The blame game: Why video game consumers are not culpable for buying poor games

[__++__==]

As a passionate gamer, I often read comments online that criticize and blame video game consumers for purchasing subpar titles. However, this attitude is misguided and misplaced. Gamers are not responsible for the production of poor-quality video games, and it’s time to stop pointing fingers at them.

Firstly, gamers are not game developers. Gamers are the target audience and not the creators of video games. They have no control over the design, development, and marketing of a game. Therefore, it’s unfair to hold them responsible for the final product that ends up on store shelves.

Secondly, consumers rely on advertising and previews to evaluate a product before purchase. Advertisements are designed to showcase the best features of a game, and gameplay trailers give gamers an insight into the style, storyline, and mechanics of the project. If the final game does not meet the standards set by advertising or previews, then gamers have every right to be disappointed.

Lastly, consumers often buy games based on the recommendations of gaming media and their peers. These sources give consumers an idea of what to expect, and if a game does not live up to the hype created by these sources, then gamers are not to blame. The media and gamers recommend what they believe is a good game, but they don’t design or produce it themselves.

In conclusion, gamers should not be blamed for purchasing poor video games. They pay their hard-earned money to purchase games based on information available to them. It’s up to game developers to create quality products that meet the expectations created by advertisements, previews, and recommendation. So the next time you feel tempted to blame gamers for poor video games, think again, and blame the correct party: the game developers.

[__++__==]

Stabra Kedabra Alakablam a écrit :

Encouraging consumers to be more savvy with what they purchase, serves as a warning to would-be "bad devs" too because reinforcing the concept of doing research as a consumer, also means less people are fleeced by bad games.

How can consumers be "more savy" when devs can censor?

You make no sense.

[__++__==]

SlowMango a écrit :

Still the consumer's responsibility to make sure the purchase is a good purchase.

Except civilised countries have consumer law.

[__++__==]

With the increasing complexity of products and services, it is unreasonable to expect ordinary consumers to have the expertise or capacity to scrutinize every purchase fully. This is where the concept of Caveat Emptor or “buyer beware” comes in. Historically, it served as a warning to consumers to be vigilant about the products they buy and assume the risk for inadequate items. But in the modern global marketplace, this principle is no longer workable, and it’s time for us to demand better consumer protection.

Firstly, products and services have become highly specialized, with modern technology and advanced manufacturing processes that make them almost impossible to understand fully. Consumers simply can’t know everything there is to know about every purchase they make. Furthermore, companies often use misleading language or technical jargon, making it difficult for consumers to understand the fine print. This type of information asymmetry is a perfect breeding ground for unscrupulous companies, robbing ordinary consumers of their hard-earned money.

Secondly, Caveat Emptor justifies fraudulent practices by unscrupulous businesses, creating an environment where they can get away with providing Substandard goods or services. This creates an unfair balance between consumers and producers, with businesses holding all the power. In this scenario, it’s challenging for consumers to push companies to be accountable for the quality of their products.

Lastly, the idea of Caveat Emptor translates to the erosion of consumer rights. It supports an environment where companies can act with impunity against ordinary consumers, leading to a society where businesses can operate with no moral or ethical responsibility, negatively affecting the marketplace.

In conclusion, the concept of Caveat Emptor is outdated and not in the interest of a fair and just society. Consumers should expect better protection, and companies should be held accountable for the quality of their products and services. As such, it’s time to demand adequate consumer protection laws and regulations to safeguard the rights and interest of the ordinary person in society.

[AmsterdamHeavy]

__++__== a écrit :

With the increasing complexity of products and services, it is unreasonable to expect ordinary consumers to have the expertise or capacity to scrutinize every purchase fully. This is where the concept of Caveat Emptor or “buyer beware” comes in. Historically, it served as a warning to consumers to be vigilant about the products they buy and assume the risk for inadequate items. But in the modern global marketplace, this principle is no longer workable, and it’s time for us to demand better consumer protection.

Firstly, products and services have become highly specialized, with modern technology and advanced manufacturing processes that make them almost impossible to understand fully. Consumers simply can’t know everything there is to know about every purchase they make. Furthermore, companies often use misleading language or technical jargon, making it difficult for consumers to understand the fine print. This type of information asymmetry is a perfect breeding ground for unscrupulous companies, robbing ordinary consumers of their hard-earned money.

