Already tired of the ME:A hate

Avatar image for ssully
#251 Posted by SSully (5277 posts) -

1. Never read the comments (except when I make them).

2. Batman Vs Superman is a steaming pile of shit of a movie

3. All this animation stuff is bullshit

Avatar image for thepanzini
#252 Edited by ThePanzini (396 posts) -

@lv4monk said:
@flippyandnod said:

@lv4monk: I don't see what's random about it. Game companies want to make their release into an event. That gets everyone talking. And sometimes what they talk about isn't exactly what the game companies want.

But I'm not sure there is much harm except for fan egos. The companies want buzz, they get it. Even bad publicity is publicity.

If the companies really don't want all this chatter, they could work to minimize it instead of maximize it. In the immortal words of DMX: "[if] You don't start nothin' there won't be nothin'."

The randomness isn't about a game being unworthy of criticism and receiving it in full force, it's about the erratic spotlight the internet at large uses to decide which hot button issue is currently worthy of it's white hot rage. The random element here being whichever PR misstep is randomly chosen as the one worthy of "punishment" next. I don't think the idea that any publicity is good publicity works the way it used to. These days you're not just contending with word of mouth and sales, every other day seems like another harassment campaign and death threat.

EA has put very little weight behind Andromeda most consumers don't go to Gaf, reddit or any other forum their oblivious to the PR missteps and certainly won't be aware of death threats or any other nonsense across twitter. Advertising won't sell a turd but it'll turn a hit into a colossal one, its why Uncharted 4 had a bigger ad campaign than the three previous games. EA like every publisher does mock reviews and focus testing they'll know its shortcomings already its why we've seen very little Andromeda footage until a few months before release.

Avatar image for lv4monk
#253 Edited by Lv4Monk (398 posts) -

@thepanzini said:
@lv4monk said:
@flippyandnod said:

@lv4monk: I don't see what's random about it. Game companies want to make their release into an event. That gets everyone talking. And sometimes what they talk about isn't exactly what the game companies want.

But I'm not sure there is much harm except for fan egos. The companies want buzz, they get it. Even bad publicity is publicity.

If the companies really don't want all this chatter, they could work to minimize it instead of maximize it. In the immortal words of DMX: "[if] You don't start nothin' there won't be nothin'."

The randomness isn't about a game being unworthy of criticism and receiving it in full force, it's about the erratic spotlight the internet at large uses to decide which hot button issue is currently worthy of it's white hot rage. The random element here being whichever PR misstep is randomly chosen as the one worthy of "punishment" next. I don't think the idea that any publicity is good publicity works the way it used to. These days you're not just contending with word of mouth and sales, every other day seems like another harassment campaign and death threat.

EA has put very little weight behind Andromeda most consumers don't go to Gaf, reddit or any other forum their oblivious to the PR missteps and certainly won't be aware of death threats or any other nonsense across twitter. Advertising won't sell a turd but it'll turn a hit into a colossal one, its why Uncharted 4 had a bigger ad campaign than the three previous games. EA like every publisher does mock reviews and focus testing they'll know its shortcomings already its why weve seen very little Andromeda footage until a few months before release.

For sure, most consumers aren't part of any of this, hate mobs or otherwise. I'm just talking about the difference between consumer dissatisfaction with a video game and the moral outrage that occasionally pops up on the internet. The worst of the internet is never the majority, doesn't change how destructive it can sometimes be.

Avatar image for flippyandnod
#254 Posted by flippyandnod (692 posts) -

@lv4monk: Your post removes all agency from me and others. You ascribe our beliefs to an internet mob. You don't stop to take time to consider that people might actually feel this way for their own reasons.

I have concerns about this game. I mention them now because I see the game now and that happens because the game is coming out now. There's no link in that chain which is "other people don't like it so I'm convinced to dislike it". I'm not taking sides, I'm expressing my opinion.

There's no randomness. The publisher wants the game shown now. The game is shown now. I have problems with it now. I mention it now. It doesn't have to be a conspiracy.

