Author Topic: Pat the NES punk controversy. Thoughts on Pat's "gamers are entitled" remarks?  (Read 1432 times)

dashv

PRO Supporter

Gamers are absolutely entitled, and get way too upset over things that are either unimportant, or not designed to make their specific subset of gamer happy.

I agree, yet I am also part of the problem sometimes.

I also “just jump into topics I don’t know much about to give half assed opinions and have a somewhat fake superficial personality” when my show goes live.

I’m not fake about my oppionions on games or my treatment of people or anything like that. But there is a persona I have to maintain when folks in the chat take things in a bad direction or when I give a charged opinion about something.

I errr way more on the side of caution than someone like pew or alpha omega.

I’m gonna tell you how I feel about something, but I don’t want or intend to offend and I wear that defense/fear on my sleeve more than I feel I should because everyone is so hypersensitive now.

It’s a challenging balancing act.

I’ve avoided certain guests and topics because I wasn’t sure I could handle the stress of a possible backlash.

I think Pat is just a guy that loves games and is trying to share and use that love of games to provided a life for himself.

Pew has established internet fame and honestly doesn’t seem to care what or who’s world he burns to the ground as long as his sponsorships and ad revenues come in. But I think he started out like Pat and probably sees himself in the same vein. Just a guy that loves games and is trying to share and use that love of games to provided a life for himself.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2018, 03:34:07 pm by dashv »

I've never liked Pat or Ian. They're just shit-stirrers that lock on to any controversial topic in gaming that they can. And their stories about working in a gaming store just come off as jaded, unprofessional a-holes that hate their customers.

So I could care less what they have to say about gamers.

As far as the YouTube end of things goes... I see Pat as someone who loves games & likes to talk about them, but doesn't always know the best way to not come off as 'preachy' and ends up projecting an air of dickitude from time to time. (And as a retail veteran myself, I've always seen Ian's stories as venting rather than jaded indifference, becuase good lord do people pull some shit.) Pewds is a performer who's got his career tied around his teen-edge persona, and is utterly terrible at judging the backlash from trying to appeal to that audience. I don't believe he's meant to start any of the controversies he has- just that he didn't think about the effects of his actions beyond 'will the teenage boys who make up most of my audience like this?'

All in all, I slap a big ol' 'meh' on the whole thing. I don't think there's enough cross over in the PewDiePie/Pat audience that they'll choose sides & cost someone (Pat) a career... more that they'll be a bunch of annoying teenagers being really shitty to Pat for a while, and hopefully they won't go too far before they move on to their next target for their shittiness. Becuase being a shithead is apparently cool for some reason? And if the rest of us are lucky, they'll grow out of that someday.

kashell

I have no horse in this race because I'm not a Diablo person. But, I completely understand the backlash and think it's warranted. Gamers are entitled, and in this case, being entitled is a good thing.

As for Pat, I've seen him at Retropalooza sauntering about. I never spoke with him, nor have I any desire to.

PDP is just a whackjob.
www.kashelltriumph.com
If you make me your enemy, you make the world your enemy.
                            

turf

PRO Supporter

I’m going to start off saying, I like Pat. I wouldn’t say I “know” him, but we’ve talked enough times that we recognize each other’s face. I think he’s a decent guy. He’s even been on OPB.

Pat is an opinionated guy. It’s what made his podcast so big. He’s also very polarizing. He’s easy to hate.

Y’all also have to keep in mind, what you see on the internet isn’t the real world.

I think gamers are entitled. We scream and holler if something doesn’t go our way. Instead of voting with our wallet, like we should, we take to the internet and bitch.


sworddude

If something negative happens people all want go on the band wagon and say negative things about said guy It's pretty easy to do while with good stuff it is usually not mentioned It's how human beings are. If something negative happens rarely or even if it's just only once someone is the bad guy immidiately.

Still though while the booing in the diablo converence had to be done it still is a bit immature as far as the audience goes, Pat defintely had some balls to throw his opinion out in such a way with the internet being the kinda beast that it is but it still is kinda true if were fair it's pretty funny to watch if I'm honest he's not wrong.

as far as the wallet thing goes, I'm pretty sure the converence was not needed for the mobile game, It might turn out to be huge succes by casual people who see a decent mobile game on their phone in wich case it gets pretty popular but not by the hardcore audience.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2018, 04:00:44 pm by sworddude »
Your Stylish Sword Master!



A bit late but I feel as though I still have a bit to add, so here it goes...

I watched Pat's video shortly after it was released (pretty sure I saw it before PDP released his video) and the only reason I know it got negative feedback, other than this thread, was Reviewtech making a video about it. Shame, I thought Rich was a Pat watcher too, after that, but I guess not. Anyways, my initial reaction to the podcast is that Pat and Ian were both very wrong, especially Ian.

For one thing, Blizzcon is itself a product, people are paying money to be there (and aside from the ticket price are also sacrificing vacation days, travel expenses, etc.) and using the capstone of the week to announce something that these people actively dislike... what did they think would happen? Perhaps not the open mockery but audience boos should have been a given. The April Fools comment, in particular is a reference to Blizzard's yearly April Fools posts, which are a real life thing and, 8 short years ago, actually included trashy looking fake mobile games. It was a Blizzard reference from a Blizzard fan. A super fan, someone who dropped a load of money to come to a week long celebration of Blizzard and their good but very over-rated games. A potential whale. Ian wanting this guy thrown out of the show is stupid, from a business perspective. And of course the presenters (who have little responsibility for the game being greenlit, etc.) had a tough job to do and will hopefully be forgiven for any on-stage snippiness with their fan interaction, but they are ultimately on the clock, they are being paid for this, probably more money than a lot of the Blizzcon attendees make.

