice then i think theres only so high they can score. Its upto the reviewer though to stress that the visuals and or sound arent what make the game special without doing the really stupid:

Visuals : 7
Sound: 7
Tilt: 7
Control: 7
Gameplay: 10


Final Score: 9.5 ( Not an average)

It happens and its stupid.

That's exactly why if a reviewer uses numbers in a review they should only do an all encompassing number grade for the game.

Movie reviewers don't rate the quality of acting, cinematography, script, etc and then take the average. They consider all things and give one solid score/recommendation.

That's how game reviews SHOULD be.

[DEATHSTAR]

I've said this numerous times but review scores give cause to the enthusiasts. If the reviewing portion of the game industry would forgo the summary score at the end of reviews, we may end up with more quality reviews and enthusiasts may have less "proof" to back up their positions.

In the end most people whether they claim to like reviews or not end up citing some review score in their argument for or against a game. That really needs to stop especially given that most gamers aren't even reading the whole reviews anymore.

Personally I think the "elitists" mostly exist in the older tech segment of gaming more often than not. Even around these boards I've seen that group do more lashing out at people that own newer or multiple units. But EVERYONE can get a bit overly sensitive about their machines.

[Smokey]

Thats alright, but if a game isnt as visually impressive or the sounds are basic by choice then i think theres only so high they can score. Its upto the reviewer though to stress that the visuals and or sound arent what make the game special without doing the really stupid:

Visuals : 7
Sound: 7
Tilt: 7
Control: 7
Gameplay: 10


Final Score: 9.5 ( Not an average)

It happens and its stupid.

Coral, just because a game has better visuals and better sound doesn't make it a better game than another. A game with visuals that satisfy the bare minimum of a 360's horsepower but has an incredibly in-depth storyline will beat out a visually mind-blowing yet shallow game.

[MAX]

I get annoyed with gamers who base their argument on subjective things like scores/ratings a game gets.

[ReaganYouth]

I get annoyed when gamers feel their tastes are the best and if someone disagrees with them, they're labeled fanboys.

[MAX]

I get annoyed when they sell their console when they know Captain Rainbow is coming out and they will end up buying the system AGAIN to play it.

[Rensa]

Thats alright, but if a game isnt as visually impressive or the sounds are basic by choice then i think theres only so high they can score. Its upto the reviewer though to stress that the visuals and or sound arent what make the game special without doing the really stupid:
Agreed, but you also have to take into account that visuals need to be appropriate to the game. For example, puzzle games require functional graphics; while polish and aesthetic is very important, gratuitous processing power shouldn't be poured into the presentation for its own sake.

I agree that gaming graphics should be the best that they can be given current technology, but that doesn't necessarily mean devoting as much processing to visuals as possible. 'The best that they can be' means the most thoughtful expenditure of technological and artistic resources possible.

[Coral]

Im not weighing Visuals or Sound over any of the other areas. But if theyre going to be used in a review, unless you specify weigh them equally.

And yes, i understand. A game on PS3 that compared to most on the PS3 looks like meh, but looks better than the best on N64 shouldnt be getting anything over a 6 in the visuals department.

Lets not forget that visuals isnt just one frame, but also frames per second, smooth loading, no pop in, proper use of styles.

Game reviewers could stop using numbers, but I think wed start seeing reviews becoming even more opinionated, and personally I dont care what Mr. so and so thinks of the game. Just tell me, is it a well made game, are their obvious flaws, okay thanks, Ill go try it out.

Coral, just because a game has better visuals and better sound doesn't make it a better game than another. A game with visuals that satisfy the bare minimum of a 360's horsepower but has an incredibly in-depth storyline will beat out a visually mind-blowing yet shallow game.

I agree 100%

I get annoyed with gamers who base their argument on subjective things like scores/ratings a game gets.

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x291/coralispink/feminist_en.gif

[ReaganYouth]

I hate it when gamers need 2 AAA titles coming out every week or so, otherwise they deem the system to be ****. I obviously can't speak for everyone (as a lot of gamers actually have jobs), but I get the feeling that some of these people have mommy and daddy buying all their games for them, therefore they don't really know the value of a dollar.

[Tanooki]

Thanks for making this, somehow I see this thread exploding in size, but somehow staying civil most likely.

Times have changed this half of the decade. The era of everything being more or less on the same playfield is out the window and everyone is doing their own thing. Reviews these days seem (since some of you brought it up) to fall into two major groupings I've seen really. You have those who rate a game against others on that system letting the gamer know how fun that game is, how pretty, how good to the ears, handling, control against the rest of the pot and what a system is figured/known to do. Then you have the others who do blanket reviews, those who like to cross compare and contrast and depending on the type will tear down something when it's easy and/or the cool thing to do. That in itself inspires a lot of child like behavior from people to mirror that crap as it gets engrained.

