Basically what that's saying however is that we shouldn't have the right to voice that we are not satisfied with a product. We are apparently just supposed to spend our money and be happy with whatever we get, because we got it. I can see that argument working should we have gotten the game for free, but otherwise it just reads as a man who can't take criticism well. I can understand where he's coming from with it, but it just doesn't work.
English
-
I think he's just tired of that unnecessary, brutal criticism that gets laid on such an enormous, hard-working industry. I have no qualms when people point out legitimate shortcomings (which Infinite had its share of), but look at the flak Watch Dogs took about its graphics: apparently some people cancelled their preorders. What happened to gameplay taking precedent? More importantly, why does the audience feel so entitled? Is it because the relative youth of the industry means that a vocal minority is basically just spoiled brats?
-
With the Watch_Dogs issue about graphics, I do believe cancelling preorders over it is a bit nonsensical, but to some degree I can understand it. It's just a disappointment factor. Those people who were really looking forward to it because of both the beautiful atmosphere as well as the gameplay likely felt let down and as if they were now getting a reduced experience compared to what they believed they would be getting. As a result, the game didn't seem nearly as enticing as it once did. Perhaps for others however, cancelling those preorders was even a form of protest because of the game being advertised as looking better than it would in the final version, something that I really think shouldn't happen nearly as much as it does in the industry. In this economy, money speaks, and if Ubisoft notices the cancelled preorders, hopefully they'd think twice about doing something like that again. Perhaps it is a bit of a childish way of doing things, but it's the most direct and powerful way of getting a message across.