to you.
this is exactly what I was talking about.
we often think our opinions are fact. FFXV is flawed as fuck but those who enjoyed it inspite of that weren't some hypontized infants fooled by marketing
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
It's time to stop using "but it sells well! " for dismissing legitimate criticism.
- Thread starter Lant_War
- Start date
this is exactly what I was talking about.
we often think our opinions are fact. FFXV is flawed as fuck but those who enjoyed it inspite of that weren't some hypontized infants fooled by marketing
Yes, but some have no diplomacy skills whatsoever and say things which are so unconstructive.
They will say somthing without presenting any reasoning which is so dismissive and disrespectful to the vast amount of work that has gone into a game, what the game has achieved etc
For example some may not like GTA5 but surely they can recognise that it is still the most detailed open world, by videogame standards has one of the better stories, has good mission variety, I mean what other game has you saving your son on your boat that he stole while driving down the freeway or pulling down Somones house because he slept with your wife etc
User Banned (3 days): Threadwhining
Some things are not worth being discussed, like this topic. Lol.
Eh, I don't think he was implying that. Marketing definitely helped FFXV sell as well as it did, though. It outperformed a lot of FF games at launch.
That's because most people look at the whole package rather than dissecting it down so they can nitpick and dismiss the game.
I don't know who the f keeps saying it but people saying that sex sells always get on my nerves. They should actually look into that suit because they're wrong. It's not sex that's being sold, the people who sell sex are sex workers. What's being sold is the idea of having a right to the bodies of women or men.
You don't see the irony in saying that some people are unconstructive while shouting about GTA's sales and things you like about the game?
Maybe not this topic specifically but that's not what you said. People can and should criticize things even if the majority like it. You are saying they shouldn't...which is dumb and boring.
I think Horizon Zero Dawn sucks. Its is a chore to move around unlike BOTW and Nier Automata; vastly superior games. The combat is also trash; its just another 3rd person shoot. Big whoop.
I didn't enjoy Horizon Zero Dawn that much. Probably because I played BOTW and Nier Automata around the same time. I like movement options in my games and HZD wasn't as fantastical on that front for my liking. I never enoyed 3rd person shooting combat so that didn't help. But to each their own I guess.
Which of those paragraphs is more likely to make someone understand my feelings about Horizon? Both are criticism by definition but unless you are just against anyone not enjoying the game something tells me that the latter gets the point across while the former (exaggerated for effect mind you lol) only would create unneeded conflict after which i'd get called a weeb, fanboy, or something lol.
Its not that you can't not like something and say your piece but there is a way to do so if you truly want "discussion" IMO.
I didn't enjoy Horizon Zero Dawn that much. Probably because I played BOTW and Nier Automata around the same time. I like movement options in my games and HZD wasn't as fantastical on that front for my liking. I never enoyed 3rd person shooting combat so that didn't help. But to each their own I guess.
Which of those paragraphs is more likely to make someone understand my feelings about Horizon? Both are criticism by definition but unless you are just against anyone not enjoying the game something tells me that the latter gets the point across while the former (exaggerated for effect mind you lol) only would create unneeded conflict after which i'd get called a weeb, fanboy, or something lol.
Its not that you can't not like something and say your piece but there is a way to do so if you truly want "discussion" IMO.
They can recognise that a game had lots of work put into it but that doesn't mean it is free of criticism.
You bring up GTA5 but what you think is good doesn't mean is good for other people. Like the missions you mention are not unique and have been done in GTA before. Sure they have different context but they have been done before in San Andreas for example so I don't see how that means their complaints are unfounded and disrespectful.
FF had been through a real dry period. It was the first on next gen. AND it was the reanimated corpse of Versus a game a lot people wanted forever. Marekting helped for sure but I think it was always set up for success on that front imo.
I...I dont think gameplay concerns would be much of a nitpick, like people praise nintendo games all the time for their gameplay and they also have things like great graphics and such
Thats more so "Attractive Looking Things Sell" more than anything. People are attracted to...uh assets. Some people legit buy things because of character designs for example.
What's constructive about ignoring criticism and going "but it sold well so you're wrong?"
Was wondering the same.
If it works for one game, it should work for every other game.
Such as how almost every game cover art depicts a (generally) man and more often than not, a gun (sans fantasy games) to sell?
OP
OP
But that's not what I'm talking about. Repeating the example in the OP, somebody said they didn't consider Rockstar's writing to be good. The response? "Oh, you're wrong their games sell a lot"
OP
OP
Because "it sells a lot" in that case is explaining why their games don't drop in price, it's literally the reason. "It sells a lot" isn't the reason why people consider Rockstar's writing good.
If you want an example with a Nintendo game, it's like someone saying they didn't like Odyssey's gameplay and then someone coming and saying "nope, you're wrong, it sold a lot" instead of actually trying to argue.
But it's not just Nintendo's best sellers that don't drop in price though.