Avatar image for bummlmitz
#255 Edited by Bummlmitz (127 posts) -
Loading Video...

I disagree.

@deathstriker said:

, but the body movement animation is a vast improvement over the trilogy.

Avatar image for lv4monk
#256 Edited by Lv4Monk (398 posts) -

@flippyandnod said:

@lv4monk: Your post removes all agency from me and others. You ascribe our beliefs to an internet mob. You don't stop to take time to consider that people might actually feel this way for their own reasons.

I have concerns about this game. I mention them now because I see the game now and that happens because the game is coming out now. There's no link in that chain which is "other people don't like it so I'm convinced to dislike it". I'm not taking sides, I'm expressing my opinion.

There's no randomness. The publisher wants the game shown now. The game is shown now. I have problems with it now. I mention it now. It doesn't have to be a conspiracy.

Dude, I think you're wildly misunderstand the behaviors I'm talking about and who those behaviors are coming from. Put down the pitchfork for a second (get it?) and take a look around you. You see those internet fires with harassment campaigns and death threats? Are you commiting them? It might just be your dislike of a game and bullshit behavior from thickheaded rageaholics aren't one and the same.

"For sure, most consumers aren't part of any of this, hate mobs or otherwise. I'm just talking about the difference between consumer dissatisfaction with a video game and the moral outrage that occasionally pops up on the internet. The worst of the internet is never the majority, doesn't change how destructive it can sometimes be." ----- Remember when I said that? Kinda relevant...

But seriously, why was there this assumption that all criticism of this (or any other) game was what concerned me? That I "don't stop to take the time to consider that people might actually feel this way for their own reason"? Why would that be what you took from anything I've said? Knowing why someone is bagging on a game is important to me and differentiating between reasonable and unreasonable criticisms should be important to anyone.

Avatar image for bill_mcneal
#257 Posted by Bill_McNeal (609 posts) -

Anyone know how badly or how long they're trashing it on The Bombcast? I tend to listen to every episode but...

I have a feeling it's going to be this way for a while on most if not all of my gaming podcasts (Beastcast included)

Avatar image for flippyandnod
#258 Edited by flippyandnod (692 posts) -

@lv4monk: Again you portray me as part of a mob by referencing my pitchfork. You slag this off by saying you once mentioned there might be some people who act outside the mob but then explicitly lump me into one with your pitchfork comments.

I'm not programmed by a mob. There is no pitchfork. These are my actual concerns expressed at a time when the publishers are attempting to get people to talk about the game. Everyone is not against you, I'm just talking about a game, not lynching anyone.

Avatar image for rahf
#259 Edited by Rahf (337 posts) -

@bill_mcneal: You can either see it as trashing or as concern. I've always heard the latter, since the crew so far all seem disappointed with this unfortunate outcome.

Avatar image for alistercat
#260 Posted by AlisterCat (7362 posts) -

@rahf: @bill_mcneal: There was a good long section, maybe 20 minutes? There was a lot of concern and disappointment not snide trash talk. They aren't taking any glee in bad mouthing it like a lot of the internet is, but they're also saying things are bad and groaning at them without discussing the possibility that other people might enjoy certain aspects. It's why I've come to learn that if Jeff doesn't like something I probably will but it makes it slightly grating to hear talk about a game, positively or negatively. More diversity in viewpoints in general on the website would be good. Hard to achieve with only 2 - 3 people left.

Avatar image for lv4monk
#261 Edited by Lv4Monk (398 posts) -

@flippyandnod said:

@lv4monk: Again you portray me as part of a mob by referencing my pitchfork. You slag this off by saying you once mentioned there might be some people who act outside the mob but then explicitly lump me into one with your pitchfork comments.

I'm not programmed by a mob. There is no pitchfork. These are my actual concerns expressed at a time when the publishers are attempting to get people to talk about the game. Everyone is not against you, I'm just talking about a game, not lynching anyone.

