• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Do You Think Expectations Are Becoming A Bit Too High Nowadays?

Justac00lguy

BooBoo
Joined
Jul 1, 2012
Gender
Shewhale
So obviously from the thread title, this particular thread is about our and the general expectations within the gaming community. It's as if now we've had so many great and revolutionary games that there is a certain standard that can be hard to reach for the majority of games. There will always be games that surpass expectations, but I feel the gaming world has shifted to a point where our expectations are sky high where anything less than great is perceived as a "disappointment".

Anyway less of me blabbing on, how do you feel about the current climate of the gaming industry in terms of expectations being too high?
 
Joined
Jun 22, 2014
Location
Minnesota
This is a really good question. And I've collected many different thoughts on this, though I want to say them more coherently so I'll be back on this topic in one way or another. In the meantime, I'll respond: Yes, in general, gamers probably have too high of expectations for the gaming industry to progress and to give more high-quality and innovative experiences. That said, gamers are not necessarily wrong to have high standards. The $60 associated with purchase of a full game contains much higher risk than other entertainment like music, movies, or other kinds of games (video or not).

Our expectations are too high, but our standards are too low.

How do you mean?

EDIT: I take "expectations" to mean what gamers should expect in a game that they would rate highly, not what gamers think the average effort in gaming is going to be.
 
Last edited:

Dan

Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Gender
V2 White Male
A lot of the reason for such is a combination of poor advertising, poor marketing, lies and hype. When we are shown games it's never clear if it's actually real game-play itself, and if the graphics will look as good as they do once a game is released.
For those that remember the Killzone 2 trailer, it embodies everything that's wrong with false trailers, or more recently Alien Colonel marines and the whole Watch Dogs fiasco.
I agree gamers can be whiney little deku baba's but when it comes to some of the gaming industries horrid practices of wrapping up a piece of **** in lies, dlc and more horrid bean bags of cat sick, I don't blame them for being whiny.

I've got to cut this short since I need to go bath my Grandfather. Games need to deliver, if publishers and or developers want to over-hype their game and lie about it then of course people are going to expect a lot from their purchase, when they discover the game is a piece of **** and that they have been lied to they are going to kick up a fuss.
 
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Location
Louisiana, USA
I think the problem is that, like movies, certain games set a standard that becomes damn near impossible for the rest of the gaming community to live up to. People may claim that games don't get worse with age, but I feel this is actually a true statement - as technology improves, and games get bigger and bigger budgets, many times the games just get flashier and flashier with their presentation, and more and more innovating with their various gameplay styles. This causes, as you said, expectations in general to rise, and when older games are subject to these new expectations, they don't come anywhere close to what we've come to "expect".

For example, take the "open-world exploration" genre; I'm sure a vast, vast majority of today's gaming audience would award The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim the "best-of" title in that genre. Skyrim set an incredibly high bar, and if a particular game that fancies itself an "open-world exploration" doesn't prove to be on par with or greater than Skyrim, it's deemed "disappointing" or a "failure". We can see this same kind of phenomenon with movies, particularly in the super-hero genre. The Dark Knight is considered to be the absolute highest point of the genre to so many people right now (including myself) that nearly every single super-hero movie's bottom line in the review is "How does it stack up to The Dark Knight?". This creates an almost unfair comparison, just because of how great The Dark Knight was, so much so that it actually does a disservice to other movies that are damn good in their own right, just not as good as The Dark Knight. An example in the gaming industry is the multitude of platforming games, indie or otherwise, that are eternally pitted against the likes of Megaman 2 or Super Mario World - these games were at the height of the genre, and are STILL considered to be near perfection in the genre to this day, making it incredibly hard to even compare to them in the modern age.

I do think that, unlike movies, games will progressively get better.... hopefully. It's hard to imagine cinema having many more breakthroughs than it already has - the best movies are still the ones with the best story and/or action, and better CGI won't really change that. I feel that games have much more room to grow, because they can always approach the medium from a different light with new innovations in the gameplay department. I was wondering if Skyward Sword could set such a bar of perfection, but in hindsight and in history, I think its approach to gameplay and controls will be remembered as little more than a novel gimmick that fell out of favor, almost like the rhythm game genre. There's still ways that games in the future can "surpass expectations", although it'll get harder and harder as time goes on. I still personally find a great deal of satisfaction from a game that lets me try new ways to play, like Epic Mickey, a game that isn't all THAT great, but had a neat little gameplay style that was at least memorable in some form, and I expect some future games will make me feel the same way.
 

DarkestLink

Darkest of all Dark Links
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
How do you mean?.

I mean we expect ridiculous things that make no sense. For example...a lot of people though Skyward Sword was going to explain everything and tie the Zelda timeline together. This makes no sense, given the story expectations the series has given us.

And, in contrast, we settle for too little. I'm constantly hearing how people will buy a game for $40 to $60, play it once and then not touch it in years. They are satisfied by this purchase. I suppose this is a matter of taste, but I would never spend that money on a game unless I thought I'd want to replay it all the time. This basically means I seldom by a game lower than a 9. Anything below an 8 is usually unplayable for me (but I do have some guilty pleasures that break the rules).
 

Moonstone

embrace the brand new day
Joined
Oct 23, 2012
Yes and no. In some ways I don't think our expectations are too high, in others I do.

I think a majority of game companies are really shorting their consumers, though I can't blame the companies entirely since their consumers are still buying the ****. There are several games these days that sell additional DLC at launch, like we're not paying enough for the game already. I mean, come on, at least give us a finished product if we're paying $50+ That's the big thing with me; we don't always get full games anymore, and that's very disappointing. And, a lot of the time, the game is a rehash of a game we've played a million times before.

In addition to above, there is false advertising going around. Again, if the demo play/video of a game looks better than the actual game, there's something very wrong going on.

But, I also think some consumers expect too much. It can be said for anything, but some people expect things to be 100% their way, or a game is simply terrible. What is perfect for one person is not necessarily perfect for another, and I understand that companies will typically want to hit as large an audience as possible. I think that's fine. If the game is fun and sold in its entire and finished form, it won't get any complaints from me.
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2008
Gender
Timecube
Not at all. I think it's the opposite. A lot of AAA title games are four hour interactive movies with tutorials, in case the player is somehow too stupid to figure out the controls they were just told how to use. Many big titles put little effort into the actual playable parts of the game, and instead have hours of pre-rendered cutscenes that often look worse than the actual gameplay. It's ridiculous cutscenes and D voice acting that make up a lot of games, either that or game controls/mechanics that make the game unplayable.

I think a prime example is Crysis 2. It literally did everything wrong with modern gaming. Crytek basically took everything that made the first game good, and removed it or made it stupid beyond belief. Apparently players need to be warned about fire and electric currents while they are makingn their way through narrow corridor levels. The voice acting and overall story is in every way a downgrade from the previous game, and even graphically it's a step back in many ways (once you get past the overdone HDR and 9001 color correction filters).

So, no, expectations are not too low. It's that we've come to expect interactive movies with tutorials based on Modern Warfare XIII.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom