# Have gamers become a bunch of whiners?



## AngelClare (Jul 10, 2012)

I've been a gamer from almost the beginning. I've seen the evolution of games from Pac-Man to Fallout 4. Gamers weren't always such whiners and complainers. Gamers used to enjoy playing games but it seems like today's gamers can't enjoy anything because they're too busy criticizing and nitpicking everything. They don't seem to appreciate the amount of work, art and effort needed to create some of these games. 

It's not just gaming, it's everything. People don't know how to just enjoy something without being overly critical and negative. 

It annoys me that every time I go on Metacritic I see great games getting zeros. On a scale of 0 to 10 these people are giving AAA titles zeros. User reviews have become almost useless because they are polluted by immature spoiled brats.

What do you think?


----------



## losthismarbles (Jul 5, 2014)

I don't think so, unless it's a fairly unknown title. To be honest I feel like games are getting too high of ratings. Sure there are plenty of immature gamers but when you are reviewing something the amount of work that went into it or whether or not its a AAA title is completely irrelevant. If I spent 1000 hours and all of my money working 24 hours a day non-stop to make you a game that looks, plays, and runs terribly, you have every right to criticize it. No one likes getting criticized but it's good for progress. And I see that creative game developers who make quality games are given high reviews, so I don't feel like gamer reviews are broken or anything. And you have to take into account the fact that the most vocal of the reviewers are probably the whiniest, that still doesn't mean the overall score is wrong. 
Also I think you have to take into account the other end of the spectrum too, a lot of people just rate a game 9 or 10 if they like it at all. The only time I think it gets messed up is when people who don't understand what the game is or aren't part of the demographic review games. I've seen reviews from people whining about how a rogue-like is too hard or something and thought "then why did you buy a rogue-like game?" 

Maybe you are talking about fallout 4 I just looked at the reviews for it. Yeah I think that happens when there's too much hype and the developers don't deliver on what they promise. Kind of like with mass effect 3. 
Basically if the developer's lie, mislead, or don't live up to what they promise they will get a terrible backlash from the fans. I imagine if some unnamed developer with no hype surrounding it made the same exact game it would have gotten better reviews. 
I looked up witcher 3 and it got 9.1 so you have to ask why does a game like that get a 9.1 and fallout 4 get a 4.9. I don't think the answer is the gamer's are all too immature and whiny. Developers did a good job with witcher 3 and conversely didn't with fallout 4.


----------



## SaladDays (Nov 26, 2013)

No, often times they're simply displeased with a product that is different from what they were "promised" or doesn't deliver on the same experience as previous games of the franchise, or other games of the same genre.You see whining on ****ty boards but no gamers in general certainly aren't whiny, keep in mind only a fraction of a game's playerbase ever uses forums


----------



## MrWolfpac (Nov 2, 2015)

I don't think gamers have become whiners too much. I'd say there is a slight increase on average, as back in the early days of gaming you were just happy to be using this amazing technology. I'd say the issue now is that gaming is so popular, you have more voices in the mix. Out of that you are going to see more whining, simply because more people are now in the ring.

I also agree with @losthismarbles that too many games get too high of a rating now. The review industry has to make a profit itself, and often companies are buying those 9/10 or 10/10 ratings, also some of them just come because the company is so loved now.


----------



## Paper Samurai (Oct 1, 2009)

I think back in ye olden days (which I experienced to an extent) there wasn't the capacity for the general game playing public to voice their opinion. You literally bought a gaming magazine once a month and maybe talked to a few like minded friends - that was the extent of your knowledge/ability to express your opinion/read other people's views. 

Now with the internet, everyone has the capability to have their say. It makes it much more likely therefore to get a much broader range of opinions. Some of which are ridiculously extreme (both positively and negatively) Just got to learn how to filter the information I think.


----------



## SilentStrike (Jul 14, 2014)

Honestly, there are a lot of whiners, but i think it is not just gamers, but instead there all kinds of people with all kinds of interests that are whiners.


----------



## Orbiter (Jul 8, 2015)

I don't know man, I'm too busy playing KSP.
I love the new parts, especially the new space shuttle-like engine.
The thrust vectoring on that thing is making me drool.
Seriously, it kinda turns me on. Is that weird? lol


----------



## McFly (Jul 15, 2014)

From what I understand the Atari 2600 games had lots of glitches that people wrote to Atari complaining about. Particularly Pac-man which had problems where the sprites would disappear randomly. And I can remember in the 90s having plenty of problems getting PC games to run because you had to go through and manually configure the graphics and there were always glitches that made some game impossible to finish. 

People did complain a lot of forums back then, it's just that the internet has grown much larger, and video games are no longer considered a hobby but a way of life. Angry Video Game Nerd on youtube has done a great job pointing out so many terrible problems in games that were highly marketed.


----------



## Scrub-Zero (Feb 9, 2004)

AngelClare said:


> It's not just gaming, it's everything. People don't know how to just enjoy something without being overly critical and negative.


The problem is you pay 60$+ for a game, you expect quality and what was promised by the devs, like good gameplay, graphics etc. And then on launch you get a toned down and buggy version.

A few examples... The Order 1886, Dark Souls 2, Aliens: colonial marines, Diablo 3, Watch Dogs. To name a few. Maybe gamers are just tired of being lied to and screwed out of their money.

It was even worst in my young day when reviews weren't available anywhere other than in magazines like Nintendo Power. You basically had no other way of knowing if the game would be good or not.


----------



## Paper Samurai (Oct 1, 2009)

Scrub-Zero said:


> The problem is you pay 60$+ for a game, you expect quality and what was promised by the devs, like good gameplay, graphics etc. And then on launch you get a toned down and buggy version.
> 
> A few examples... The Order 1886, Dark Souls 2, Aliens: colonial marines, Diablo 3, Watch Dogs. To name a few. Maybe gamers are just tired of being lied to and screwed out of their money.
> 
> It was even worst in my young day when reviews weren't available anywhere other than in magazines like Nintendo Power. You basically had no other way of knowing if the game would be good or not.


I agree with this too, the prices we pay are pretty ridiculous now. It's no wonder we're more prone to complaining about defects and bugs. It's like going into a gourmet restaurant and getting served a McDonald's burger - who on Earth would be happy at that :O

But saying that though, I'm leaning more towards the idea that this is where we are now as a society and the internet facilitates it. I see people complain just as much with stuff like movies, music and TV. I don't see why games should be any different.


----------



## fingertips (Jan 11, 2009)

AngelClare said:


> It annoys me that every time I go on Metacritic I see great games getting zeros.


but clearly there are people who don't think those games are great, right? there are people out there who are needlessly vitriolic about games they don't like, but i'd be careful not to dismiss anyone whose opinions fall outside the consensus.

also metacritic is awful and review scores are meaningless.


----------



## Kind Of (Jun 11, 2014)

Back when you had to gather on the playground with a Game Boy and there were no YouTube guides, no one wanted to listen to you whine if you couldn't trade them a goddamn Bellsprout.


----------



## AngelClare (Jul 10, 2012)

fingertips said:


> but clearly there are people who don't think those games are great, right? there are people out there who are needlessly vitriolic about games they don't like, but i'd be careful not to dismiss anyone whose opinions fall outside the consensus.
> 
> also metacritic is awful and review scores are meaningless.


I dismiss people giving quality games zeros. It's childish.

Sometimes these ratings come in before the game is released. Fallout 4, for example, is a long game yet somehow day 1 you have all these reviews. At least finish the game.

Here an article about the Metabombing of Fallout 4

http://www.thejimquisition.com/2015/11/metabombed-fallout-4-is-vomit-trash/

What bothers me also is that these complainers end up killing innovations in gaming. If you try and do anything new and there are any glitches or bugs you'll get hit with 0's.