I think you're fuming so heavily you aren't thinking straight. I said you were being an angry ass that wasn't paying attention to what I was saying. I then pointed to the thing I said that contradicted what you were telling me I said. I'll say it again since you seem to be blinded by anger and aren't seeing it. You're criticisms of this game, and in fact most others, isn't what concerns me. What concerns me is irrational, poorly thought out, unreasonable criticisms that have no logical basis. For some reason you then thought "oh, he means me and that's insulting. I'd better lash out at him".

In other words I said angry internet mobs are a problem and for some unidentifiable reason you got angry thinking I called you an angry internet mob. So now you ARE an angry dude that i'm criticising for being needlessly angry and this whole conversation couldn't be any more pointless.

Why are you implying I think everyone's against me when I literally said most people aren't responsible for doing what I'm criticizing? Unreasonable and illogical hate being flung at companies and their products fuels the vocal minority that do actual harm. THAT is what I'm criticizing.

Avatar image for rahf
#262 Posted by Rahf (337 posts) -

@alistercat: But this is also what I appreciate about their viewpoints. It is an opinion and nothing more. From our history with the guys, we can often construe how that opinion relates to us as individuals. I feel like they wave concerns away quite often with an, "I didn't like it, but others might." At some point they have to speak plainly and blatantly about how they feel, and we have to decide how much weight it carries.

And, you know what, guys? There's no real need to shout the reasons why person X is completely irrelevant. I bet you can find a whole alphabet of people whose likes and dislikes line up perfectly with yours. To beat your chest and tell everyone how wrong they are isn't really conducive to anything worthwhile, is it?

Avatar image for devise22
#263 Edited by devise22 (450 posts) -

@lv4monk said:
@flippyandnod said:

@lv4monk: Again you portray me as part of a mob by referencing my pitchfork. You slag this off by saying you once mentioned there might be some people who act outside the mob but then explicitly lump me into one with your pitchfork comments.

I'm not programmed by a mob. There is no pitchfork. These are my actual concerns expressed at a time when the publishers are attempting to get people to talk about the game. Everyone is not against you, I'm just talking about a game, not lynching anyone.

I think you're fuming so heavily you aren't thinking straight. I said you were being an angry ass that wasn't paying attention to what I was saying. I then pointed to the thing I said that contradicted what you were telling me I said. I'll say it again since you seem to be blinded by anger and aren't seeing it. You're criticisms of this game, and in fact most others, isn't what concerns me. What concerns me is irrational, poorly thought out, unreasonable criticisms that have no logical basis. For some reason you then thought "oh, he means me and that's insulting. I'd better lash out at him".

In other words I said angry internet mobs are a problem and for some unidentifiable reason you got angry thinking I called you an angry internet mob. So now you ARE an angry dude that i'm criticising for being needlessly angry and this whole conversation couldn't be any more pointless.

Why are you implying I think everyone's against me when I literally said most people aren't responsible for doing what I'm criticizing? Unreasonable and illogical hate being flung at companies and their products fuels the vocal minority that do actual harm. THAT is what I'm criticizing.

Good post here. Especially the last part. If people don't think them blindly rushing to justify their criticism even if it lines up with some of the things the so called "angry mob" are saying doesn't make this more of a problem they need to give their head a shake. Regardless if you think this game is good or not, regardless if your criticisms are similar to the angry mob or not. We all have to say "no this angry mob is garbage." They don't deserve to be aligned with any of us who are trying to have legitimate conversations about a game. Because all they do is destructive things, that is why they are called the angry mob.

Of course the angry mob may not go away, but if we ignore them and their opinions it severely limits the influence and damage an angry mob. That is why I find it's paramount to make sure when giving an opinion of something, give it in full. Make sure you can't be confused for an angry mob, especially in situations like this one where you already have said angry mob attacking individuals and harassing them on the internet. Sure, I'm not saying criticizing this game makes you part of the angry mob, but that doesn't mean we have to completely ignore that the angry mob does exist, and we should be careful to not associate ourselves with it in any way imo.

