This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

The dumbest complaints you've heard for disliking a game

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. The dumbest complaints you've heard for disliking a game

User Info: JKatarn

JKatarn
4 months ago#91
KillerTruffle posted...
You're right that nobody should object if the dev choses to add easier/harder modes to their game, since it doesn't affect the difficulty you'll play it at. You just have to remember that that is the developer's choice, not the gamers'.


How is what you said in any way different than what I said? Thanks for agreeing with me that it's the developer's prerogative what content/modes they include/omit. Granted, developers can and do take feedback from the public during betas etc. and will adjust things based on that feedback, but it's ultimately THEIR call to make, and they're typically going to make the changes that garner them the highest possible sales/best appeal to their target market. Nowhere in my post did I claim that developers of games are beholden to me.
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii-U | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES

User Info: KillerTruffle

KillerTruffle
4 months ago#92
JKatarn posted...
How is what you said in any way different than what I said?

Because you also said this:

JKatarn posted...
if somebody wants to play a game on an easier/harder mode that will in no way affect your experience, who gives a flying fig?

Which seems to imply pretty heavily that the people in the wrong are those arguing that games like Dark Souls should not have easier difficulties (even though that difficulty was set at the discretion of the dev). If that's not how you meant it, sorry.
"How do I get rid of a Trojan Horse?" -Sailor_Kakashi
"Leave it outside the gates of Troy overnight." -Davel23

User Info: bshwalker

bshwalker
4 months ago#93
Ciera posted...
It's a console exclusive.

Why is this a bad one?
If I don’t have a console, Why would I buy a console exclusive?
Being called nostalgic is a compliment. Thanks for noticing!
~C.O.I.~

User Info: KillerTruffle

KillerTruffle
4 months ago#94
Honestly, *most* of the reasons given for disliking games are totally valid. Reasons you like or dislike something are entirely subjective. If a certain art style rubs you the wrong way, why would you want to stare at it for hours on end as you play that game? If a game is too hard, why is it wrong to dislike that all it does is frustrate you? If a game is too *easy*, what's wrong with disliking the way it does nothing but waste your time while providing no real entertainment? If a game is a console exclusive, why is it wrong for disliking that you can't play it - even though you think you might enjoy it - without dropping another $300+ on the necessary hardware to play it? If a game has awful, unintuitive controls, why is it wrong to dislike the fact that it's a chore to play and feels like the control system is fighting against you the entire time, rather than the game itself?

IMO, there are really very few "bad" reasons to dislike a game, because like and dislike is so subjective.
"How do I get rid of a Trojan Horse?" -Sailor_Kakashi
"Leave it outside the gates of Troy overnight." -Davel23

User Info: Dragon Nexus

Dragon Nexus
4 months ago#95
KillerTruffle posted...
The bottom line is it's the developers' call how they want their game to be experienced. Not yours.


Yup. Just like it's my decision to not play the game the way they wanted it.

KillerTruffle posted...
It's childish and silly to think that every game should be built to your personal tastes, and the developers are responsible to cater to you.


See, this is the argument that always comes out. Like those of us who say Dark Souls should have an easy mode somehow want all developers to cater to all tastes all the time with everything. That's not true at all.

I simply argue inclusion. The challenge still exists for those who want it. And fr those who care more about the story and the lore rather than playing a difficult game and getting frustrated, they can play the game and enjoy it. Lots of games have a "Just give me the story" difficulty now and I don't see why that's a bad thing.

I'm not arguing entitlement, I'm arguing against exclusionary thinking.

KillerTruffle posted...
However, the devs might have a specific reason to want to force a specific control scheme that plays into the overall design of the game.


I can think of so very few games that would somehow be less fun or engaging to play if I were allowed to change the control setup. In fact I'm struggling.
Using games that just work with a controller as an example, could you list me some games that would not function if you were allowed to remap the controls? I'm not asking this as a challenge I expect you to fail, I genuinely am curious. Only thing my mind comes up with is Rock Band, which doesn't feel like it counts, really.
"Everything popular is wrong." - Oscar Wilde

User Info: Orestes417

Orestes417
4 months ago#96
What you're arguing is forced inclusiveness for the sake of inclusiveness, which is frankly a horse s*** philosophy.
Even I'm not crazy enough to believe that distortion of reality

User Info: KillerTruffle

KillerTruffle
4 months ago#97
Dragon Nexus posted...
Yup. Just like it's my decision to not play the game the way they wanted it.

