58 réponses à ce sujet

[Natureguy85]

Plea: Please learn how to construct a proper sentence.

 

In all seriousness, this is a whiny rant to people who will probably never read it. People get death threats from stupid people. Not that it isn't troubling, but real killers rarely make death threats and most death threats are not followed up on in any way.

 

The devs have the right to make whatever decisions they want, but not the right to falsely advertise their product. We the consumer have the right to complain.

 

 

The company determines whether someone screwed up or not, not the customers. You don't get to make that decision just because you purchased a product. You have the option of not buying it again, or registering a complaint which more often than not makes you sound like a lunatic in my experience.

 

A lot of people are entitled and spoiled. Believe it or not, any management staff of a big company will likely share the same view. And any big company worth working for will support their employees, especially when they are copping abuse from external sources. People have a very sheltered view of what actually goes on due to this "customers is always right" mentality. Only the customer actually believes that.

 

No we can decide if they screwed up, but we can't decide if they get fired or not.

[Panda]

So customers should not complain when getting broken product that in most cases they can't even refund unlike most products that are broken? I think game devs should stop releasing games that are unplayable by release. People have every right to be angry and disapointed by the product that is not working. Of cource attack on devs themselves were it insult or death threats are never okay but I'm pretty sick of this: you aren't allowed to complain about anything! It's your fault of buying the game attitude or having old gen console that I have seen a lot in this forum.

[dantares83]

giving 0s at metacritic is passive-aggressive behavior and serves nothing. just saying. 

 

it is unfortunate that u are not able to get a refund because u either miss the deadline or you brought a physical copy. Just learn from your mistakes and move on by refusing to purchase another game from them.

 

staying here and rant would do both parties no good. 

[SadisticChunkyDwarf]

Plea: Please learn how to construct a proper sentence.

 

In all seriousness, this is a whiny rant to people who will probably never read it. People get death threats from stupid people. Not that it isn't troubling, but real killers rarely make death threats and most death threats are not followed up on in any way.

 

The devs have the right to make whatever decisions they want, but not the right to falsely advertise their product. We the consumer have the right to complain.

 

 

 

No we can decide if they screwed up, but we can't decide if they get fired or not.

 

Getting a death threat is very unnerving for some people (imagine that) especially when said threat is levied at their family members. Regardless of "how many death threats are followed up on". Sounds ridiculous to me, that's a statement no one is really qualified to make. A threat is a threat, and by nature of a death threat you normally have no idea who sent it, and hence no idea what kind of person you're actually dealing with. It's a serious issue and the "well you're very unlikely to die in a plane crash" kind of logic is not really applicable.

 

Also, consumers get to decide whether a product is for them or not, to decide that someone "screwed up" indicates it went wrong and not according to plan. Only those familiar with the inner workings of a project could make such a decision, since they would have knowledge about what the plan actually was.

 

So no, you do most definitely not get to decided if someone screwed up at their job or not unless you actually work there.

 

From my experience in various types of business, managers tend to pat staff on the back for stuff that infuriate their customers. Because companies in general do what is best for themselves, like any other entity. You thinking someone screwed up at their job is probably something they'll get promoted for, more often than not.

[DragonAgeLegend]

Wow, are people actually that mentally unstable? Those peoples parents shouldn't have bought the game for them. (If what is said in the OP is true)

[The Hooded Paw]

There are a couple of things that get me in these types of attitude.

 

Does no-one see the damage they are doing to the entertainment industries? If you lose a writer due to bad behaviour then you lose their input into every aspect of the game, and future employees from walking into hell later. There are films that people rant about to the point that no-one goes to see them. TV series are being pulled because of a backlash from a small minority who are happy to give their enitire time to destroying them - ZOmbieland was pulled immediately due to 'proper' fans of the film ranting...that pilot was great. A few people making one hell of a racket destroying everything. Making someone leave their job because of this behaviour? That's truly abhorrent. If they receive death-threats and stress is no good. Yes, people die from this. They have no way to get away from it, and the idea that you don't treat death-threats seriously is ridiculous.

 

Yes, you have a right to complain and ask for refunds. Do it, and then it's done. No need to keep doing it. What is it going to do? People WILL put these horrible things on the people who complain loudest, so being aimed at pc players is not surprising, as they are the noisy, vicious group - it certainly doesn't mean it is them, but this is the easy view from people. If someone makes a death threat or whatever else, don't say it's not from the players....of course it is, or they wouldn't have the knowledge or opinions they do.

