Don't blame the industry -- blame gamers

Default_picture
Wednesday, January 04, 2012
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom Rob Savillo

Danny makes a good point: Money talks. If you're unstatisfied with something in the game industry, don't support those practices with your wallet.

When gamers start ranting in forums and website comment sections, they spare almost no one. They make the same war cries every time: The media is too easy on the industry; publishers are milking the same old franchises in every way they can; and greedy retailers and digital-rights management (DRM) are killing the secondary market. Everyone except the "hardcore" are to blame.

Gamers need to wake up and stop supporting many of the issues they complain about.

 

We all have our preferred media outlets. Mine happen to be Giant Bomb, 1UP, and Rock, Paper, Shotgun.

I tend to disagree with some writers from various sites. So I don’t read their reviews. It’s no big deal...we just have different opinions. I don’t make a habit of visiting other websites just to insult them and their writers.

Don’t like IGN’s features? Think Gamespot is biased? Have a hunch that someone gave a critic a suitcase full of money to write that positive review? Then don’t visit those sites or buy those magazines. You’re just giving them page views. Your troll comments don’t hold any weight; however, your clicks -- or lack thereof -- do.

The same goes for any series you’ve had enough of. I have several friends who complain about how sick they are of Call of Duty but purchase each annual installment anyway. I’m done with the series and haven’t bought an entry since Modern Warfare 2.

Now, I’m not saying that supporting those games is a bad thing. If you’re a Call of Duty fan, then by all means have a blast with them. If, however, you frequently rant about a series or its downloadable content (DLC), then stop being part of the problem. Don’t give the publishers your money.

You can argue that for every person who doesn’t buy a COD game plenty of others do. But this isn’t about Call of Duty, Madden, or any other specific titles. Call of Duty and Madden have annual sequels because they sell well every year. Gamers complain about the lack of innovation as if there’s a secret ban on new creative works.

On the other hand, when titles like Alan Wake, Beyond Good and Evil, and Psychonauts emerged, they didn’t sell well enough to immediately warrant a sequel.

While Bastion and Catherine did well commercially, Ghost Trick: Phantom Detective and Child of Eden didn’t. Innovative and creative titles are out there whether in retail, digital-distribution channels, or the indie market. But gamers don’t always look hard enough to find them.

It’s easy to talk about "voting with your dollars," but how many of us actually do so? I no longer buy anything from GameStop. It sometimes takes a little more effort to get my hands on older games, but I’m willing to sacrifice some convenience knowing that I won’t pay near full price for a used title.

GameStop and Best Buy aren’t your only choices when it comes to purchasing and trading games. If those are the only options in your area, then online sources such as Cheap Ass Gamer and Craigslist can help you. It doesn’t take much more effort to do business with places that won’t give you the shaft.

Be conscious of the trends your purchases support. Your dollars are what businesses really listen to, not your thoughts. I might be getting sick of DLC and "online passes," but my writing that doesn’t mean anything. This post might reach a couple thousand people at best. What matters is if I actually do something about my disdain for these trends, so I’m going to cut down on purchasing DLC this year.

Some issues wouldn’t be so rampant if more gamers are as critical as they are online when they’re actually making purchases. The next time you rant about "sequelitis," a game review, or the war on the used market, think about whether or not you’re putting your money where your mouth is. 


What are some trends you're not happy about? Do you have any personal boycotts? Feel free to share below.

 
Problem? Report this post
DANNY CONCEPCION'S SPONSOR
Comments (21)
37893_1338936035999_1309080061_30825631_6290042_n
January 03, 2012

I don't think it's fair to tell gamers to quit their bitching (no matter how nice you put it in your article.) Feedback is the best way for developers, publishers, journalist outlets, etc. to learn what their audience likes and dislikes so they can tailor their content for that audience.

"Voting with your dollars" doesn't give a whole lot of infomation. Without people complaining about how formulaic Call of Duty's multiplayer has become or how overpowered characters like Yun and Yang are in Street Fighter, developers would only see sales, and think that everything is just fine.

The same can be said about gaming media outlets. Without feedback, these outlets would either be putting out the same old content thinking it still works, or they'd be taking stabs in the dark at trying to improve it.

What you perceive as unnecessary hate, I see as much needed criticism (though I will admit, most of it appears to lack much constructive quality.) These gamers don't hate these franchises, journalists, and articles, but rather, they love them enough to voice their opinion in hopes of making them better. Not all of them of course: there are always going to be a few assholes, but more commonly, I think this complaining is really people caring.

Dollars are a short-term barometer, but these companies realize (or need to realize,) if they ignore customer feedback, those dollars are going to dry up in the long term.

