By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Gamers can be toxic to devs and vice versa

Yeah, sure, the gaming community can be VERY toxic at times, but in my experience, most - if not all - communities/fandoms/groups have that kind of people.
Sports fans, politics enthusiasts, Anime fans, they can be just as bad if not worse.



Around the Network

What about the " yellow chairs" ?
They only shit talk some things, they dont shit talk when some companies shove them with free stuff.

Yongyea is one off the yellow chairs.



People can be toxic. That can be applied to any interaction between humans.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

To be clear, though, "Devs" who post online are mostly PR and Advertising people. It's hard to have a job and post on Twitter all the time. Also most companies strongly discourage outside communication using the company's name (just in case someone says something crazy).



Chrkeller said:

Gamers, for whatever reason, feel very entitled. I don't understand why gamers can't take the stance of "don't like something, don't buy it." Pretty simple.

I feel like that's throwing away the fact that if you pay for something, you are entitled to a quality product/service, not a low standard product/service and being lambasted by someone standing at the sidelines going "don't like it, don't buy it".

We've also seen that used for years and yet the mobile games industry dwarfs both consoles and PC, and those folks are still buying into it.

We've seen this happening for years and years, where studios/CEO's make bad decisions that lead to consumer outbursts and the like.

Full on dev harassment is bad, that goes without saying, but at the same time, studios shouldn't be making bad choices and making sub-par products and charging you twice/thrice for it either. 

If a game is bad 2-3 times per IP, then of course you should stop buying into it, but at the same time, devs/studios should stop repeating the same mistakes and not making bad products?. 

It's a two way street with this industry, not a one way one like it is with the Art industry (even though I have a different stance with that industry in that you pay and describe what you pay for). 

Last edited by Chazore - on 18 July 2022

Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

Around the Network
Chazore said:

Full on dev harassment is bad, that goes without saying, but at the same time, studios shouldn't be making bad choices and making sub-par products and charging you twice/thrice for it either. 

Aye, I 100% agree. But the best way to protest - or support - their products is with your wallet. 



Chazore said:
Chrkeller said:

Gamers, for whatever reason, feel very entitled. I don't understand why gamers can't take the stance of "don't like something, don't buy it." Pretty simple.

I feel like that's throwing away the fact that if you pay for something, you are entitled to a quality product/service, not a low standard product/service and being lambasted by someone standing at the sidelines going "don't like it, don't buy it".

We've also seen that used for years and yet the mobile games industry dwarfs both consoles and PC, and those folks are still buying into it.

We've seen this happening for years and years, where studios/CEO's make bad decisions that lead to consumer outbursts and the like.

Full on dev harassment is bad, that goes without saying, but at the same time, studios shouldn't be making bad choices and making sub-par products and charging you twice/thrice for it either. 

If a game is bad 2-3 times per IP, then of course you should stop buying into it, but at the same time, devs/studios should stop repeating the same mistakes and not making bad products?. 

It's a two way street with this industry, not a one way one like it is with the Art industry (even though I have a different stance with that industry in that you pay and describe what you pay for). 

I find that overly complex, because reality is simple.  Developers need to make money...  if people stop buying any game with lootboxes and developers bleed negative profits for a year, want to know what will happen?  Developers will drop lootboxes. 

Fact is if people buy it, developers will sell it.  So I stand by my "don't like it, don't buy it."  

And it isn't hard to figure out if something has lootboxes or if a game is good/bad..  there are literally 100 review sites out there to review prior to purchase.



What always astonishes me is how serious gaming is taken. You'd think, with the stuff that happens, that gaming was as life-and-death as well... life and death.



Chrkeller said:
Chazore said:

I feel like that's throwing away the fact that if you pay for something, you are entitled to a quality product/service, not a low standard product/service and being lambasted by someone standing at the sidelines going "don't like it, don't buy it".

We've also seen that used for years and yet the mobile games industry dwarfs both consoles and PC, and those folks are still buying into it.

We've seen this happening for years and years, where studios/CEO's make bad decisions that lead to consumer outbursts and the like.

Full on dev harassment is bad, that goes without saying, but at the same time, studios shouldn't be making bad choices and making sub-par products and charging you twice/thrice for it either. 

If a game is bad 2-3 times per IP, then of course you should stop buying into it, but at the same time, devs/studios should stop repeating the same mistakes and not making bad products?. 

It's a two way street with this industry, not a one way one like it is with the Art industry (even though I have a different stance with that industry in that you pay and describe what you pay for). 

I find that overly complex, because reality is simple.  Developers need to make money...  if people stop buying any game with lootboxes and developers bleed negative profits for a year, want to know what will happen?  Developers will drop lootboxes. 

Fact is if people buy it, developers will sell it.  So I stand by my "don't like it, don't buy it."  

And it isn't hard to figure out if something has lootboxes or if a game is good/bad..  there are literally 100 review sites out there to review prior to purchase.

If only it were actually that simple. We would still be in the middle of a lootbox hell right now if it weren't for governments around the world investigating lootboxes for gambling. Even though most countries won't recognize them as such, having lootboxes in your game became a detriment to game companies. Although some companies will refuse drop them entirely (EA) as one example.

But, the past 10 years have taught me that if 2 out 10 people buy lootboxes/microtransactions, most gaming companies will design their games based on the 2 that did buy, rather than the other 8 that didn't. So, regardless if you "don't like it, don't buy it" it's not going to matter in the end, and we're the ones that get the short end of the stick for it. Sucks, but that's the reality of the gaming industry as is. 



gtotheunit91 said:
Chrkeller said:

I find that overly complex, because reality is simple.  Developers need to make money...  if people stop buying any game with lootboxes and developers bleed negative profits for a year, want to know what will happen?  Developers will drop lootboxes. 

Fact is if people buy it, developers will sell it.  So I stand by my "don't like it, don't buy it."  

And it isn't hard to figure out if something has lootboxes or if a game is good/bad..  there are literally 100 review sites out there to review prior to purchase.

If only it were actually that simple. We would still be in the middle of a lootbox hell right now if it weren't for governments around the world investigating lootboxes for gambling. Even though most countries won't recognize them as such, having lootboxes in your game became a detriment to game companies. Although some companies will refuse drop them entirely (EA) as one example.

But, the past 10 years have taught me that if 2 out 10 people buy lootboxes/microtransactions, most gaming companies will design their games based on the 2 that did buy, rather than the other 8 that didn't. So, regardless if you "don't like it, don't buy it" it's not going to matter in the end, and we're the ones that get the short end of the stick for it. Sucks, but that's the reality of the gaming industry as is. 

Gaming industry is a reflection of gamers.   Online isn't free...  why?  Because gamers will pay for it.  It is that simple.  A company cannot sell a product people don't buy.