And exactly nobody is saying otherwise (that I've seen).

Dragon Nexus posted...
Like those of us who say Dark Souls should have an easy mode somehow want all developers to cater to all tastes all the time with everything. That's not true at all.

I simply argue inclusion.

What is "inclusion" if not all tastes all the time with everything? If that is not what you're arguing for, then exactly what do you mean by "inclusion?" What's more, that's literally what we're trying to tell you - developers do not need to include you. That's one big problem I've noticed in the current generation of ~ college-aged people - "inclusion" is a huge deal. Everyone feels that everything should include them. The concept of anti-discrimination has been taken to the extreme end, where rather than merely arguing against unlawful discrimination, they're arguing that everyone should be included in everything. There comes a point when people really do need to grow up, and recognize that not everything needs to be about - or even include - them. Especially when it comes to an artistic medium.

Dragon Nexus posted...
I'm not arguing entitlement, I'm arguing against exclusionary thinking.

Actually, you ARE arguing entitlement - that's literally what you're arguing for. You feel you have a right to be included. And you've given a perfect example of exactly what I pointed out in my last paragraph - you've taken the concept of anti-discrimination (or "anti-exclusion," if you will) to the extreme, to the point where you can't tell the difference between non-discrimination and inclusion.

Non-discrimination is arguing that, for example, an amputee in a wheelchair is able to enter your sporting goods store without undue difficulty, and can shop there. Inclusion is arguing that the store should be selling running shoes for the amputee.

You're arguing for the running shoes.

Dragon Nexus posted...
I can think of so very few games that would somehow be less fun or engaging to play if I were allowed to change the control setup. In fact I'm struggling.
Using games that just work with a controller as an example, could you list me some games that would not function if you were allowed to remap the controls? I'm not asking this as a challenge I expect you to fail, I genuinely am curious. Only thing my mind comes up with is Rock Band, which doesn't feel like it counts, really.

I didn't say there were many - I said it was possible, and completely legitimate, for a developer to require a specific control scheme for their game. In fact, when I made that comment, I had exactly games like Rock Band, certain VR games, etc. in mind, where messing with the controls had the potential to mess up the gameplay itself badly. That doesn't mean someone *can't* hack together a way to control scheme that lets them use a bunch of bananas to play an FPS if they want - but the developer doesn't need to make that allowance. If the player wants to play that way, it's on them to make it work.
"How do I get rid of a Trojan Horse?" -Sailor_Kakashi
"Leave it outside the gates of Troy overnight." -Davel23

User Info: Dragon Nexus

Dragon Nexus
4 months ago#98
Orestes417 posted...
What you're arguing is forced inclusiveness for the sake of inclusiveness, which is frankly a horse s*** philosophy.


For the sake of inclusiveness? How about for the sake of broadening your audience? Or for the sake of getting more money from sales?

Because currently anyone unable to play Dark Souls that well and wants to know the lore goes to a wiki or a let's play, neither of which pays the developers.

KillerTruffle posted...
What is "inclusion" if not all tastes all the time with everything?


Errr...not that? It's slightly hyperbolic, the way you worded it.

KillerTruffle posted...
That's one big problem I've noticed in the current generation of ~ college-aged people - "inclusion" is a huge deal. Everyone feels that everything should include them. The concept of anti-discrimination has been taken to the extreme end, where rather than merely arguing against unlawful discrimination, they're arguing that everyone should be included in everything. There comes a point when people really do need to grow up, and recognize that not everything needs to be about - or even include - them. Especially when it comes to an artistic medium.