Secondly, Caveat Emptor justifies fraudulent practices by unscrupulous businesses, creating an environment where they can get away with providing Substandard goods or services. This creates an unfair balance between consumers and producers, with businesses holding all the power. In this scenario, it’s challenging for consumers to push companies to be accountable for the quality of their products.

Lastly, the idea of Caveat Emptor translates to the erosion of consumer rights. It supports an environment where companies can act with impunity against ordinary consumers, leading to a society where businesses can operate with no moral or ethical responsibility, negatively affecting the marketplace.

In conclusion, the concept of Caveat Emptor is outdated and not in the interest of a fair and just society. Consumers should expect better protection, and companies should be held accountable for the quality of their products and services. As such, it’s time to demand adequate consumer protection laws and regulations to safeguard the rights and interest of the ordinary person in society.

More AI bot bs,. Do the thinking for yourself.

[Boblin the Goblin]

__++__== a écrit :

SlowMango a écrit :

Still the consumer's responsibility to make sure the purchase is a good purchase.

Except civilised countries have consumer law.

We do too. Just because it wouldn't have help your scenario doesn't mean we don't.

[Had Matter]

What do you expect to achieve with your rants? So CoH 3 sucks, I'm totally with you but for me it was the reason to not buying it.

I purchased a bunch of products of questionable quality in my life, too. In the end it always boiled down to am I legally in the position to change the status quo or do I have to accept it. I'd say you're just wasting your time.

Money comes and goes but time just goes.

[AROCK!!!]

Consumers hold a share of the blame.

There are numerous ways to research a game before buying it, and there is also a refund option.

If you get a bad game, give it a negative review, refund it, and then make a mental note of the developer for future reference

[Start_Running]

__++__== a écrit :

As a passionate gamer, I often read comments online that criticize and blame video game consumers for purchasing subpar titles. However, this attitude is misguided and misplaced. Gamers are not responsible for the production of poor-quality video games, and it’s time to stop pointing fingers at them.

No but gamers are responsible for having a standard that determines what they plonk their money down on. If you buy a game you're not happy with well, you're the one who thought it would make you happy yes, is that anyone's fault but your own? Why did you think it would make you haoppy, what contributed to that decision?

__++__== a écrit :

Firstly, gamers are not game developers. Gamers are the target audience and not the creators of video games. They have no control over the design, development, and marketing of a game. Therefore, it’s unfair to hold them responsible for the final product that ends up on store shelves.

There is a significant overlap between the two piopulatuion, not every gamer is a developer but just about every developer is a gamer. Some goes for any piece of art or entertainment. Writers are always avid readers ...well good writers are, same for musicians, painters, sculptors, etc.

The consumer is not respobnsible for the product, but theur are responsible for buying the product.

__++__== a écrit :

Secondly, consumers rely on advertising and previews to evaluate a product before purchase. Advertisements are designed to showcase the best features of a game, and gameplay trailers give gamers an insight into the style, storyline, and mechanics of the project. If the final game does not meet the standards set by advertising or previews, then gamers have every right to be disappointed.

And most everyone learns by the age of 8 that advertising will always embellish. So there's no excuse there. You chosing to believe the magic bean salesman is basically your own fault. Especially when there are sooo many avenues for gaining a more balanced view.

__++__== a écrit :

Lastly, consumers often buy games based on the recommendations of gaming media and their peers. These sources give consumers an idea of what to expect, and if a game does not live up to the hype created by these sources, then gamers are not to blame. The media and gamers recommend what they believe is a good game, but they don’t design or produce it themselves.

Gaming media is advertising so see above. and as for peers. Well peers don't really mean much. If you're a lawyer, every other lawyyer in your country is your peer. Does that mean you'd assume they have the same taste in food as you dio? A gamer's peers are other gamers and gamers are a very very diverse crowd. TYHere's no game so bad that you won't find a couple positive reviews, and there are no games so good that there won't be negative reviews.

Even among friends. My friends and i share a passion for gaming but quite a few of them have tastes wildly divergent from my own. One I know loves racing and other sports games...for me the closest I come to enjoying a a sports game is bloodbowl.