Another problem we see now is the broadening again of the base, just as Sony did a decade ago with the PSX. At first it was diehard fan type gamers in love with their Nintendo and Sega (perhaps Atari too) seeing Sony doing all this mainstreaming and changes and getting a lot of people in it, some went with the flow, others curled up into a ball or slashed out in a rage over it. Fastforward 10 years and now Nintendo is doing it again opening to door from there to those who gave up or never got on board, and again you got two groups...the accepting types, and those of the core thinking they're getting hosed, mistreated, screwed because it's (Wii/DS) not up to par with the others (PSP/PS3/360.) You start seeing double talk and underhanded comments in some reviews, and again it spills into threads. Some people do have some valid arguments such as the zombie one this thread spawned about having the entire town in the mall. Often though you get those who just need their eyes and ears tickled to get a rise, and a 'lesser' system can't cut it so they feel everytime the little kid on the block gets all the attention they need to lash out like all the Sony haters of 1996 and on did 10-12 years ago.

That there is the root of the elitism, being either openly or common underhandedly snotty about something that is different getting the attention, different from what you're into at least or own/care about, or have some stake in. A great example would be the neck and neck wars of DS and PSP 2+ years ago with stupid crap like the PSP IGN Juan guy doing the DS mailbag making fun of mail writers and trying to talk them into selling it and getting PSP, or the 1up.com review of Ridge Racer DS(not a great game anyways) basically making a 2min writeup with like 1/4 of it on the game and the rest talking about PSP RR game being so much better...and ending it with a 2.5/10 ...real fair. Crap like that causes snob comments to get tossed around because some people refuse to be objective, or at least keep their snide comments out of positive threads, discussions, and debates just to get a rise or whatever satisfaction comes from it.

In the end no one is more entitled than any other to enjoy the games they have the systems they play on. And while it is your right to be a jackass and pick a fight in a conversation, expect it to cause more anger, more attacks, and more back and forward when it wasn't even part of the discussion or necessary in the first place. Fine, if you hate a system and/or game...cool. Make a thread, get other like mindeds in there and perhaps a few defenders who will argue your points as that's awesome, but don't step into someone elses conversation and toss out the 'you/this sucks' card as that just like canned reviews, and other lame mentality all gets people the ownership of the elitist snob card.

[Coral]

for every elitist snob theres a righteous fanboy defender. Leave my system alone, its not fair to judge me for being lesser, I cant afford this, I dont have time to play games so Ill just talk about them instead and expect to have my opinion valued.


Ridge Racer DS was cute. Its like those ugly cell phone games you only play when youre trapped in an elevator with no reception, ipod, book, magazine, or sexy hispanic man winking at you.

[blokeymon]

I simply cannot be arsed reading all the other posts, but here's my two cents anyways.

I like games. That's it. Naff graphics. Naff sound. Naff animation. I don't care. So long as I can sit back and say "I had fun playing that", I'm happy.

I also own all 3 current gen systems and I play them on an old rear projection TV, meaning I don't have HD. Do I care? No. Cos I can have just as much fun barbecuing some git on Warhawk as anyone else, HD or not.

So if you HAVE to have HD, or it HAS to look awesome, or it HAS to sound good, and you're not too bothered about the actual gameplay, then you need to die in a ****ing fire.

That is all.

[MAX]

hahahaha luff blokeh

[Tanooki]

I like games. That's it. Naff graphics. Naff sound. Naff animation. I don't care. So long as I can sit back and say "I had fun playing that", I'm happy.

So if you HAVE to have HD, or it HAS to look awesome, or it HAS to sound good, and you're not too bothered about the actual gameplay, then you need to die in a ****ing fire.

Quoted for truth and that was fan-f'n-tastic blokey. That's very well cut down into what I was getting at...play your crap and be happy, don't just go around jumping online and crapping on someone elses doorstep because you have your own divine issues of what should be best and not. Kind of like Coral there with his not so indirect pot-shot at my entire post making a lot of stupid assumptions. Also I never said RR DS was great, but it did deserve a fair review which it didn't get in those examples I gave to illustrate the snobby behavior. It is kind of lame to use the example 'do not pick on me because I am lesser' as that right there is a key snob point if anything because one could see the one saying someone is lesser as someone who thinks they're superior with their gaming tastes and therefore is an elitist.

