Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Do we use "It's not for everyone" to justify buggy, flawed games?
Thenarius
Member Posts: 1,106
This made me wonder for a while.
A lot of people here use "It's not for everyone" when the other posters are talking about bugs and/or obvious design flaws.
Of course, there are cases when this is true and the poster just wants it his way, but don't you think that there are also cases when this is used as an easy way to escape from a valid concern(especially when coupled with: "This game is innovative")?
Comments
We use all manner of justifications to explain away buggy crap.
"It's not for everyone." is one of them.
"It's got potential." is another.
"All MMOs launch with bugs." is a classic.
"<insert MMO here> had a much worse launch." is often seen too.
"We should support the game, it's trying to be different." always fails on me.
"They had to release early due to financing." I'm not sure why people think I should care.
Oh, and let's not forget "It's a BETA." .. loses credibility when it's 2 weeks from launchday.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
This thread was meant to be in the MO forums, by the sounds of it.
People use legitimate excuses for crap games, that they have heard about good games.
Take Fallen Earth, EVE, and Darkfall.
All those games are not for everyone. EVE especially, and it's doing great.
Fallen Earth and Darkfall, really do have alot of potential.
But, again. There is something else all these game have in common too. They are all Indy games, they are not made by huge corporate video game manufacturers and don't/didn't have large funding. If it's a corporate game, I expect corporate quality. If you pump $40mil into a game and it's released at lower quality or even just a slightly higher level than a game who took $2-5mil, then you're doing something very very wrong.
Some games, really don't have potential. Take the case of MO. The idea has great potential, but there are alot of ideas out there that have alot of potential. The problem is, do you have a talented enough crew to achieve that potential? I think it's clear to most people, that MO just does not. Argue it till you're blue in the face, they just don't have the talent to create the MMO they have promised people and have sold Alpha testing to.
Take Fallen Earth, it may be a ways off from it's potential, but their crew is on the ball and work their asses off trying to get there.... even if the design management doesn't really seem like they know what they are doing.
Like Trading Card Games? Click Here.
I wish, but not really.
It's overused for many ganes out there, as a way too simply end a valid conversation,
Well bugs are a constant problem for MMOs, anyone knows that. Using the phrase "It's not for everyone" isn't appropriate though.
However, when you talk about "design flaws", that can be a pretty subjective thing. Just because you think one game system is flawed, doesn't mean someone else doesn't think it's fine and fun.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Do you have an example of what you are referring to?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Well, I'll upset a few people over here, but STO, for example.
I think TheHatter is right. If it's indie it's generally a temporary design flaw, or "it's just not for everyone". Mainly because indie's generally are unfinished at launch and thus evolve. Whereas with the corporate launch, problems are described in much more pessimistic terms such as: Complete failure, bug infested, bombed, or tanked. We give a certain amount of "hopeful" leeway in our terminology when something has been put together by a company who doesn't have SoE, Blizzard, Cryptic, EA, ext behind it.
No, an example of where it is being used in the context you refer to. The reason I ask is because I'm not seeing it used in the manner you are suggesting so I wanted to see where you are perceiving this is occurring.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
No, an example of where it is being used in the context you refer to. The reason I ask is because I'm not seeing it used in the manner you are suggesting so I wanted to see where you are perceiving this is occurring.
Well, I think it is, considering the amount of posts on this forum that makes it like that.
There's also MO, who has massive problems, but people still defend it with such simple words.
this.. It's rather ignorant of someone to think THEY are right when they accuse a "design flaw". A door that opens outwards with no handle is a design flaw, not a game that has been made in a way that you did not anticipate.
No, an example of where it is being used in the context you refer to. The reason I ask is because I'm not seeing it used in the manner you are suggesting so I wanted to see where you are perceiving this is occurring.
Well, I think it is, considering the amount of posts on this forum that makes it like that.
There's also MO, who has massive problems, but people still defend it with such simple words.
That's because MO idea does, but ideas aren't worth s*** unless you have the talent, dedication, teamwork, money, and management to make those ideas into reality. MO does not have that and from what I can tell, the only thing they have going for them is a talented art crew.
There are a billion and a half good MMO ideas out there, just because MO made it to Alpha testing, doesn't mean those ideas are going to come to reality. How can they make those ideas a reality, when they don't even understand the difference between Beta, Alpha, and Pre-Alpha?