----------



## Ignopius (Mar 19, 2013)

I 100% disagree with you. There are bad practices by many of these developers/publishers which screw over consumers. There are games released (50$ price tag) with ads in them. And LOCKED content on the disk that you have to pay an additional $5-$15 dollars to unlock. Gamers need to hold these people accountable by speaking out.

Also there are certain things that should not happen in 2015. An online game releasing with connection and server issues where its unplayable on launch. No voice chat is another big one that should be mandatory for any online gaming experience. Crappy PC ports with no button configuration and resolution adjustment is nonsense as well. Especially since PC Game sales are second to only the PS4. There is no excuse for buggy ports on the PC iteration of the games. This mentality that we need to wait for a patch for an issue to be resolved is disgusting.


----------



## AngelClare (Jul 10, 2012)

Ignopius said:


> I 100% disagree with you. There are bad practices by many of these developers/publishers which screw over consumers. There are games released (50$ price tag) with ads in them. And LOCKED content on the disk that you have to pay an additional $5-$15 dollars to unlock. Gamers need to hold these people accountable by speaking out.


I'm not talking about those kinds of issues. I haven't even run across games with ads. And I've never purchased or wanted to purchase any locked content. I don't play MMO's so maybe it's more common in that genre.



Ignopius said:


> Also there are certain things that should not happen in 2015. An online game releasing with connection and server issues where its unplayable on launch. No voice chat is another big one that should be mandatory for any online gaming experience. Crappy PC ports with no button configuration and resolution adjustment is nonsense as well. Especially since PC Game sales are second to only the PS4. There is no excuse for buggy ports on the PC iteration of the games. This mentality that we need to wait for a patch for an issue to be resolved is disgusting.


I'm a software developer and I can tell you with certainty that it's impossible to release a bug free product. There are so many different configurations of user machines that could lead to bugs that it's absolutely impossible to get everything right on day 1.

It's not easy to simulate client/server load issues. So, day 1 you may run into issues. Why not wait a few days for the devs to sort the issue out instead of running immediately over the metacritic and giving a 0?

I'm not even talking about real issues like the one you bring up. I'm not talking about games that try to rip people off or games that don't work.

I'm talking about good games getting 0's from whinny users. I'm playing Fallout 4 right now. In my opinion, it's a brilliant game. I'm not done with it yet so I can't give it a full review. I can understand other gamers having a different opinion but there is no excuse for a 0 or even a 4 score. These are just spiteful reviews. Most of these people only started playing the game for a few hours before giving their review.

Here is an example of a guy who gave it a 6 after just 10 hours play and now he comes back to change his score.



> This is a review to negate my early review (of about 10 hours play) rated at 6.
> 
> This game gets its hooks in you. As pro site reviewer said, "the details make it." That sentiment is right.


Moreover, there is this tendency today of just seeing the negatives. All they see are the flaws. Their opinions are not at all balanced out by any positives.

I think it might help if Metacritic did allow user reviews until 1 week post release. Professional reviewers get the game weeks in advance. User reviews seem to come in on day 1. How did these people have time to review the game in 1 day?


----------



## Telliblah (Sep 19, 2015)

Might it have something to do with heightened expectations on games?


----------



## AngelClare (Jul 10, 2012)

I'll give you a great example of the whinners I'm talking about. The Witcher 3 has both great critic reviews and user reviews. A 92 critic rating and 88 user rating. But listen to this user who gave it a ZERO. Yes, 0/10 according to this guy



> This game is SO overrated it gets ridiculous. I ended up selling it after playing it for just 5 days since I couldn't stand a couple of things about the game:
> 
> - A messy and poorly documented inventory (you never get to really know how important some items are, keeping them there with no use at all).
> - A very clunky combat system which just doesn't work.
> ...


Another guy who gave it a 0



> Bad story line, Terrible RBG. Controls do not respond in real time, especially in combat. The people who made this need to go back to the drawing board.


I just can't stand these people. They ruin the rating system.


----------



## apx24 (Jan 31, 2012)

Maybe.