A big error from Pat was that he said gamers would get their real Diablo game, regardless of how this turns out. Probably true, but ask the people still waiting for Warcraft 4 whether it actually is. Because its pretty obvious that WoW's success killed the RTS aspect of that franchise. The simple fact is that if this Diablo game is a huge hit, it will have an impact on the main series, probably a negative one. People in this thread have mentioned Pat being unaware of current game trends, I would say that this is a pretty big example of that.

Gamers, like all people who buy products, are not entitled to anything other than what they buy actually doing what it says it will do on the box. Sometimes they don't even get that but in this case I suspect that they will. And yet, they do not have to buy the products on offer either. In this case I hope that they don't. Jim Sterling, in his most recent video, flipped the question on its head. Are these companies not acting entitled too? They give us less choice and variety each year while systemically designing their products to ask for more money, even after they've been paid for. They try to switch to a model where the consumer no longer actually owns what they buy, just a digital license to a digital product that might not work in two years. Why does Blizzard think that it is entitled to sales of a game that already exists, just with Diablo art pasted over it? Why do they think they are entitled to money for "purple coins" or whatever their secondary currency for this game is going to be? Does it cost them more money to produce? I doubt it. They are certainly within their rights to do any of that stuff, but if they do I hope their fans look elsewhere for entertainment.

And, finally, to take it back home to the topic of Pat... I do not like Ian. He whines a lot and I feel that his histrionics take away from the podcast. I dislike hearing him bring his personal politics into retro gaming topics where they are totally irrelevant too, though those moments typically do not make it onto the Youtube clips. As a retro store owner he has a lot to add to the discussions, but his personality sucks and I suspect that his store is one of the ones that has really good inventory because they over-price stuff (you all know the type of place I am talking about.) Most of this discussion was his fault, Pat was just along for the ride.

edit: And there Ian goes again, in the latest video, saying that Microsoft still has some sort of ownership stake in DKC. They do not. They have never. It has always been available for Nintendo to use assets from, and Nintendo has always used assets from it. Ridiculous.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2018, 01:27:09 pm by scraph4ppy »

Yea I tend to lose a lot of respect for anyone who brings up the whole "gamers are entitled" thing because its, in essence, a way to try to shield video games as a medium from criticism. Sure, there are a times where people complain way too much, but so often its a line of though that has no more substance than a smug "So what?"

The company announced a crappy mobile reskin of an unrelated game in place of an actual legitimate product. People absolutely have a right to call that out.

In the immortal words of Phil Anselmo "Fuck em all". Pat and Pew are both garbage.

^ 100% this.



Them: calling people “babies.”

Me: uh, you’re a grown adult in a room full of stuffed animals. Maybe you shouldn’t throw stones?

I’m not ashamed to collect and play video games. I am ashamed of simultaneously how toxic and childish how the people who cover the industry continue to behave. Criticism at a fan event is not analogous with behaving like a baby or acting entitled. It’s how one conducts that criticism that could engender such comments.

There was nothing I saw from BlizzCon that was entitled or childish. The “out of season April fool’s joke” comment could be seen as snarky, but given how people who worship the company’s PC products and strongly dislike mobile, paid money to attend the event, giving a little negative criticism in the face of Blizzard’s tone deaf presentation was more than deserved.
—Currently Playing—
Phantom Breaker: Battlegrounds (PS Vita)
Guns, Gore & Cannoli (PS4)


I met Pat at his book signing, seems like a cool dude.  I've seen Ian a few times when I went to Luna, he didn't seem obnoxious when he rang me up.

I don't see anything wrong with Pat (or anyone for that matter) voicing their opinion on anything.

I met Pat at his book signing, seems like a cool dude.  I've seen Ian a few times when I went to Luna, he didn't seem obnoxious when he rang me up.

I don't see anything wrong with Pat (or anyone for that matter) voicing their opinion on anything.
There is nothing wrong with Pat voicing his opinion, just as there is nothing wrong with us voicing our displeasure with how he (or more accurately, Ian) handled it (i.e. poorly, like a child, petulant, etc).
« Last Edit: January 14, 2019, 01:57:22 am by bunnybear »
—Currently Playing—
Phantom Breaker: Battlegrounds (PS Vita)
Guns, Gore & Cannoli (PS4)


pzeke

Pat has never been my cup of tea, he's quite patronizing most of the time, if not always. I can see where he and Ian where coming from, but I firmly believe that they could have handled it respectfully and with better etiquette instead of, essentially, antagonizing a group of gamers who were simply expressing their disappointment in a civilized manner. The only thing that I saw that was “uncalled for”, and what apparently bothered them the most, was the late April fools joke comment, and that clearly came from a place of frustration.

Not that anyone is, but if you ask me, the way Pat usually goes about things truly give meaning to his online moniker.

⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜

seberhusky

No, people don't hate Pat. They only hate him because PewDiePie said so. You have to remember people are not capable of thinking for themselves anymore, they have to have someone tell them how to think and how to feel, especially PewDiePie's fanbase.

pzeke


⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