 

QUite frankly, if it would shut people up, I'd give them their money back. It doesn't shut people up. Just look at the films, TV series and games that are being destroyed. Minecraft is a good one. SOld to Microsoft because of the hell the maker was going through. He would never have done that. Now what are they going to do with it that's positive? I decided to write something vaguely sensible. I'll probably get death threats for it, and I can't justify spending more time on this. With this, there will be no games, no films or shows of anything that is a niche in the industries...rpgs, fantasy, sci fi...all of these will go and you'll be stuck with FPS that you can then attack through boredom if nothing else. Think of MMOs...hacking destroying them, ESO getting a bashing where most people are actually happy. The people who don't play are the ones making the hell for them.

[Panda]

giving 0s at metacritic is passive-aggressive behavior and serves nothing. just saying. 

 

it is unfortunate that u are not able to get a refund because u either miss the deadline or you brought a physical copy. Just learn from your mistakes and move on by refusing to purchase another game from them.

 

staying here and rant would do both parties no good. 

 

It's screwed that in many places you can't get refund for the game. I don't know any other product where you wouldn't get refund if it's broken unlike game if it's software issue. PSN won't refund the game if it's software issue and retailers usually don't either. So you pretty much get robbed if game producer does game that doesn't work.

[Maverick827]

It feels like this thread is using some new type of Godwin's Law. Instead of associating people you disagree with to Nazis, instead you associate them with random internet people who made threats years ago.

[TheRealJayDee]

Also, consumers get to decide whether a product is for them or not, to decide that someone "screwed up" indicates it went wrong and not according to plan. Only those familiar with the inner workings of a project could make such a decision, since they would have knowledge about what the plan actually was.

 

So no, you do most definitely not get to decided if someone screwed up at their job or not unless you actually work there.

 

From my experience in various types of business, managers tend to pat staff on the back for stuff that infuriate their customers. Because companies in general do what is best for themselves, like any other entity. You thinking someone screwed up at their job is probably something they'll get promoted for, more often than not.

 

So unless you worked on a game you're not qualified to notice and complain about technical issues, however noticable or drastic?

 

Unless you were involved in making a game (or movie or book in that case) you have no right to comment on the quality of the narrative, the characters, the dialogues etc?

 

Unless you're part of a company you are not able to have an opinion on wether or not their advertising is sound, and wether or not their PR and communication are adequate?

 

I disagree.

 

I must add that it should go without saying that personal attacks are in no way acceptable, and people who go as far as making death threats need to be held accountable for such cruel behaviour. Also the baseless spamming of ratings is a rather pathetic way to vent.

[mikeymoonshine]

This thread is sensational bs and the OP should be ashamed. I don't understand why so many of the people who are so concerned with online abuse insist on trivializing the issue, do you not understand how screwed up that is? Sending a death threat to another person is not the same thing as giving a game zero on metacritic and it's certainly not the same as complaining about things you don't like about a game. 

 

Online abuse is a crime, complaining about a game is not, even if you are being an ass about it. 

[Natureguy85]

Getting a death threat is very unnerving for some people (imagine that) especially when said threat is levied at their family members. Regardless of "how many death threats are followed up on". Sounds ridiculous to me, that's a statement no one is really qualified to make. A threat is a threat, and by nature of a death threat you normally have no idea who sent it, and hence no idea what kind of person you're actually dealing with. It's a serious issue and the "well you're very unlikely to die in a plane crash" kind of logic is not really applicable.

 

I am sure it's unnerving but it's also unlikely to be followed up on. I'm not saying they aren't wrong, but it's dumb for some other guy who didn't receive them to rant about them as if it was a large group of people on this forum who were giving the threats. And we can make the statistical statement because of all the people who receive death threats that are still alive. Not that I'd put a bioware writer on this lever, but public figures get death threats all the time.

 

 

Also, consumers get to decide whether a product is for them or not, to decide that someone "screwed up" indicates it went wrong and not according to plan. Only those familiar with the inner workings of a project could make such a decision, since they would have knowledge about what the plan actually was.

