Do gamers today seem to generally have low standards?

  • 113 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for doomnukem3d
#51 Posted by DoomNukem3D (241 posts) -

@subspecies: So you let the opinions of the masses dictate what you consider good or bad?

Avatar image for davillain-
#52 Edited by DaVillain- (36934 posts) -

@doomnukem3d: I for one enjoy all the Uncharted games because they are good to me. Maybe not to others, but I enjoy them and go read my original post about what I think about low standards. I'm a gamer first and foremost and that's all you need to know.

Avatar image for subspecies
#53 Posted by Subspecies (568 posts) -

@doomnukem3d: Well, between a frustrated fanboy making a "look at me" thread and the masses, I'll go with the latter. Just sayin.

Avatar image for Gatygun
#54 Posted by Gatygun (1528 posts) -

People game on mobile and consoles

People pay for online subscriptions to freaking online connections

People pay for lootboxes or season passes

People pay for garbage services like PSN+ or other subscription forms.

People accepting DRM and supporting DRM boxes that forces you to spend extra money for nothing.

Yea people have low standards i would say.

Avatar image for NTM23
#55 Edited by NTM23 (1275 posts) -

No, I just don't think people will boycott or be up in arms about issues in games as long as the overall experience was enjoyable enough. I think that without a doubt people obviously always want games to strive to be better, more innovative, but what are we going to do right now with the myriad of games out today? We love games, do we simply stop playing them all just because they have flaws? That said, are you talking about avid gamers or people that will buy COD and Madden every year? I think those that will buy Madden and COD every year do have low standards, but it doesn't really matter to them because all they want to do is play a 'new' game with their friends. Avid game players that will take the time to get all the way through a game like RDR2, or be compelled to play through a Dark Souls game multiple times, I wouldn't say their standards are low. We take what we can get and always hope for something greater. I also wouldn't say that these games are terrible and you may need to look at a wider audience to see that not everyone is happy about where games are at currently.

Avatar image for PinchySkree
#56 Posted by PinchySkree (1230 posts) -

Growing up with games that have declined in quality lowers their standards

Late 80's to early 00's had everything you could ask for in games

Now all the corporate parasites that harvested most of the money from those generations only churn out business models for investors to milk the uninformed and indoctrinated, game quality is the last thing on their mind

Avatar image for Chutebox
#57 Posted by Chutebox (44657 posts) -

No. People enjoy different things, get over it

Avatar image for Chutebox
#58 Posted by Chutebox (44657 posts) -

@Sevenizz said:

Judging by how the ps4 and Switch are selling. Yes, gamers have low standards. The ps4 has an awful controller, horrible network, and specializes in casual single player games. The Switch lacks relevant power, 3rd party support, and a network no where near today’s standards brought forth by their competitors. The Switch does have some decent software so it makes for a good back up system. But if it’s your only gaming outlet - my sympathies.

PC or X1X is the way to go this gen. Most power, best controller, and robust online performance. It’s no competition if you’re anything near a serious gamer.

I laughed hard. Thanks haha

Avatar image for i_p_daily
#59 Posted by I_P_Daily (12032 posts) -

@subspecies: You play mostly PSVR games, the lowest form of gaming there is right next to mobile games.

Avatar image for subspecies
#60 Posted by Subspecies (568 posts) -

@Chutebox: In the land of SW, enjoying different things isn't allowed lol. In reality, I bet half the people on this forum don't even play games.

Avatar image for mandzilla
#61 Posted by Mandzilla (4109 posts) -

I'm pretty easily amused if I'm being honest.

Avatar image for mclarenmaster18
#62 Posted by MclarenMaster18 (1559 posts) -

In this generation of gaming, I get to see a lot of kids mainly playing multiplayer shooters like Call Of Duty, GTA and Battlefield on their beloved Playstation 4 and Xbox One.

For me I mostly play single player racing sims these days.

Avatar image for briguyb13
#63 Posted by briguyb13 (3086 posts) -

No. Not liking something doesn't mean it's lower quality. As far as mtx are concerned, the non-gamer casuals are responsible for that grabbing hold of the gaming industry.