You think I'm college aged. That's kinda flattering. Sadly not, I'm just someone who spent the whole of their school years being excluded from stuff for one reason or another and dislike seeing it perpetuated later in life. Again, adding an easy mode *does not harm your experience in any way*. Not to mention this is starting to feel very soap boxy right now. Who's said anything about anti-descrimination? Is this just a debate you really want to have with someone, so just inserted it into the argument? Because so-called "possitive descrimination" in my view is a really dumb and cynical idea that only leads to tokenism.

KillerTruffle posted...
Actually, you ARE arguing entitlement - that's literally what you're arguing for. You feel you have a right to be included.


I never said I feel like I had a right to play Dark Souls on easy. I just think it would be nice if I could. I'm not flinging poo at the developers because they didn't let me into their club house. I'm not throwing insults around and having a tantrum. I'm just saying including people like me wouldn't hurt anything. No demands, just requests.

KillerTruffle posted...
but the developer doesn't need to make that allowance. If the player wants to play that way, it's on them to make it work.


Or maybe it's up to the developer to not make an obtuse control scheme. See example - Kid Icarus for the 3DS.
"Everything popular is wrong." - Oscar Wilde

User Info: Orestes417

Orestes417
4 months ago#99
Dragon Nexus posted...
For the sake of inclusiveness? How about for the sake of broadening your audience? Or for the sake of getting more money from sales?


Not a priority for all projects.
Even I'm not crazy enough to believe that distortion of reality

User Info: KillerTruffle

KillerTruffle
4 months ago#100
Dragon Nexus posted...
How about for the sake of broadening your audience? Or for the sake of getting more money from sales?

And if those are not the dev's primary goals?

Dragon Nexus posted...
Errr...not that? It's slightly hyperbolic, the way you worded it.

OK, but you haven't actually answered my question. When you're asked "what do you mean by this word if not that," a proper answer is not merely "not that." Are you arguing only for inclusion of yourself? Are you more entitled than anyone else? If not, and if you don't mean "inclusion" to indicate "all tastes all the time with everything," then where do you draw that line? Where does "inclusion" stop if it falls short of all? You're arguing for inclusion, yet you've totally failed to define it since you apparently have a different definition.

Dragon Nexus posted...
You think I'm college aged. That's kinda flattering. Sadly not, I'm just someone who spent the whole of their school years being excluded from stuff for one reason or another and dislike seeing it perpetuated later in life.

Well, it's an attitude most commonly seen in that generation. Not everyone in that generation holds that attitude, and there are others outside that generation that do have it, but current college-aged people is where you see it most. Yes, that's a generalization though. And regardless, it's just a fact of life that you're not going to be included in everything, or even in all the things you want to be. That's something everyone needs to learn.

Dragon Nexus posted...
Again, adding an easy mode *does not harm your experience in any way*.

You're right - it doesn't. That doesn't mean the developers have any responsibility to include an easy mode if that doesn't fit with their vision for the game, or if that will take too much additional work to implement for them to justify. A good easy mode is going to be more than just fewer enemies with weaker attacks and less health. It does require a good bit of extra work to create alternative difficulties if you're gonna do it right.

Also, I noticed this bit from earlier that I'd missed before:

Dragon Nexus posted...
Yeah, and know what happens to those restaurants? They get a rep of being stubborn and not customer centric and they take less business.

I'm assuming you've never eaten at a truly "high-end," gourmet restaurant? Try going someplace like The French Laundry in Napa Valley, California, and making a substitution to one of the meal items. Most places will accommodate food allergies, and ask beforehand, but these are top-end chefs who create a very specific culinary experience, and they won't have Joe Blow coming in and deciding he'd rather have fries with his meal instead of roasted red potatoes or something. Some may make minor substitutions if it doesn't hurt the nuance they put into the dishes they create, but when you eat at those places, you're there to eat what they create. If you want substitutions galore and to eat what *you* want, cook at home or go to Burger King ("your way"). EDIT: And by the way - the restaurants that do this have no shortage of customers. They have waiting lists that stretch for literal months.
"How do I get rid of a Trojan Horse?" -Sailor_Kakashi
"Leave it outside the gates of Troy overnight." -Davel23
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. The dumbest complaints you've heard for disliking a game

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

Update Topic Flair

You are not allowed to update this topic's flair.

  • Topic Archived