Likewise, if a minority likes a game, does it need detractors jumping into every conversation about it?
OP
OP
Selling 2 million copies at full price for a budget game is still selling a lot.
That alone doesn't justify not having price drops. Nintendo's popularity allows them to do this... Not necessarily the quality of the individual title.
So when people handwave R*s writing with their overall popularity... Nintendo is doing the same with their catalogue prices.
Two sides of the same coin; majority trying to control the conversation.
Might be missing something, but what does Nintendo have to do with any of this topic?
OP
OP
Except it literally does. Their game sell well, so why would they drop the prices? Hell, since Rockstar is in the conversation they do the exact same thing. That's a time where "it sells well" is a valid argument.
Nope, not a good argument even then. GTA5 is the highest grossing piece of media of all time and still goes on sale for $15 every now and then, Nintendo has no excuse.
OP
OP
GTA V goes on sale for $15 now, after six years. Since the game's launch on PS4, it took them almost a year to have a sale and 4 to go under $30 bucks:
https://psprices.com/region-us/game/13504/grand-theft-auto-v
I cant remember the last time a Nintendo game went on sale for $30 or under.
It's also possible to like Rockstar and at the same time recognise they have significant issues that permeate through all their marquee games.
Rockstar "giving a shit" is not the only reason to discuss our feelings about their writing.It's not even the point of criticism itself.
Most of the promotional material shown before March 2016 (6 months before the original release date) was not in the game at all. Even at the Uncovered event, they used a certain key art for the Deluxe Edition cover, a huge banner, and a 2 minute video about the artwork... and the artwork had absolutely nothing to do with the game.
FFXV's marketing was fucking misleading as hell, intentional or not. Don't call people infants because they expected things that were shown to them numerous times, and not even too long before launch.
This has been really irritating when discussing Pokémon Sword and Shield. Like, of course they're going to sell well. Not only are the full effects of the decision to cut Pokémon not going to to be fully felt until months after launch (plus they were trying to hide the news and while they didn't really succeed, they also didn't fully fail), it's still Pokémon, they're not going to manage to ruin the sales in a single entry. Just because it's still going to sell that doesn't invalidate the criticism. If anything, it makes it more important, because otherwise they're not going to get the message.
OP your argument collapses under scrutiny because it's predicated on the premise that A) all criticisms hold equal weight/value, and B) that actual non-nonsense criticisms aren't rooted in an element of inherent subjectivity.
To A) you need to consider that game criticisms, especially on the internet, are far less criticism and more sweeping, unjustified judgements. E.g. if someone spouts off that GTAIV is a "bad game", that's not a criticism. It offers no qualification at all. So a retort saying "but the game sold X tens of millions", is a legitimate argument because the former unqualified judgement is shown its inherent invalidity due to the fact that the person rendering such a judgement is in the extreme minority; i.e. millions of gamers don't come out in droves to buy bad games---they can and do so for flawed games, but never for irredeemably bad games.
Which brings me to point B), when your typical internet gamer renders an "criticism" that a game or facet thereof is "bad", they are neglecting any understanding that their own judgement is rooted in inherent subjectivity. Every gamer has their own subjective biases and prejudices when it comes to games. Some might say turn-based combat in RPGs is bad and makes for bad games. That's not an objective assessment. So not all criticism is valid and some can very well be dismissed for the fact that the person criticising said game or facet thereof is inherently biased against said game/feature and so their criticisms have far less value.
REAL, legitimate and properly qualified gaming criticisms surrounding the less subjective aspects of games are the valuable things that most gamers will be less inclined to challenge. And frankly I've been posting on forums forever and I can't think of one single instance of a person trying to rebut a legitimate criticism of a game with "b-but it sells well". In which case, I'm really curious what spawned you to make a thread about this?
I don't like post-GTA 3 Rockstar games not for the story part but the gameplay part. I hate shooting in GTA 5. I did not buy Red Dead Redemption 2 after hearing about animation above control responsiveness and rigid mission...
I find the game far from any From software games or HZD(combat against machines...) or The Witcher 3 (combat were ok not among the best but I could finish the game...)
criticism of hugely successful things is of course valid. just don't go expecting your criticism to have any effect.
excellent post.
Shooting is awful in those games. I have no shame in setting it to auto aim, and just pretending I'm a character with perfect aim.
Same for GTA 5, I set the fame to auto-aim, awful... But I have hope again seeing Rockstar said they will improve character responsiveness in RDR 2 online...
They need to step up on the gameplay part and mission/quest design...
You're of course entitled to your opinion.
My point is the vast vast majority of people don't think in terms like that.
People REALLY need to stop treating their own personal opinions about pop culture like God etched them on stone tablets to show to the world.
Saying "I personally believe" before their comments or something would help defuse some of that tension. It also wouldn't be as punchy or attention-grabbing, though. :/