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
#64 Posted by DoomNukem3D (241 posts) -

@briguyb13: What's MTX? I'm out of the loop on that. Looking it up just brings up audio stuff.

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
#65 Posted by DoomNukem3D (241 posts) -

@subspecies: You can like what ever you want m8.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#66 Edited by uninspiredcup (33688 posts) -

Used reading paper instead of toilet paper today because didn't want to walk all the way down to the kitchen.

Very high standards.

Avatar image for subspecies
#67 Posted by Subspecies (568 posts) -

@doomnukem3d: As long as it's okay with you, of course. /s

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
#68 Posted by DoomNukem3D (241 posts) -

@subspecies: Get mad about people not accepting you enjoying different things. Get sassy when someone tells you that you can enjoy whatever you want. Makes sense.

Avatar image for subspecies
#69 Edited by Subspecies (568 posts) -

@doomnukem3d: Sorry dude I would've replied sooner but I'm hard at work compiling a list of things I like to give you to make sure you're okay with them.

Avatar image for BenjaminBanklin
#70 Posted by BenjaminBanklin (4752 posts) -

Yeah, because some people have to be in a defense mode for everything I guess. We're getting these broken games stuffed with MTX made on super crunch time, and people want to attack the people that call it out instead of wanting better.

Avatar image for henrythefifth
#71 Posted by henrythefifth (2502 posts) -

I think its trend based now. We like trendy games no matter how bad they are, and dislike untrendy games, no matter how great they actually are...

Avatar image for naazaniqua
#72 Edited by naazaniqua (10 posts) -

Of course, these comparisons assume that national video game markets are largely uniform, with Dutch, Korean and American consumers playing the same spectrum of games.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
#73 Posted by mrbojangles25 (44045 posts) -

@jaydan said:

Gamers these days have low-standards for gameplay and high standards for graphics.

Agree with this, but also I think publishers don't have any respect for their customers. It's cyclical; consumers have no standards, publishers don't try to raise those standards, the cycle continues. I think if one demanded more, or one decided to do good work for the sake of doing good work, the whole culture around it would change, but right now both sides are happy being absolute shit.

Don't have this problem on PC, thankfully; good games exist on this platform

Avatar image for Litchie
#74 Edited by Litchie (24037 posts) -
@davillain- said:

I have an open mind when it comes to games I like playing such as GTAV. I never think about the controls are clunky when I play it on PC, so it get's a pass.

I've been accused of having low standards, but I don't care! I don't play games for other people, I play games for me and my own enjoyment! As long as I am enjoying the game, I don't care if other people think I have high standards, low standards, whatever. Their opinions on standards don't matter to me because they aren't me and that's all their is to it!

Really? From what I've seen you've got a pretty good taste in games. Well.. you did say you like Anthem. :P

I wish I had lower standards than I do. I'd enjoy more stuff.

Avatar image for Litchie
#75 Posted by Litchie (24037 posts) -
@subspecies said:

@doomnukem3d: Riiiight. So, basically, you're saying that you're right and the majority of the gaming world critically speaking is wrong. Makes sense.

Opinions, dudes.

People generally think Fast & The Furious movies are good. I think they're terrible. People think Fifty Shades of Grey is a good book. I highly disagree. People genereally likes McDonald's. My least favorite burger joint. People generally think Uncharted games are good. They look awful. Haven't played them, but wouldn't even think about doing it.

Avatar image for DocSanchez
#76 Posted by DocSanchez (5312 posts) -

I think it's the opposite. Perfectly good games are written off entirely because the market for that genre has been flooded. Gamers get sniffy if everything is not perfect. I've seen it above. Rockstar games have clunky controls? Really? Do you not remember the days for 3D games before dual analogue? Fixed, broken cameras or controlling via L & R triggers? Or needing to outright stop to look up and down?

What about bugs eh? If a game is not 100% ready we call a game alpha. Previously, once a game had a bug, that was it, for life. Daggerfall, Tresspasser, Jet Set Willy (could never complete this one). That was it.

Back in the day we put up with some absolute shite. People have rose tinted specs.