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

I personally believe marketing has much more of an effect on sales than any criticism does, but that's a topic for another time.

I'm not saying that criticism is worthless. Just that it's not as effective as money is.

Activision didn't end Guitar Hero because of any blogs or forums. Guitar Hero is on hiatus because sales waned.

If you log onto a developer's forum and say "Hey I think this should be changed because X" then that's good feedback. However if you go onto gamefaqs and say "This game is fucking garbage because it's for n00bs," you're only enforcing a stereotype. Even if you have valuable feedback, it'd still be wasted on the wrong website.

Now you're right that you voted the second you clicked. If you disagree with what I'm saying and voice it, that's fine. Now if you visit every post I make from now on just to call me an idiot, you're wasting your time.

I also agree that complaints can influence other consumers' "votes," except I think the press holds much of that influence. But you don't know how much you're helping the cause vs. how much you're hurting it when lighting up the message boards.. I've never thought "Gee progamer400 said it sucked on gamefaqs" while making a purchase. I go to the media or to friends for that.

It's probably why we visit this particular site. So that someday we can have that amount of clout. Until we do, our money is more valuable than our opinions.

37893_1338936035999_1309080061_30825631_6290042_n
January 04, 2012

I think we've reached a somewhat fair middle ground, though I would like to add one anecdote.

You say that gamers are wasting their time voicing their opinions on sites like gamefaqs, but the devs on Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Shadow Wars (the unbelievably good SRPG for the 3DS,) specifically took to gamefaqs to get feedback on their game and ask what gamers would want from a sequel.

Developers might be looking on more sites then you think.

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

Welp. Can't argue with that.

Jayhenningsen
January 04, 2012

I am a gamer and I don't support the things I complain about. Please don't try to group me with those people.

The truth is, gamers are voting with their dollars. If you stop and think about it, if all the people who rant on messageboards stopped buying the games they complain about, you probably wouldn't notice any difference. The number of worldwide gamers is in the hundreds of millions, and the number of people who regularly post rants on the Internet about video games are in the tens of thousands (if you're being generous.)

Do the math. The people who you say are a problem (which are most certainly NOT gamers as a whole) are really an almost statistically insignificant percentage of the industry.

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

You're right. I wouldn't notice if sales dipped for the large franchises.

But people were surprised when Catherine sold 200k in its first week, as if Catherine was expected to flop. Minecraft was another success. We shouldn't have that kind of reaction whenever a less-than AAA game sells well, but we still do because it's uncommon.

Now not everyone wants to buy Catherine. I get that. But the original titles are out there. Why don't we hear about them selling well?

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

Wait, I'm confused. So "voting with your dollars" doesn't make a huge difference, but neither does "complaining on forums"? What should we do then? Are we just at the mercy of the industry?

Robsavillo
January 04, 2012

He's arguing that voting with your wallet won't make a huge difference unless more people follow through and refrain from financially supporting practices they criticize on forums and the like.

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

At the end of the day, I will refrain from supporting games, publishers, or practices I don't like or disagree with even if I'm in the minority opinion and my obstaining from said purchase changes nothing. It's similar to voting--even if the guy I vote for doesn't win, I can look at myself in the mirror...the guy who bitches about Modern Warfare but buys it anyway reminds me of the sort who doesn't vote but complains about fiscal policy.

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

Honestly, I have a love-hate relationship with the hobby specifically due to all the bitching that gamers do. If it was constructive then I'd be perfectly fine with it, but like Chase said, so very little of it actually is.

Sequels: The same people who bitch about sequels will almost always play it safe instead of taking a chance on a new IP when all is said and done, but they'll continue to hypocritically and very selectively bitch about them on principle just the same, and will do so irrespective of their individual quality. Fun is fun, which is why I assume we're all so invested in the hobby to begin with, but that concept takes a back seat to the opportunity that we imagine vilifying sequels gives us to appear to be more enlightened as gamers. Right, as if being dismissive as a rule could ever be considered to be enlightenment.

Worse, I'm left with the impression that those who aren't using it for that purpose are simply using the existence of sequels as fodder for their silly little console flame-wars. People have been bashing sequels for so long that folks like that only affect the appearance of hating them when it can be used to bash another console.   

Onlines Passes: People who bitch about online passes either fall into the category of folks who buy new and aren't effected by them; thus having no reason to complain about them in the first place, or they fall into the category of folks who buy used and have no room at all to complain about not being handed the same experience that folks who buy new get. There is really no conceivable reason why anyone should complain about them, and yet people do. A lot, even.

DLC: Someone dared sell some horse armor years ago that nobody in his right mind was stupid enough to buy, so now DLC gets vilified as a rule regardless of its implementation on a case-by-case basis. We could get a game loaded to the rafters with content, but if developers dare offer us substantial DLC along with it then we scrutinize it and accuse them of holding back content. The reality is that at worst it's really just something that you either think is worth the cash and buy or don't. Just like videogames in general, actually.

Really, is it a wonder why we're not taken as seriously as we'd like to be? I'd treat all that shit like white noise too if I were in their shoes.

100media_imag0065
January 04, 2012

Used business has been around as long as business itself. Literally, as far back as history can show us, people have been selling their used products. What other company can you think of right now demands to profit off of all subsequent sales of one product? I would love to know. Since, by law, they are not guaranteed that money.

When a company sells a product, they are promised to profit off of the original sale of that product. When you, the conusmer, buys that physical product, it becomes your property. This does not extend to digital products, but it does to physical ones. Since that product is yours, you can do with it what you want.

If you wanted to give it to me so I can try the multiplayer, no company has the right to tell you that you can not do that and that the person you have lent the game to must pay them for the right to use it. Unless you are subscribing or paying a subscription for that game, they literally have no right to ask anyone to pay them.

If I buy a used game, I am not suddenly adding more weight onto their servers when I want to play their game online. It isn't like I am adding double the space when only one copy of the game was purchased. You are swapping one consumer for the other, and whoever originally bought that game new had every right to do that, since it was their product.

Any company demanding you pay them money to use a feature in a product that was already paid for is lying to you, manipulating you, and ripping you off. This is why Ford doesn't come to your house and remove the tires of the pre-owned Focus you just bought and demand money to get them back. This is why Apple doesn't lock out features of the used iPad you just bought and demand money in order for you to use them.

This is why Samsung who remotely shut off the used HD TV you bought at a garage sale, and demand money to turn it back on. This is why MGM won't remotely block out the used DVD you bought at a flea market, and demand payment to unblock it. These companies know that legally they have no right to ask for that money.

The video game industry knows it too, but they are doing it anyway because they know they can get away with it because many gamers are too stupid and lazy to stand up to them. Online passes are scams. There is nothing worng with buying a game used. As I have said before, used business has been around as long as business itself, yet business seems to thrive.

Apple is thriving right now, even though there are literally thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of used iDevices on the internet for you to buy. It is extremely rare to hear a company go under because their products are being bought used. That is because used business doesn't truly affect New business. This is why the video game companies are lying to you.

They aren't "loosing" sales to used games, and they should never ask anyone to pay them money because that person bought their game used. Especially families, who would have to pay those fees multiple times, even if they bought the game new, if they each wanted to play that game on one console, using different profiles.

100media_imag0065
January 04, 2012

Agree completely. Everyone should do what I do. Create a list. I started this years ago, at the start of this current generation. I have gotten many friends to join in. They all call their list something different, and most even hang it up on their wall to remind them. Remind them of what you say? To remind them of why they don't buy certain games from certain developers/publishers.

Over the years my list has grown. It now has 11 developers and publishers that I will no longer support by buying their games new. If I want to play their games, I buy them used and never, ever give them a dime. I keep the list hanging on the wall to remind me of what I am standing up to. Here is some of my list, word for word.

Capcom-

A) Continues to release the same game over and over again, with extremely small changes, and asks $40, sometimes full price for them when these "upgrades" could have easily been $5 DLC.

B) Refuses to listen to any fan input at all, and then blames the fans when a game does not sell well. Lost Planet 2 is the prime example, since they ignored years of complaints with the original Lost Planet and refused to fix even the smalles of problems with the series before shipping the sequel.

THQ, EA, Sony, Ubisoft-

A) Attacks gamers at every opportunity. Has begun using a scheme known as "Online Passes" to try and rob money that they do not deserve from gamers. Used business has been around as long as business itself, and no company is guaranteed ANY profit after the initial sale. What they are doing is practically illegal.

B) Demand absurd prices for their digital games. On the Xbox 360's "Games on Demand" service, each one of these companies demand absurd prices that most of the time double what the game can be purchased for brand new at retail. They complain that used games are hurting their business, but at the same time they go out of their way to make it as difficult as possible for someone to buy their games new at a reasonable prices. No wonder used games are thriving when these companies are asking $50 for 3 year old games that can be bought at retail for $15. They are saving a ton of money releasing these games digitally, and refuse to pass any of the savings on to consumers.

EA, Sony, Microsoft-

A) Lies on a regular basis to gamers and the industry. They promise features, and then remove them from the games before they ship them. They promise innovation, long single player campaigns, innovative ideas, and deliver on none of them when it comes time to ship. They will say anything to get you interested, regardless if those things are true.

B) Demands you, the consumer, to give away your rights in order to use their services. This is thanks to the Republican controlled Supreme Court, which has given away many of your rights to corporations this past semester.

