Therefore the average is wrong! I've been getting this argument from a bunch of different people the last few days and it REALLY annoys me. You happen to be a statistical outlier? That doesn't suddenly mean the other 10 million or so people suddenly stop existing. The world doesn't end with you. And with that snazzy segue, the most recent example. Electronic Arts recently released a controversial statement saying gamers don't like change. Someone strongly disagreed, and I said that on average that was pretty true, pointing out how stuff like Assassin's Creed or Call of Duty break ten million units sold every year. The reply was "Oh yeah? Then why is one of my favourite games The World Ends With You?" I don't get it, why do so many people think that 'average' means 'everyone'? You can like whatever you want, it doesn't change what everybody else likes.
Oh yeah? Then why is one of my favourite games The World Ends With You? It may sound crazy, but Amaury might actually have half a point there. People who think this way tend to have issues with the Theory of Mind (a concept that most people begin to grasp by around 4 or 5). Lacking the ToM is often indicative of developmental disorders, usually on Autism Spectrum but it can also be a symptom of high functioning mental ******ation (as it was called for decades until a year ago when the effects of the euphemism staircase kicked in again). EDIT: I own a fire ******ant jacket. Is that okay, Xenforo? EDIT 2: Oh my god I thought censors were supposed to hide words that are inappropriate for kids, not ****** people's ability to say things. EDIT 3: Okay, I need to see how far this goes. Xenforo, am I allowed to go on vacation to Scunthorpe? EDIT 4: Yay! I'm booking the flight now!
Where did you confuse being an asshole with having a developmental disability?[DOUBLEPOST=1404402315][/DOUBLEPOST]Serious answer: It's a reaction to a bad argument. They have incentive to say that most people are wrong; it just comes out that way. There isn't much you can do when your opinion goes against a majority, especially in a market setting. I would like for different types of games to crop up. I get upset when I realize that most people are not willing to shift their spending habits to suit me. I will not get what I want because it will not sell. For a lot of people, all that is left when faced with assured disappointment is denial. Are they wrong to want something they can't have? No, of course not. "We have a right to want things, too." You don't disagree. What are you doing, then? It sounds like you want them to give up when you bring up how bad the odds are.
Gamers fight change, but that doesn't necessarily mean they don't like it. The argument against it is shoddy in this case, but I feel it deserves more than to be boiled down to what one or the other side thinks, whether the sides are a million to one or not. Plus sales arguments are potentially the worst things to use in the gaming industry, the companies basically rig sales before the game's even finished
It takes two though. They can only rig sales because people are willing to eat it up in the first place There's a more complex argument to be made, sure, but at the end of the day a lot of people would rather take a safe bet on a franchise they know they like than to try something completely different
Game theory did an episode on this: Spoiler It's pretty interesting, it's worth it to give it a watch.
That really depends on marketing. I only got KH because there was actually a commercial for it, for instance, and I've heard as much from a lot of others onsite. Plus there's the fact that you can market a game based on its mechanics rather than its aesthetic content and still appeal to a wide range of people. There's always an angle. To say gamers dislike change implies a level of deliberacy that I doubt most people have when they make purchases; they don't stick to what they know, they stick to what looks pretty, in a manner of speaking. It just happens that what they know looks pretty.
Prettiness doesn't make something sell quite as well as familiarity. If a person liked whatever Assassin's Creed or Call of Duty then it stands to reason they'd like the next one. It's not even really an inherently negative thing, it's just smart use of your money. You go to the point of least resistance, least risk. Rather than putting your money into the unknown you put it into something that you already have reason to believe you'll enjoy. Marketing is how you bring people in, and that's where prettiness helps. But if something is pretty but not enjoyable, there's no longevity in that. The two go hand in hand though, people as a rule love shiny things and things that make them feel comfortable