Avatar image for shivermetimbers
#264 Posted by shivermetimbers (1334 posts) -

Criticism ceases to be criticism when it turns into harassment. I.E. when someone makes fun of the facial animations in ME:A, they can do so and are likely having fun doing it. When statements get turned into threats people make to developers about the facial animations. That's harassment.

There is such a thing as unreasonable hate; that happens when you attack a creator's character. When one criticizes a creator's work, it's not unreasonable hate.

It's not rocket science. Yes, it sucks when someone is working for years on a project only for their work to be criticized, but it's not the consumer's responsibility to enjoy it. I get that games are hard, expensive, and time consuming to make, but art doesn't have to exist in a vacuum and connections aren't always made between the consumer and the art. And that's what this is about...the relationship between the consumer and the art, not the relationship between the consumer and the developer. That happens when these shitty threats to individual developers occur, or in the rare case, when a dev decides to attack a critic's character.

I mean, go ahead and get angry at the criticism if you want. I'll be honest and say it's kinda sad that we can't accept differences in what we get connected to or what we don't get connected to when it comes to art. I'll reserve my anger at the threats.

Avatar image for lv4monk
#265 Edited by Lv4Monk (398 posts) -

@shivermetimbers said:

Criticism ceases to be criticism when it turns into harassment. I.E. when someone makes fun of the facial animations in ME:A, they can do so and are likely having fun doing it. When statements get turned into threats people make to developers about the facial animations. That's harassment.

There is such a thing as unreasonable hate; that happens when you attack a creator's character. When one criticizes a creator's work, it's not unreasonable hate.

It's not rocket science. Yes, it sucks when someone is working for years on a project only for their work to be criticized, but it's not the consumer's responsibility to enjoy it. I get that games are hard, expensive, and time consuming to make, but art doesn't have to exist in a vacuum and connections aren't always made between the consumer and the art. And that's what this is about...the relationship between the consumer and the art, not the relationship between the consumer and the developer. That happens when these shitty threats to individual developers occur, or in the rare case, when a dev decides to attack a critic's character.

I mean, go ahead and get angry at the criticism if you want. I'll be honest and say it's kinda sad that we can't accept differences in what we get connected to or what we don't get connected to when it comes to art. I'll reserve my anger at the threats.

There's definitely an important distinction between attacking the creator's character and attacking the thing they created. I also still think a creator's work can be unreasonably attacked with hate, hate that in turn can justify more dangerous groups doing the horrible shit they do on the internet.

Avatar image for clearleaf
#266 Edited by Clearleaf (8 posts) -

The problems with Mass Effect Andromeda are problems that have existed in every Bioware game since Dragon Age 2. I'm not sure why a large percentage of the community and the press have suddenly turned on Bioware. The mainstream press are saying things that ex-Bioware fans have been saying for years. So why the sudden change? Has it just become fashionable to shit on Bioware for reasons beyond our understanding?

Avatar image for hayt
#267 Edited by Hayt (1256 posts) -

@clearleaf said:

The problems with Mass Effect Andromeda are problems that have existed in every Bioware game since Dragon Age 2. I'm not sure why a large percentage of the community and the press have suddenly turned on Bioware. The mainstream press are saying things that ex-Bioware fans have been saying for years. So why the sudden change? Has it just become fashionable to shit on Bioware for reasons beyond our understanding?

I haven't played the game but from the reviews I've read and the gameplay I've seen the issue is those "old problems" aren't bolstered by good writing and interesting characters like they were previously. You're right, Bioware games have had shaky animation for ages but when the animation, voice acting and plot aren't up to snuff the roof really starts to cave in. I don't buy that theres been a sudden change it's just that this game is quite different than Mass Effect 3.

Avatar image for horseman6
#268 Posted by horseman6 (1176 posts) -

@clearleaf: the issues are worse in a lot of ways. There isn't good writing or interesting characters which Chas always been the main attraction of ME. Also, Mass Effect 3 came out 5 years ago and we should expect improvements. It's why Fallout 4 wasn't well received.