 

So no, you do most definitely not get to decided if someone screwed up at their job or not unless you actually work there.

 

So it's not a mistake if it was according to a plan even if the plan was stupid?

[Natureguy85]

This thread is sensational bs and the OP should be ashamed. I don't understand why so many of the people who are so concerned with online abuse insist on trivializing the issue, do you not understand how screwed up that is? Sending a death threat to another person is not the same thing as giving a game zero on metacritic and it's certainly not the same as complaining about things you don't like about a game. 

 

Online abuse is a crime, complaining about a game is not, even if you are being an ass about it. 

 

It's to make himself look/feel good by being against something nobody would defend.

[Damazig]

giving 0s at metacritic is passive-aggressive behavior and serves nothing. just saying. 

 

it is unfortunate that u are not able to get a refund because u either miss the deadline or you brought a physical copy. Just learn from your mistakes and move on by refusing to purchase another game from them.

 

staying here and rant would do both parties no good. 

Ok mate, I for one do not agree with stupid people making stupid threats or even death threats.

 

First I think you should stop trying to "white-knight" Bioware, and telling people to not come complain at the forums, as no one will be writing private e-mails about the game saying they are not happy about the game, they will get no answer or no discussion with anyone, not even other community members, which are 99.9% of the interaction in these forums, its other players not Bioware devs. I can also tell you that Bioware and any game complany that can "patch/correct" some stuff after the game has launched, does indeed want constant feedback, especially of what is wrong with the game according to the customers, as opposed to everyone buying the game, it gets loads of good reviews, then imagine 50% of the people dislike it, say nothing and do what you said, stay silent and not buy any other game form the company. You know what happens? even more people getting fired the next game comes up and the sales numbers being completly off.

 

Also, there's another thing that confuses me about you, you are the one saying this game is SO much better than the previous Dragon Age games, and yet you complain they fired people who made the other previous games? wait you get new people working on this new game you prefer so much over the other 2, but you'd rather it had been created by the old devs? I'm lost...

 

I'll tell you why people are getting upset and leaving games development. Games are becoming more famous and getting a bigger crowd, Bioware started with a smalller group of fans and customers who all loved D&D, and classic roleplaying and the likes. It is also safe to say that maybe the vast majority of old school RPGers come from an age when those developers were/are mostly the kind of people who love their job, love their work, and many have the the tipical reserved personality.

 

Then they get bought by a huge money making company (EA), they start shifting their creations/products towards the masses, and all of a sudden, quiet gamers/game developers start getting the "Rock Star" or "Hollywood" treatment. All kinds of people know who you are, know your work, know where you work and want to know more about you and what you the developer think about this and that.

You can clearly see this when they start having to pull off those mega expo show events, and you can see how many of them are not "show biz, talk to a theater full of people" kinda guys. Trust me, you take a quiet violin player and give him them thousands of fans of a rock star with their love/hate, and see if they can cope with it.

 

It is clear many of these developers are just not Psycologically ready for all the love/hate/attention they all of a sudden get, and not just their work, but they themselves get the attention.

 

Did I like that the 2 Doctors left Bioware? no, but did I see it coming when Bioware got bought by EA? yeah... either the games failed and EA would take down Bioware, or the game developement direction and values would change significantly, and the people who were stuck to the past and created this big company would eventually get frustrated and either leave or get fired.

[Damazig]

Also, are you seriously giving credit to ANY of the metacritic user reviews?? you hate the 0s and love the 10s?? really?? cause if so, you are so far down the line that I don't really think there is any point of trying to explain anything to you. Those user critics are worth nothing, if anything they will allow to measure the attention or lack of, that the game got from the audience. All major triple A games gets this treatment.

[SadisticChunkyDwarf]

So unless you worked on a game you're not qualified to notice and complain about technical issues, however noticable or drastic?

 

Unless you were involved in making a game (or movie or book in that case) you have no right to comment on the quality of the narrative, the characters, the dialogues etc?

 

Unless you're part of a company you are not able to have an opinion on wether or not their advertising is sound, and wether or not their PR and communication are adequate?

 

I disagree.

 

I don't recall saying people aren't entitled to an opinion. Why do people get so worked up about their right to an opinion anyways? If you've already said it, and nobody came to your house and put you in a black bag and effectively stopped you, then you've exercised your right to an opinion without impediment. Any further discussion on anyone's right to an opinion is redundant, and a monumental waste of time.