Like Trading Card Games? Click Here.
It depends on the context - What you think are design flaws some might think are features. After all, Jazz isn't for everyone, neither is IDM or industrial music, that doesn't make them flawed just because you don't like them.
Playing: WF
Played: WoW, GW2, L2, WAR, AoC, DnL (2005), GW, LotRO, EQ2, TOR, CoH (RIP), STO, TSW, TERA, EVE, ESO, BDO
Tried: EQ, UO, AO, EnB, TCoS, Fury, Ryzom, EU, DDO, TR, RF, CO, Aion, VG, DN, Vindictus, AA
depend on the game maker!but the buggy game are fairly easy to spot!
take any futur game if it looks insanelly good and it is not a cg but actual gameplay,i do hope the game maker announced
that said game was gona be a 64 bit game because if its regular 32 bit !you will have lot of issue with said game.
but if a gamer come here and say its not for everybody ,first thing to do is ask question or go trial it if its avail.
most that say here THIS GAME AINT FOR EVERYBODY!know what they talk about often if you ask they ll say the issue that might be a problem for other player.
good luck trying to get the real deal out of game maker since they all want to sell maplestory style mmo at wow cost plus
monthly fee of 20$/month.
Buggy? No.
Design flaws? More and more that seems to be personal opinion. I keep seeing posts about design flaws and I think "doesn't seem like a flaw to me".
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
As other posters have related to it boils down to the context it's used in. At times they're right in the justification because it boils down to personal taste, while other times it's simply balderdash used to try and justify bugs or flaws in the gameplay or the overall game design.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
I havent read the OP or any of the subsequent replies but, I would like to add an answer to the question in your thread title.
Do we use "its not for everyone to justify..."
Yes, yes we do. We did it for Vanguard, Aoc, War, Aion, Darkfall and well pretty much every single craptascular game that has released in the last 4 years.
We also like to use "leave, no one will miss you" and "go back to WoW". Both make me giggle when the game is merging servers and struggling to stay afloat a few months later. I always imagine the devs cringing at their playerbase chasing people away from already bad games.
The only reason I would use the "it's not for everyone" rationalization would be in a case such as AOC as it stands now. Definitely not at launch. To a lesser extent games like EQ2 or anything that's heavily zoned, or designed for a specific playstyle. As you mention games like EVE or Darkfall fit into this line of reasoning.
Also it can be used for any game when someone is dissing on it's features and design, rather than it's true flaws. Like saying STO is a buggy incomplete game because it's not open world. This type of criticism is even worse than what you're pointing out in your OP.
Let me ask you a question though, does this not work both ways? Are we to think only people who enjoy something pull things out of their *** to defend it? What about those with irrational criticism?
I ask because in my personal opinion people like to dwell a bit to much on the negative on this site, and it usually leads to group bullying toward those who disagree. Been here since 05' and have seen this happen during just about every games launch. Makes me think there's quite a bit of just bitter and cynical people here, not mention a good bit of narcissism.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Very true. In many places, the people here take that to incredible extremes. There are MMOs listed or posted here that are nothing more than a few changes to the demo project in an MMO Kit, coupled with a massive wish list pitched as 'features' and some of the worst graphics you'll see this decade in ANY game. You'll see responses to these threads with "Looks great!" and "Can't wait to play it!" However when a known or AAA studio pitched the same exact 'features' list or graphics they would be ripped apart mercilessly for unrealistic goals and outdated graphics.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
"It's not for everyone" usually doesnt start out this way.. it goes through steps, something like this:
"It's BETA folks, this is to be expected"
then progresses into:
"It's just released! Every just released mmo's have these issues"
then graduates into:
"It's a server merge, you should expect problems like this"
and finally evolves into your fine example of:
"It's not for everyone"
the comical evolution here though, is that the frequency for deliberate rushed and unfinished product has become so rampant as of late that most folks now days are simply going directly to the "It's not for everyone" stage of delusion. Oh, I might have left one out past the "everyone" bit.
"It's a FtP model, they have to make thier money somewhere"..
done.
d
"He who reigns within himself and rules his passions, desires, and fears is more than a king."
"Where there is much desire to learn, there of necessity will be much argruing, much writting, many opinions; for opinions in good men is but knowledge in the making."