Avatar image for flippyandnod
#269 Posted by flippyandnod (692 posts) -

@lv4monk said:
@flippyandnod said:

@lv4monk: Again you portray me as part of a mob by referencing my pitchfork. You slag this off by saying you once mentioned there might be some people who act outside the mob but then explicitly lump me into one with your pitchfork comments.

I'm not programmed by a mob. There is no pitchfork. These are my actual concerns expressed at a time when the publishers are attempting to get people to talk about the game. Everyone is not against you, I'm just talking about a game, not lynching anyone.

I think you're fuming so heavily you aren't thinking straight. I said you were being an angry ass that wasn't paying attention to what I was saying. I then pointed to the thing I said that contradicted what you were telling me I said. I'll say it again since you seem to be blinded by anger and aren't seeing it. You're criticisms of this game, and in fact most others, isn't what concerns me. What concerns me is irrational, poorly thought out, unreasonable criticisms that have no logical basis. For some reason you then thought "oh, he means me and that's insulting. I'd better lash out at him".

In other words I said angry internet mobs are a problem and for some unidentifiable reason you got angry thinking I called you an angry internet mob. So now you ARE an angry dude that i'm criticising for being needlessly angry and this whole conversation couldn't be any more pointless.

Why are you implying I think everyone's against me when I literally said most people aren't responsible for doing what I'm criticizing? Unreasonable and illogical hate being flung at companies and their products fuels the vocal minority that do actual harm. THAT is what I'm criticizing.

You say you aren't calling me part of a mob but you reference my pitchfork.

You're only kidding yourself if you think that the communication problems are on my end.

Maybe you need to step back, shake off some anger and take a look at what you're actually saying instead of assuming others simply can't figure out how to pick up what you are saying.

I'm not sure who you are raging at when you say the problem is the internet sometimes all picks on the same things at once and then you say that you didn't mean to include everyone. You seem to be being overly selective in your defense, but not in your accusations. But fine if you don't mean me, then you don't mean me. But perhaps you can choose your words more carefully to someone you are saying is not in a mob instead of telling them to quiet down while using an obvious mob mention.

Avatar image for bill_mcneal
#270 Posted by Bill_McNeal (609 posts) -

@alistercat: Hey thanks, and that certainly doesn't sound as long or as bad as I thought it would. And yes, perhaps I was a bit...harsh when I typed that. I don't mean to insult the duders and don't mind a dissenting opinion. It's just that they can go a little overboard sometimes (as can most people).

Avatar image for sharpless
#271 Posted by Sharpless (493 posts) -

I stopped reading when you used the term "SJW" without a hint of irony. No thank you.

I'm a few hours into the game. It seems fine. The writing and the faces are not top tier, but Mass Effect has never had top tier writing or faces, and I say that as a fan of the series. It's a good series, sometimes even a great one, but it's always had shortcomings.

Avatar image for jakobi
#272 Edited by Jakobi (25 posts) -

I heard the outrage about the animations before ME:A came out. But it didn't look as bad as people were making it out to be and it seemed like more "anti-SJW" outrage: fanboys attacked a female animator, people saying the story was doomed because the developers worried too much about having a diverse cast, blah blah blah blah..... So I bought the game.

Well, I'm only about 8 hours in and so far I agree that the animations and some of the voice acting lines are really bad. The character models are alright (though I hate the short, stubby legs on human models). The irony of all this hate is that I probably would have taken the criticism more seriously and waited to buy the game on sale if it hadn't been so emotionally-charged. The hate was so intense, it drowned out legitimate concerns fans like myself would have when looking to buy this game.

Avatar image for soulcake
#273 Posted by soulcake (981 posts) -

i don't know about your "this game should be a 9. something logic". human faces are bad there mmo's out there with better human faces. Dialog is pretty horrendous , story is kinda meh so far, gameplay is fun, and the new MAKO is a nice extra, Ryder is kind of a blank slate most of your buddy's seem forgettable. I think i would gave this a 7.4 outta ten it's ok but forgettable, in a year were we had some amazing games already.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.