 

What I did say is there a huge leap between saying "I do not like this work" and "This person failed at their job". Any random slob can say the latter, the former can only be accurately claimed by someone with intricate knowledge of the work that was being done. I thought I elaborated this sufficiently in my post.

 

I am sure it's unnerving but it's also unlikely to be followed up on. I'm not saying they aren't wrong, but it's dumb for some other guy who didn't receive them to rant about them as if it was a large group of people on this forum who were giving the threats. And we can make the statistical statement because of all the people who receive death threats that are still alive. Not that I'd put a bioware writer on this lever, but public figures get death threats all the time.

 

 

 

So it's not a mistake if it was according to a plan even if the plan was stupid?

 

A statistical statement requires actual statistics, I would think. Regardless, one can't gauge the validity of a death threat from someone they don't know. You say again that it's unlikely to be followed up on. Do you know the person who was sending death threats to this person? If so you should report it to the authorities and the culprit likely has a prison sentence in front of them. If you don't know the person who sent the threats, then you have no idea how serious they were and shouldn't comment on it.

 

What plan is it, and who's saying it was stupid? This statement needs clarified to give any serious consideration.

 

I didn't buy DA:2 because any fool could see that it was going to be much different from DA:O. It doesn't change the fact that it's still a successful franchise, and they likely designed the second game just as deliberately as they made the other two. It just didn't appeal to me directly, or you apparently, this does not make it a failure, or "stupid".

[Kantr]

It's screwed that in many places you can't get refund for the game. I don't know any other product where you wouldn't get refund if it's broken unlike game if it's software issue. PSN won't refund the game if it's software issue and retailers usually don't either. So you pretty much get robbed if game producer does game that doesn't work.

Thats why you should be thankful to EA. as they let people have refunds

[Rynjin]

The company determines whether someone screwed up or not, not the customers. You don't get to make that decision just because you purchased a product. You have the option of not buying it again, or registering a complaint which more often than not makes you sound like a lunatic in my experience.

 

This sounds like someone with very little understanding of what a consumer-creator relationship is.

 

The consumer is the ultimate determiner of whether the product is good or bad. Because if it is bad, people will not buy it due to hearing about its badness, or return it. Bad products (in a perfect world) fail miserably, and the company then recognizes "Hey, this thing only made about half the money we projected. Somebody dun goofed.".

 

In addition, saying the customer doesn't even get to make a decision, or complain about a faulty product is just asinine. Of course they do. That is, just about, the only power a consumer has to do anything about it. And they have a right to exercise that as much as they please.

 

"You have the option of not buying it again" is likewise silly. Of course I do. Why would I purchase it again if I already have it? Especially if I didn't like the first copy.

 

Perhaps you meant to say they have a right to return it, but no, not really in this case if they're playing on PC. You've got 24 hours from first launching the game to return it. After that, EA gives you the big middle finger, says "Thanks for your cash, sucker" and continues, presumably,  publishing broken games, because they have quite handily removed a good portion of the consumer's power (getting their money back and retroactively voting with their wallet).

 

I foolishly hoped there would be a patch put out quite quickly fixing some of the game breaking bugs this game. I should have known better.

[SadisticChunkyDwarf]

This sounds like someone with very little understanding of what a consumer-creator relationship is.

 

The consumer is the ultimate determiner of whether the product is good or bad. Because if it is bad, people will not buy it due to hearing about its badness, or return it. Bad products (in a perfect world) fail miserably, and the company then recognizes "Hey, this thing only made about half the money we projected. Somebody dun goofed.".

 

In addition, saying the customer doesn't even get to make a decision, or complain about a faulty product is just asinine. Of course they do. That is, just about, the only power a consumer has to do anything about it. And they have a right to exercise that as much as they please.

 

"You have the option of not buying it again" is likewise silly. Of course I do. Why would I purchase it again if I already have it? Especially if I didn't like the first copy.

 

Perhaps you meant to say they have a right to return it, but no, not really in this case if they're playing on PC. You've got 24 hours from first launching the game to return it. After that, EA gives you the big middle finger, says "Thanks for your cash, sucker" and continues, presumably,  publishing broken games, because they have quite handily removed a good portion of the consumer's power (getting their money back and retroactively voting with their wallet).