Avatar image for i_p_daily
#77 Posted by I_P_Daily (12032 posts) -

@mrbojangles25 said:

Agree with this, but also I think publishers don't have any respect for their customers. It's cyclical; consumers have no standards, publishers don't try to raise those standards, the cycle continues. I think if one demanded more, or one decided to do good work for the sake of doing good work, the whole culture around it would change, but right now both sides are happy being absolute shit.

Don't have this problem on PC, thankfully; good games exist on this platform

That's the biggest load of shit I've read this week.

You act like its a consoles playerbase/developer problem and yet most devs that develop for consoles also release their games on PC.

You hermits say some of the dumbest stuff on here.

The simple fact is that good games are on every platform (except PSVR as that's garbage) and that is a simple fact that you can't refute.

Avatar image for PSP107
#78 Edited by PSP107 (17477 posts) -

@jaydan said:

Gamers these days have low-standards for gameplay and high standards for graphics.

And story.

Avatar image for wickedmuffin
#79 Edited by WickedMuffin (53 posts) -

exactly, I agree that gamers have low standards nowadays

Avatar image for nepu7supastar7
#80 Posted by nepu7supastar7 (5108 posts) -

@doomnukem3d:

Those games are considered the best because they are genuinely fun to play. Ironically, gameplay is their strongest asset. So I'm not really sure where you're coming from.

Avatar image for speeny
#81 Posted by Speeny (1774 posts) -

Yeah, I think so. Kind of why I'm not big on modern games.

Avatar image for calvincfb
#82 Edited by Calvincfb (0 posts) -

Why is this even going? A person that has a username based on duke nukem has no right to talk people down because of their tastes.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
#83 Edited by mrbojangles25 (44045 posts) -

@i_p_daily said:
@mrbojangles25 said:

Agree with this, but also I think publishers don't have any respect for their customers. It's cyclical; consumers have no standards, publishers don't try to raise those standards, the cycle continues. I think if one demanded more, or one decided to do good work for the sake of doing good work, the whole culture around it would change, but right now both sides are happy being absolute shit.

Don't have this problem on PC, thankfully; good games exist on this platform

That's the biggest load of shit I've read this week.

You act like its a consoles playerbase/developer problem and yet most devs that develop for consoles also release their games on PC.

You hermits say some of the dumbest stuff on here.

The simple fact is that good games are on every platform (except PSVR as that's garbage) and that is a simple fact that you can't refute.

Right, but PC has more good games, more variety, more open development, more developers that care and don't take their customer base for granted.

SONY produces a game, everyone with PS4 buys it. Doesn't matter if it's good or not, that's why you have God of War, Spiderman, and Horizon: Zero Dawn being hyped to hell before are during it's release, but people tend to be more lukewarm to it a year or so later. SONY takes their customers for granted, while at the same time PS4 owners don't exactly have high standards.

PC games often tend to be passion products. While they often lack the polish and quality control of large, AAA games, they none the less tend to be better games that take more risks and offer new challenges and concepts to their players. This is because, outside of multiplats, games developed for PC don't take their customers A.) for granted, and B.) for fools.

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
#84 Posted by DoomNukem3D (241 posts) -

@calvincfb: Says the guy with a Kingdom hearts avatar.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
#85 Posted by lundy86_4 (53374 posts) -

Gamers have to vote en-masse with their wallets, and there in lies the issue. Far too many casual gamers will let issues slide, and thus profits soar. Look at EA and MTs within their sports franchises. Unfortunately, there's too little of a divide between those that are easily placated, and those that outwardly criticize.

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
#86 Posted by DoomNukem3D (241 posts) -

@DocSanchez: I think newer games should be held to higher standards than early games that were the first of their kind. We should expect games to improve over time. You cant compare early 3d games that had little foundation to go off of to the latest entry in a series of games that have been doing what they've been doing over 15 years.

Besides there are plenty of older games that still play well and much better than Rockstars games.

Avatar image for calvincfb
#87 Posted by Calvincfb (0 posts) -

@doomnukem3d: better than duke nukem.