 

This is just a few of the companies on my list. The list goes on. I don't put a company on my list for simply releasing a bad game. I didn't like Red Dead Redemption, but I didn't put Rockstar on the list because of it. I get sick to my stomach thinking about how absolutely abysmal Mass Effect 2 was compared to the brilliant original, but I won't put Bioware on the list simply because of that. A company has to do something anti-consumer. They have to go out of their way to try and harm you and rip you off, or take away your rights to get on my list.

There are many publishers and developers on my list that I no longer buy new games from. But there are plenty that I still do. I buy every Nintendo game new, for example. For every used game I buy from one of the companies listed above, I buy 2 more new. It all comes down to voting with your wallet. Support the companies that are on your side like Valve and Double Fine. Then, ignore the ones that are against you like Sony, EA, Microsoft and Capcom.

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

Just to point out a couple things.  Mass Effect 2 was published by EA, on your list twice of companies you won't do business with.  Did you buy it used? or do you have some exception to the rule to promote studios who decide to still do business with companies that have poor business practices. 

I have a different solution to the problem that actually hits developers harder.  Buying used actually transfers your money to the companies anyway, through a 3rd party who originally purchased the game.  Other people takes cuts out of your money, sure, but as others have pointed out, the company still makes money off that original sale.

My solution?  Buy new, but bargin bin it.  You get all of the features, plus you hit the publisher where it hurts, at retail and actually absorbing a loss on their product.  Most retail stores work out with a publisher a way to recoup cost of marked-down products that they need to get rid of for shelf space.  On top of that, the retail stores thus order LESS product for fear of loss from a publisher in the future if they take a loss on product. 

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

Rob, I uploaded a watermark-free version of the first photo here: http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/ab285/dkoncepcion/laptop-screen-punch.jpg

Mind swapping them out? I just can't stop staring at that big white X looking thing.

37893_1338936035999_1309080061_30825631_6290042_n
January 04, 2012

Really? You have eight great comments here that you could easily turn into an interesting dialogue, and you're worried about a piece of stock photography?

Another thing I thought of. What am I to do when I've bought a game I ended up not liking or read through an article I ended up not agreeing with (possibly like this one?)

However regretful, I've already voted with my dollars/clicks. Complaing allows me to either a) voice my issues with a game or article in hoping for a better future outcome, or b) warn other consumers from my same fate.

If voting with my dollars is good, wouldn't attempting to affect the dollars of my fellow consumers be even more effective.

Like I said, though not all criticism is constructive, it's all important enough to be allowed, no matter how stupid and irrational it seems.

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

Woah woah woah Chase. I'm not blowing any of you off. I'll reply to the comments. I was just addressing the pic first. Not because I have some list of priorities where the picture is on top. It's just how things happened. Sorry if it looks douche-y of me.

Dscn0568_-_copy
January 04, 2012

Unfortunately, we can't. Image companies like iStockphoto can track down un-watermarked photos used without their permission and ask for them to be taken down or demand payment from us for their use.  We can remove the image completely, or you can supply an original image to replace it.

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

Well I don't want any more trouble. Thanks anyway. Watermark it is!

Robsavillo
January 05, 2012

Sorry Danny! I don't like using a watermarked image any more than you do.

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

I couldn't agree with this post more. Far too often people complain about the industry while continuing to support the very practices they complain about. Reminds me of the Steam Group to boycott Modern Warfare 2 then on the day of release like 85% of the group were actively playing Modern Warfare 2.

Default_picture
January 04, 2012

I enjoyed this article and you echo many of my sentiments regarding the industry and our gamer brotheren.  I also have a rule about backing up my discust with the "online pass" system that EA has.  Although, looking at my library I have found that I have slipped up on my own pledge.  I did find a qualifying factor that helps ease my mistake of purchasing Mass Effect2 and Dragon Age2.  I did buy them new; however, only after then dropped in price and went into clearance.  I figured out that this actually hits the publisher harder than ever buying the game used. 

That said, I do make it a point and have no waivered on my stance on EA's sport titles.  The online pass system and their quick hook of their online servers on their sports titles has pulled me away from their games.  I used to be a yearly purchaser of their titles.  However, with the advent of DLC, I see no reason outside of greed that EA continues to force purchase of their new title, when they could just offer the roster updates as DLC.  It has alienated me from some of my friends since they continue to pressure me into buying the newest madden, or NHL game, however I have to explain to them my stance.   Soon, even my friends will see what I do and move on.   At least, that is my hope.

You can't force anyone to change their mind on something.  But, like Danny said, if you are going to talk the talk.. be man enough to walk the walk.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.