 

I foolishly hoped there would be a patch put out quite quickly fixing some of the game breaking bugs this game. I should have known better.

 

For the past 2 years I've work as escalations manager for a wagering company. Believe me, I've heard every complaint imaginable from people who spend millions of dollars with my company, and very few of them actually get actioned or are legitimate. I've far more experience in customer relations, high profile ones at that, than you likely could fathom in your lifetime. If anyone sounds naive and grossly uninformed about what actually occurs when noteworthy customers make actual complaints, it's you my friend.

 

Not that I would need such work experience to have a clue in, what's it called, "consumer-creator relationship". You likely only have the experience from one end of that relationship, so you lack perspective, which is not that surprising.

 

Bioware has identified their client base just as every other big company has. DA:I is not the first game they've produced, nor the first one you've likely bought. Word of mouth is a highly overrated narrative. I hear dozens of times a week from high rollers that they will tell all their friends to stop gambling with us and take their money elsewhere. I give them maybe 2 or 3 hours and I'll see activity on their account again. That's just the way it is. People like yourself talk a big game when you're upset, but you'll be waiting in line to buy Biowares next feature, just like your friends who you've apparently been whinging about them out to.

 

Uhhh,

 

"You have the option of not buying it again"

 

You do realize that DA:I is not the only installment in the franchise, won't be the last, and Bioware does produce other products? Most companies make a tremendous share of their income from repeat business, so "not buying it again" is one of the few things you can do of merit to get your point across. The fact that you're struggling with that concept though, shows you likely don't understand the "consumer-creator relationship", and/or plan on buying Biowares next venture without a second thought. Again, not surprising.

 

But I do find it hilarious how you spend the first half of your post telling me how horribly wrong I am on the subject based on your fanciful ideals on the topic, then proceed to delve into the reality of the topic and reiterate what I was saying by illustrating that EA basically has all the power in their corner. Yeah well, welcome to the real world of capitalism.

[Britcorp]

Please stop being a drama queen.

[taranoire]

Damn. I had no idea Bioware employees were facing so much crap. It kind of makes me a little apologetic; I've been hard on them before, but not nearly to that level. 

[Chari]

And here we see a fascinating example of a "white-knight". What a specimen, so obnoxious, so righteous

[Darkly Tranquil]

You fishing for a job at Bioware, dantares83?

[Travie]

As soon as I read 'entitled' when discussing videogames my eyes roll so hard they literally get stuck at the back of my head. 

 

I'd love to read the rest, but I physically can't. Sorry. 

[Natureguy85]

What I did say is there a huge leap between saying "I do not like this work" and "This person failed at their job". Any random slob can say the latter, the former can only be accurately claimed by someone with intricate knowledge of the work that was being done. I thought I elaborated this sufficiently in my post.

 

 

I think you need to double check what "former" and "latter" mean, unless you are trying to say something very odd.

 

 

A statistical statement requires actual statistics, I would think. Regardless, one can't gauge the validity of a death threat from someone they don't know. You say again that it's unlikely to be followed up on. Do you know the person who was sending death threats to this person? If so you should report it to the authorities and the culprit likely has a prison sentence in front of them. If you don't know the person who sent the threats, then you have no idea how serious they were and shouldn't comment on it.

 

What plan is it, and who's saying it was stupid? This statement needs clarified to give any serious consideration.

 

I didn't buy DA:2 because any fool could see that it was going to be much different from DA:O. It doesn't change the fact that it's still a successful franchise, and they likely designed the second game just as deliberately as they made the other two. It just didn't appeal to me directly, or you apparently, this does not make it a failure, or "stupid".

 

I apologize, I'm unable to find the statistics I was looking for, but I can tell you that every President and many public figures received death threats and yet very few are killed. The point is that while something always could happen, there is little reason to take too seriously the comments of some random moron on the internet who doesn't really know you or where you live.

 

I don't need to be specific because you made a general, blanket statement that something can't be a failure if it was done according to plan. Maybe you meant if it achieves a goal, in which case it would by definition not be a failure, though the poster using that term may have simply meant that it was low quality.

 

No, DA2 isn't not very good because it didn't appeal to me; it didn't appeal to me because it wasn't very good. The characters were not as deep and the central conflict was ruined by the ending.