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
#88 Posted by DoomNukem3D (241 posts) -

@calvincfb: No it's really not.

Avatar image for dimebag667
#89 Posted by dimebag667 (1225 posts) -

@doomnukem3d: While I do agree that people seem to be more forgiving of poor design and flawed/broken mechanics these days, I'm more curious as to where this divide in our perception of what's good and bad came from.

This could just be selective memory on my part, but it used to seem like the majority of us could agree on what constituted a good game. Stuff like great art, design, mechanics, lore, controls, etc. You still decided based on your personal feelings towards those factors, but even if you didn't care for that particular style of game you could still say a game was good even if it wasn't your cup of tea. This seems to be less so these days.

I've had numerous arguments with my friends about this observation, and I still don't have an answer. Take Gran Turismo III as an example. I couldn't care less about sim racers; it's just not my thing, but I can clearly look at that game a know it's quality. From the customization, car models, level design, sound design, handling, soundtrack, graphics, etc, I would have no problem saying it's a good game, and still have zero desire to ever play it. Now for some reason they would take that as I think it's a bad game because I don't want to play it, which I hopefully just demonstrated isn't true, but either way...here we are.

Now let's try Diablo II. I'm sure there's someone out there that just hates this game, but by and large it's widely regarded as a great game. It checks enough boxes in my mind for what a good game is.

Now comes Diablo III. Right out the gate we have server issues, auction house nonsense, poor loot tables, weakened upgrade system, poor story choices, reward cinematics shown months before game release, etc. And people still claim it's great! I felt like I was taking crazy pills! And I am just talking about launch, not years later after they fixed some of those issues. But the sad part is that it was still better than most arpgs, even with this cavalcade of flaws.

So what happened? I've got ideas but nothing concrete.

Then you get into something like fortnite. It's hard to even talk about how little I care for this game, but I'll try and solider on. It's shooting mechanics are weak, art is lame, level design is generic, the...all of it sucks. I guess the idea of a 100 person free for all is cool, but basically every idea they had after that is disgusting. But nevertheless, it's one of the most popular games of all time; and that just hurts my heart.

It's a sad state of affairs but here we are. My personal take is that people are just so starved for entertainment that they'll take mediocre over nothing.

P.s.

*Quick aside* D2 (and blizzard as a whole) also did cinematics the right way. You play till you beat and act (or so many missions) and then you're rewarded with a sweet little mini movie. D3 had the audacity to use one of those treats as a promotional trailer before the game was released, ruining the first time surprise. Never Forget

Avatar image for calvincfb
#90 Posted by Calvincfb (0 posts) -

@doomnukem3d: yes, It is.

Avatar image for calvincfb
#91 Posted by Calvincfb (0 posts) -

@dimebag667: some people are entitled and immature, just like OP.

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
#92 Posted by DoomNukem3D (241 posts) -

@calvincfb: You came into this thread several times just to complain about it. Very mature.

Avatar image for fedor
#93 Posted by Fedor (5158 posts) -

@doomnukem3d: Don't humor, Recloud.

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
#94 Posted by DoomNukem3D (241 posts) -

@dimebag667: So starved for entertainment that they'll take mediocrity over nothing. That's an interesting take. Tbf with Fortnite it doesn't seem like a very well respected game despite being popular. Like anyone whose not into it turns their nose up at it. I've never touched it though.

I think maybe a lot of it is just that people are willing to overlook massive flaws in certain areas as long as the game ticks the right boxes in certain areas.

Avatar image for that_old_guy
#95 Posted by That_Old_Guy (1236 posts) -

Gamers these days are dumb and ignorant. Not bc they have low standards but bc there’s literally something out there for everyone.

This is the nest time ever to be a gamer.

You basically have every type of game for every type of gamer.

Bitching about how some games are movie games or aren’t hard enough or need difficulty settings (other than the accessibility argument) is just stupid.

Avatar image for dimebag667
#96 Posted by dimebag667 (1225 posts) -

@calvincfb: I don't think op is entitled or immature. I just think he wants better games and to see if his ideas hold water... which I agree with.