[MR EPIC]

It's not elitist to demand good graphics for a video game, sorry to inform y'all. I have friends that aren't elitists in the slightest bit (if anything they're casual) but if a game is not pleasing to the eye they're going to shy away from it. I'm sorta' the same way, just not with graphics though but with art style. I don't care how much "fun" the game might be, if the art sucks I'm not playin' it as that's a huge part of the experience and something I have to look at constantly. These aren't the days of playing Wizard PC games where they're only text based and there are no visuals. Graphics and art style are every bit as important as control, gameplay and story.

[blokeymon]

Mr Epic, Imma hunt you down and double nipple cripple you.

Srsly.

:D

[Tanooki]

Bad art is one thing, and I agree on that, but to get all vindictive and mouthy over say the Wii vs the 360 or something is childish as they're not even in the same tier yet those who want to will happily shove in there to toss around cheapshots and it's just so pointless and stupid. There's no crime in demanding damn good graphics for a game given what the hardware itself can do, but to just pull out some fantasy demand the hardware can't meet and then run it into the ground is over the line and that is snobby.

[ReaganYouth]

For me, visuals do matter, but in more ways than just "polish". For example, I think Little King's Story has great graphics, because the graphics are inspired and the art direction looks real swell.

[MR EPIC]

Well I can agree with that Jeff.

Blokeh - That sounds a bit painful, can I get a raincheck?

If I may try to speak for Coral (not that I necessarily agree with his point of view) as to explain where he's coming from...

Let's take The Conduit for example. Coral realizes that it looks good for a Wii game, as the system is limited in comparison to the other consoles. However, the game compared to the technology out there is not going to ever be "impressive" to him overall because the standard is now much higher. Much like with an N64 game, in this case let's use OOT. OOT was incredible for it's time, but if you were to say that it looks amazing now you'd be thoroughly laughed at all around the internet. So basically it annoys Coral when people on these forums gush over the graphics of a Wii game and use terms like "Amazing" "Gorgeous" and "Impressive" to describe it, because he knows that if the same game were released on one of the other two consoles it wouldn't even be given a second look. He just wants people to be more realistic and say things like "it looks nice for a Wii game" or "it looks pretty good".

Again, I'm not saying that I agree with his line of thinking but I do understand where he's coming from, which is what I'm trying to convey with my post here.

[Lizzaroni]

Right, it's totally weird to demand something be HD. It's not like high definition TV or Blu-Ray are now becoming standard for entertainment or anything.

[ReaganYouth]

Ocarina of Time will never stop being beautiful to me.

And Blu-Ray shouldn't be becoming the standard of anything. I'm not buying all the movies I already own on DVD just for a barely noticeable improvement. HDTV's on the other hand, are essentials.

[MR EPIC]

Barely noticeable improvement? Either you need glasses or you've seen Blu-Ray/HD-DVD on some poor equipment. The difference between the two is night and day Reagan. Take it from someone who's been into HD for almost 10 years now

[Lizzaroni]

The quality shift from DVD to Blu-Ray is phenomenal. I'm not criticizing Nintendo, the Wii, or it's games. I'm simply saying we're at a turning point and it's entirely reasonable to synchronize that upgrade in quality with an upgrade in your media center. Nintendo lacks in this regard, and as someone who just really enjoys watching movies and tries to maximize that enjoyment, it makes the console [Wii] secondary when considering a purchase. I'm not a social gamer; my friends do not play video games and I reckon would like the Wii for about a month or so before tiring of it. I do, however, love Blu-Rays and was in the market for a Blu-Ray player, had recently acquired an HDTV, and really wanted to play MGS4. I'm a very visual person, and the PS3 made the most sense to me because it had many of the XBox games I wanted to play with a few extra features that really sold me.

And yes, Blu-Rays are becoming standard. I don't know why you interpret this to mean "you must replace all your DVDs," but Blu-Ray won that format war and eventually obsolete mediums will be phased out, much like VHS.

[MR EPIC]

The quality shift from DVD to Blu-Ray is phenomenal. I'm not criticizing Nintendo, the Wii, or it's games. I'm simply saying we're at a turning point and it's entirely reasonable to synchronize that upgrade in quality with an upgrade in your media center. Nintendo lacks in this regard, and as someone who just really enjoys watching movies and tries to maximize that enjoyment, it makes the console secondary when considering a purchase. I'm not a social gamer; my friends do not play video games and I reckon would like the Wii for about a month or so before tiring of it. I do, however, love Blu-Rays and was in the market for a Blu-Ray player, had recently acquired an HDTV, and really wanted to play MGS4. I'm a very visual person, and the PS3 made the most sense to me because it had many of the XBox games I wanted to play with a few extra features that really sold me.