John Milton 1608-1674
yep problem for mmo began about when everquest was at the top of the food chain.
32 bit showed its limit ,if any played back then they ll remember there was lot of issue
instancing delayed that .wow at first was the perfect balance in vanilla wow.some instance some open world raid open world pvp
but at one point they faced the limit also ,yes they had pushed it higher and later but they still faced it
so they did same thing as guild wars and went all out in instancing(basicly copying guildwars way)
that gained them a bit more time but once they reached the 10 million mark ,that barrier still showed it self in wotlk
so in wintergrasp they had to lower total player that can be cramed into one fight
to prevent lag and other issue and even at the number they decided on it still lag terribly.
but lower then that it wouldnt look good since it was supposed to be an epic fight to start with,people on the south of the map etc everywhere.lol if all the stuff that need to be done in wintergrasp is done the keep fight is very empty lol.
so now blizzard and all other mmo are4 stuk at the 2gig(without paa)and about 3 gig with it.thats the 32 bit problem every game face.arenanet did the grunt of the work on that front hell blizzard adopted that way very fast and never looked back
but wow is so popular and will probably rise to 20 million at cataclysm lunch,that even instancing wont resolve this
will they go 64 bit!probably not they ll keep that for their next mmo .they ll lower total player number instead lot simpler.
so any that saw vanilla wow in all it glory back then with raids battlegroup etc all open world,and they stare down at the left over that is wow today are like hell we sure lost a lot from good old vanilla wow
Star Trek Online right now is facing a problem many games have had in beta and launches, server load at maximum. The games is instanced and the server is unable to open new instances and transfer charatcer assests to those instances properly. There are hours of slower server traffic and potentially let players judge the game better. I will also point out even World of Warcraft has had continued problems over it years of lauch with creating new instances on popular servers (and now popular battlegroups at peak hours) as well as people reconnecting to instances already in progress.
I think most of the frustration people are experiencing are not being able to play the game as it was intended or the game is just not what they expected, and if it is not what they were expecting than "it is not for you" is valid, not as a defense..and a statement of the obvious. Industrial metal music is not exactly mainstream in populatity, but people enjoy it and its value does not dimish simply because some people do not enjoy it.
I would say the biggest strength of Star Trek Online's game play is "open team play" You are not forced like many other games to organize a team prior and fill specific rolls and even do research and know the encounters prior to entering. The game does a decent job guiding people together and providing many opportunities to simply happen upon encounters. Star Trek Online provides that random sparky of spontaneity that is missing in many online games.
Wait so what you're saying is, if someone actually likes a game many don't, they're delusional? How about we look at what really happens shall we?
Poster a-. Likes game z
Poster B- hates game z but likes y
Poster a- writes up his view on game z it's very positive in it's tone.
poster B- can't accept poster a like's z because it's not as polished as y
poster b- writes his rebuttal bringing up all the issues in game z compared to game y
poster a- says well I still like the game, regardless of those flaws never liked game y, sorry..
poster b- then accuses poster A he is the devil and only the devil would like such a game, poster a wants to destroy MMO's is the point b makes.
Poster a- well "I guess it's not for everyone". is what is said to end the conversation, because it's going nowhere.
Now tell me this is not the sum of just about every conversation regarding a recently released MMO?
edit- to add poster B then stalks said games forum for a year making sure to hit every singe thread with the same remarks he made in the last.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Wait so what you're saying is, if someone actually likes a game many don't, they're delusional? How about we look at what really happens shall we?
Poster a-. Likes game z
Poster B- hates game z but likes y
Poster a- writes up his view on game z it's very positive in it's tone.
poster B- can't accept poster a like's z because it's not as polished as y
poster b- writes his rebuttal bringing up all the issues in game z compared to game y
poster a- says well I still like the game, regardless of those flaws never liked game y, sorry..
poster b- then accuses poster A he is the devil and only the devil would like such a game, poster a wants to destroy MMO's is the point b makes.
Poster a- well "I guess it's not for everyone". is what is said to end the conversation, because it's going nowhere.
Now tell me this is not the sum of just about every conversation regarding a recently released MMO?
This is true enough , but is only one context the "its not for everyone " phrase plays out and you know it
What's the difference? He's looking at one side of the coin while you're looking at the other. They both happen so not sure what you're trying to argue here.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.