Now the whole cloth attack on uncharted needs to be refined a little. Kind of like hanging a picture frame nail with a sledgehammer, but there's something to talk about there, and I'd be happy to discuss in further detail if you're game.

Avatar image for i_p_daily
#97 Posted by I_P_Daily (12032 posts) -

@mrbojangles25 said:
@i_p_daily said:
@mrbojangles25 said:

Agree with this, but also I think publishers don't have any respect for their customers. It's cyclical; consumers have no standards, publishers don't try to raise those standards, the cycle continues. I think if one demanded more, or one decided to do good work for the sake of doing good work, the whole culture around it would change, but right now both sides are happy being absolute shit.

Don't have this problem on PC, thankfully; good games exist on this platform

That's the biggest load of shit I've read this week.

You act like its a consoles playerbase/developer problem and yet most devs that develop for consoles also release their games on PC.

You hermits say some of the dumbest stuff on here.

The simple fact is that good games are on every platform (except PSVR as that's garbage) and that is a simple fact that you can't refute.

Right, but PC has more good games, more variety, more open development, more developers that care and don't take their customer base for granted.

SONY produces a game, everyone with PS4 buys it. Doesn't matter if it's good or not, that's why you have God of War, Spiderman, and Horizon: Zero Dawn being hyped to hell before are during it's release, but people tend to be more lukewarm to it a year or so later. SONY takes their customers for granted, while at the same time PS4 owners don't exactly have high standards.

PC games often tend to be passion products. While they often lack the polish and quality control of large, AAA games, they none the less tend to be better games that take more risks and offer new challenges and concepts to their players. This is because, outside of multiplats, games developed for PC don't take their customers A.) for granted, and B.) for fools.

I like taking the piss out of the PS4 too, and you were going really well up until the last part, and well I just have this to say....

You were saying???

Avatar image for dimebag667
#98 Posted by dimebag667 (1225 posts) -

@doomnukem3d: I guess my assumption would be that a large chunk of fortnites playerbase hasn't played the good games of the past; so they don't know what they're missing. Same with COD. They had some good games early on and then went off the rails with nonsense, but that's when tons of people started so they don't know any better. At least that's a partial theory.

Yeah there has to be something in there that they like, but they seem WAY to eager to put up with what for me would be a deal breaker. But like @NTM23 said, "We love games, do we simply stop playing them all just because they have flaws?". I wouldn't say all, but at least the blatant cash grabs and mtx swilll that they keep pushing. I'm not gonna say it's fun, because it sucks getting excited for a game that turns out bad, or watching your friends play something that you refuse to support, but it's what you have to do if your convictions are important to you.

But another thing to think about is where are all the demos? Surely less people would buy crap if they could try it first. I know on steam you can ask for a refund, but my friend got some pushback on that for doing it too much, so there's a limit. PSN seems to have somewhere between 2-3k games and less than 200 demos which seems light.

Surprise of the night goes to Ubisoft for (as far as I can tell) having demos for all of their games. Not a huge fan of their games, but they earned some respect for that in my book.

P.s. duke3d kicks ass!

Avatar image for DocSanchez
#99 Posted by DocSanchez (5312 posts) -

@doomnukem3d said:

@DocSanchez: I think newer games should be held to higher standards than early games that were the first of their kind. We should expect games to improve over time. You cant compare early 3d games that had little foundation to go off of to the latest entry in a series of games that have been doing what they've been doing over 15 years.

Besides there are plenty of older games that still play well and much better than Rockstars games.

But this doesn't square with modern gamers having lower standards. You're saying games back then could not have been better, as they were early forays into 3D. Well, true. That's why they were held to lower standards. Modern gamers are more entitled, because they are used to better standards.

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
#100 Edited by DoomNukem3D (241 posts) -

@DocSanchez: They got better quickly though which is my point. Look at the jump from Catacombs 3d and Wolfenstein 3d to Doom it's very impressive and Doom still holds up as a game that plays very well and has great level design. It's from 1993 and it still plays better than a lot of games that are big today. I'm talking about the expectation for games to improve and move on from ideas that are no good.