And yes, Blu-Rays are becoming standard. I don't know why you interpret this to mean "you must replace all your DVDs," but Blu-Ray won that format war and eventually obsolete mediums will be phased out, much like VHS.

Excellent, excellent post.

[ReaganYouth]

The quality shift from DVD to Blu-Ray is phenomenal. I'm not criticizing Nintendo, the Wii, or it's games. I'm simply saying we're at a turning point and it's entirely reasonable to synchronize that upgrade in quality with an upgrade in your media center. Nintendo lacks in this regard, and as someone who just really enjoys watching movies and tries to maximize that enjoyment, it makes the console secondary when considering a purchase. I'm not a social gamer; my friends do not play video games and I reckon would like the Wii for about a month or so before tiring of it. I do, however, love Blu-Rays and was in the market for a Blu-Ray player, had recently acquired an HDTV, and really wanted to play MGS4. I'm a very visual person, and the PS3 made the most sense to me because it had many of the XBox games I wanted to play with a few extra features that really sold me.

And yes, Blu-Rays are becoming standard. I don't know why you interpret this to mean "you must replace all your DVDs," but Blu-Ray won that format war and eventually obsolete mediums will be phased out, much like VHS.

Where does Nintendo come into this? I don't recall bringing them up in that post. My disdain for Blu-Ray has nothing to do with them.

And if you read my post, you'd see that I called HDTV's "essential", kthnxbi.

[Lizzaroni]

Ocarina of Time?

[ReaganYouth]

MR EPIC said the graphics are dated, and I said that game in particular would never stop being beautiful to me no matter how dated they are. But I suppose nostalgia comes into play in that case.

And I would appreciate it if you guys would stop talking to me like I'm a close-minded fanboy, because I'm not. K?

[HGW XX/7]

Ocarina is dated, yes. But the look suits the game, which makes it okay.

Final Fantasy VII however.... no dice.

[ReaganYouth]

Ocarina is dated, yes. But the look suits the game, which makes it okay.

Final Fantasy VII however.... no dice.

Hah?

[Tanooki]

Well I can agree with that Jeff.

Blokeh - That sounds a bit painful, can I get a raincheck?

If I may try to speak for Coral (not that I necessarily agree with his point of view) as to explain where he's coming from...

Let's take The Conduit for example. Coral realizes that it looks good for a Wii game, as the system is limited in comparison to the other consoles. However, the game compared to the technology out there is not going to ever be "impressive" to him overall because the standard is now much higher.

Well see that's the problem being set, trying to equal all 3 systems on the same tier. You need to in the case of the Wii not rate it on impressiveness factor against the other two as they're entirely different beasts from the HD to the massive hardware. The Conduit just like OOT is VERY impressive even today for what it was released on, high end tier stuff, and deserves to be rewarded not insulted over that fact. Like you I don't agree with that thinking either, but hey some people just can't resist a dig as not everyone has a little thing called self control.


Reagan that's kind of insane saying you wouldn't rebuy from tape to DVD as the boost actually is phenominal, and while the jump again to BR is nice it's nowhere near the same from tape to disc which is why it's not taking hold in the market except among primarily technophiles...DVD still reigns king and until people are forced to move and/or prices match that of DVD that won't change anytime soon. DVDs are a solid and clear format while the old magnetic tape would wear, stretch, get fuzzy, sound and visual would bust up and then die over so many uses or just years of no use.

Again really when it comes to the Wii and DS considering they're visually the low tier devices against the others you know what you're getting into when you get it. With that, you really just need to be evaluating what the hardware can handle against what you're getting in a title, then determine the pretty factor and all that and not against a HD similar genre counterpart as it's just insane and insanely unfair, especially in the case of just dropping into a thread on a board like here and beating it to death with a negativity attack. A great example would be the old Conduit threads where people were wow, wii did that? whoa...and then some chode would wander in and go 'well it is ok but looks like shat go play halo 3 or resistance to get a real experience.' Not necessary...not at all.

[HGW XX/7]

Hah?

Basically I'm saying that OOT looks good today, because they went with an art style that fit the game completely. Could you have imagined if they had tried to go realistic? The game would be unplayable today, as it'd be way too ugly.

Just like FFVII

[ReaganYouth]

Basically I'm saying that OOT looks good today, because they went with an art style that fit the game completely. Could you have imagined if they had tried to go realistic? The game would be unplayable today, as it'd be way too ugly.

Just like FFVII

I (and apparently many others) thought they were trying to go realistic with OOT. That's why everyone flipped out when Spaceworld 2001 Celda hit the internet.