[Rynjin]

For the past 2 years I've work as escalations manager for a wagering company. Believe me, I've heard every complaint imaginable from people who spend millions of dollars with my company, and very few of them actually get actioned or are legitimate. I've far more experience in customer relations, high profile ones at that, than you likely could fathom in your lifetime. If anyone sounds naive and grossly uninformed about what actually occurs when noteworthy customers make actual complaints, it's you my friend.

 

Not that I would need such work experience to have a clue in, what's it called, "consumer-creator relationship". You likely only have the experience from one end of that relationship, so you lack perspective, which is not that surprising.

 

Bioware has identified their client base just as every other big company has. DA:I is not the first game they've produced, nor the first one you've likely bought. Word of mouth is a highly overrated narrative. I hear dozens of times a week from high rollers that they will tell all their friends to stop gambling with us and take their money elsewhere. I give them maybe 2 or 3 hours and I'll see activity on their account again. That's just the way it is. People like yourself talk a big game when you're upset, but you'll be waiting in line to buy Biowares next feature, just like your friends who you've apparently been whinging about them out to.

 

Uhhh,

 

"You have the option of not buying it again"

 

You do realize that DA:I is not the only installment in the franchise, won't be the last, and Bioware does produce other products? Most companies make a tremendous share of their income from repeat business, so "not buying it again" is one of the few things you can do of merit to get your point across. The fact that you're struggling with that concept though, shows you likely don't understand the "consumer-creator relationship", and/or plan on buying Biowares next venture without a second thought. Again, not surprising.

 

But I do find it hilarious how you spend the first half of your post telling me how horribly wrong I am on the subject based on your fanciful ideals on the topic, then proceed to delve into the reality of the topic and reiterate what I was saying by illustrating that EA basically has all the power in their corner. Yeah well, welcome to the real world of capitalism.

 

There's a big difference between what you do (provide a service) and what Bioware does (creates a product).

 

And generally, complaints are not listened to uness they have merit.

 

In your case "I fucked up and lost tons of money, you suck!" is not a valid complaint.

 

In this case, many of the complaints are valid "There are numerous bugs that make it difficult or impossible to actually play the game".

 

Those are the sorts of complaints any smart publisher should listen to. Because not everyone is as dumb as you seem to think. I have no intention of buying the next Bioware game on release, if ever, due to this experience (this is actually the first one I haven't waited for, so I'm not as big of a blindly loyal fanboy as you seem to imply). I'm sure other people agree as well.

 

Word of mouth is a big deal when you're dealing with a large consumer base, many of whom spend time on the internet. This is why pre-release game reviews are so important for companies. The review comes out, and primarily spreads through word of mouth (or keyboard).

 

"Hey, I heard this game was good, it got good reviews! Are you going to buy it?"

 

On the day of release and for maybe a week afterward, sales will be high. They should continue to sell copies steadily for a reasonable period if it lives up to the reviews over time.

 

However, if enough people are dissatisfied, and start expressing said dissatisfaction with valid complaints, things slow down. You may still have people going "I heard it was great!" but you'll have a solid core of people going "It has issues, I'd wait a bit". At that point it goes from a sure-fire purchase, to a doubtful one.  That's just how people work. They'll believe what they hear, and if they hear conflicting things, they will be more hesitant to act on the one that may cost them.

 

This is not high rollers making false claims in the hopes that you'll be intimidated and recoup their losses out of fear. This is simply people saying "I don't like this" to someone, and those people saying "I heard it wasn't very good" to other people. 

 

In the old days where this was primarily spread by verbal communication, this was a small difference. Now, with social media being ubiquitous, it is a bigger deal. Not the primary source of new consumers, by a long shot, but a potentially significant chunk.

 

And yes, I realize DA:I is not the only one in the series.

 

Do you realize that buying a product again is not in any way the same thing as buying the next iteration of said product?

 

I also never disputed that EA has "all the power" as far as my copy goes.

 

But that doesn't mean that valid complaints are unwarranted or useless, and it certainly doesn't mean I don't have a right to express them as I please. "This thing is bad" is not a determination determined solely, or even primarily by the company.

 

"This is/is not profitable" is. "We should do/should not do something about this" is.

 

"This isn't bad because we say so" is not.