Anolther friend hates FPSes but we both love RTS and TBS games. So on.
At the end of the day the consumer is responsible for what they choose to buy and consume. if you just grab whatever off the shelf mindlessly because "OOH SHINY!" then you're making it rather easy forpublishers to push cruddy games atcha.. A consumer that takes the time to inform themselves and put thought into their purchases is less likely to wind up with a game they consider poor. The more forethought you put into a purchase the lesslikely you are to regret it.

__++__== a écrit :

In conclusion, gamers should not be blamed for purchasing poor video games. They pay their hard-earned money to purchase games based on information available to them.

ty the end of the day the buckl stops at the gamer. THey made the decision . If you make a decisiobn you regret you strive to improve your decision making process. DId you only rely on advertising ? then next time widen the scope of the information you gather, be more selective of where you gather information from. etc,.

I mean for myself. If I'm thinking of buying a Deck Builder game, I know which friend I'm gonna ask about that for their opinion. And even then I won't base it entiurely off that opinion.

__++__== a écrit :

It’s up to game developers to create quality products that meet the expectations created by advertisements, previews, and recommendation.

Yeah the developers really don't have much control over that. The development team and the marketing team are seldom on speaking terms. HEck its rare they're in the same building.

At the end of the day the consumer just has to be diligent and willing to have and maintain a very high standard. Even if it means waiting a couple days or months post launch to gather the needed information.

__++__== a écrit :

So the next time you feel tempted to blame gamers for poor video games, think again, and blame the correct party: the game developers.

I dont blame gamers for poor video games, but if a gamer starts complaining about a poor video game, my question to them is "And what will tyou do to avoid that mistake next time?"

[Aachen]

__++__== a écrit :

How can consumers be "more savy" when devs can censor?

You make no sense.

One thing of which savvy consumers avail themselves is varied sources of information.

[ShelLuser]

Start_Running a écrit :

I mean for myself. If I'm thinking of buying a Deck Builder game, I know which friend I'm gonna ask about that for their opinion. And even then I won't base it entiurely off that opinion.

Slightly offtopic but I can very much recommend Mystic Vale ;) Takes getting used to, but I find it a lot more fair wrt gameplay than other casual deck builders.

Figured I'd share ;)

[Start_Running]

ShelLuser a écrit :

Start_Running a écrit :

I mean for myself. If I'm thinking of buying a Deck Builder game, I know which friend I'm gonna ask about that for their opinion. And even then I won't base it entiurely off that opinion.

Slightly offtopic but I can very much recommend Mystic Vale ;) Takes getting used to, but I find it a lot more fair wrt gameplay than other casual deck builders.

Figured I'd share ;)

Thank you.
granted with that addition my wishlist has now grown large enough to exert a gravitational pulll oon the fabric of reality, but thank you.

[Tito Shivan]

We've all paid tickets for a terrible movie.
We've all paid for a terrible book.
We've all paid for crappy dinners.

We've all not gotten money back from some of those ocurrences. You learn from it and wise up.

However the system should not protect you from making mistakes. From being mislead yes (which IRL has a way more restrictive definition than what people think it does), but from taking wrong decisions no.

[Nx Machina]

Yet another CoH3 thread.

__++__== a écrit :

In conclusion, gamers should not be blamed for purchasing poor video games.

Purchasing - the exchange of money.

Who added CoH3 to the cart? You

Who clicked on confirm? You.

Who played beyond the refund policy? You.

Who is to blame? You.

[Overseer]

It's always this black & white crap thinking.
The consumer is responsible for buying a ♥♥♥♥ product. The company is responsible for making, advertising and defending ♥♥♥♥ product.
So yes you are responsible for your own actions. And that doesn't mean that poor games should not exist. There is only so much you can do.

And you can't put consumer protection on fun. That's not a product. You don't buy fun. You buy a game and if you don't like it that's your opinion that does not devalue the work or service.
And talking ethics: developers also have the right to learn from their mistakes and work on a new and better product without having to close doors and file for social security.

[Dowlphwin]

It's everybody's responsibility. Guilt lies more with those who are very complacent. Everybody contributes to how the system is shaped. Game publishers could try to reject responsibility, too, by saying that if they didn't play the dominant marketing deception routine, they wouldn't have a chance. Then we'd have to ask why insincerity is so conductive to success.