But at the same time developers and publishers need to stop ****ing gamers about and milking them for their money. Yes, it is impossible to have a game without bugs, but when publishers charge $60 for games which are so riddled with technical problems that they are unplayable (Batman: Arkham Knight for PC), or when they ram the game with microtransactions (Halo 5 or Star Wars Battlefront), then there is a problem, or when they try and do stupid things like always online DRM (SimCity or the initial Xbox One reveal), people should complain about it.


----------



## Scrub-Zero (Feb 9, 2004)

AngelClare said:


> I just can't stand these people. They ruin the rating system.


They don't ruin it really. At least they have the balls to speak up some truth against very popular titles that people mindlessly buy as soon as it available.

And that guy was right too. The combat in The Witcher is **** and a clunky mess. That whole series is way overrated and mostly popular because fantasy and soft-core porn simulator.


----------



## fingertips (Jan 11, 2009)

AngelClare said:


> I just can't stand these people. They ruin the rating system.


would it be okay if they gave scores of 15 or 30 instead?


----------



## ScorchedEarth (Jul 12, 2014)

Overall review scores shouldn't be the only thing you look at, anyway. Actually read individual reviews, a selection of them. Professional and player reviews, positive and negative.


----------



## AngelClare (Jul 10, 2012)

Scrub-Zero said:


> They don't ruin it really. At least they have the balls to speak up some truth against very popular titles that people mindlessly buy as soon as it available.
> 
> And that guy was right too. The combat in The Witcher is **** and a clunky mess. That whole series is way overrated and mostly popular because fantasy and soft-core porn simulator.


So if you don't like it, it deserves a zero. Imagine if your teacher graded your papers that way.


----------



## Scrub-Zero (Feb 9, 2004)

AngelClare said:


> So if you don't like it, it deserves a zero. Imagine if your teacher graded your papers that way.


I wouldn't go as far as to say it deserves a zero though. It's a decent series and obviously a lot of work went into it. But it's still overrated. I don't play any of the games just because i can't stand the combat and that's a huge chunk of the game.


----------



## VanDamme (Jun 8, 2004)

AngelClare said:


> What do you think?


Do you remember a few years ago when YouTube went from the 5 star rating to Thumbs up/down? That's essentially what user "rating" is. It's a like/dislike ratio and not how *good* the game is but how they *feel* about it. That's why some give it zero. You know the term "lighsaber" :grin2:

If you want to find out how *good* a game (or movie on Imbd), look at critics' reviews. If you want to know how people on average feel about it, check out users' "rating".

A few whiners are not going to make much difference. If, however lots of people rate the game poorly on average then chances are there are reasons for that ...


----------



## AussiePea (Mar 27, 2007)

If the internet existed as it does now 20 years ago we would be seeing the same things. It's easy and quick to communicate your displeasure over mundane things and so people do so.


----------



## AngelClare (Jul 10, 2012)

VanDamme said:


> Do you remember a few years ago when YouTube went from the 5 star rating to Thumbs up/down? That's essentially what user "rating" is. It's a like/dislike ratio and not how *good* the game is but how they *feel* about it. That's why some give it zero. You know the term "lighsaber" :grin2:
> 
> If you want to find out how *good* a game (or movie on Imbd), look at critics' reviews. If you want to know how people on average feel about it, check out users' "rating".
> 
> A few whiners are not going to make much difference. If, however lots of people rate the game poorly on average then chances are there are reasons for that ...


That does make sense. Maybe many users see the rating scale as an emotional reaction scale. If they're extremely disappointed that a game they were looking forward to didn't live up to their expectations they are extremely angry thus 0 which indicates maximum displeasure. If they love the game it gets a 10.

Maybe metacritic should explicitly say:

10 - One of the best games I've ever played
5 - A mediocre game
0 - One of the worst games I've ever played


----------



## Staticnz (Mar 25, 2013)

Yes, but mostly in regards to all this gamer game ethics in games feminism is destroying our lives BS.

Whiny and pathetic.


----------

