Are fans more important to please then critics?

spyromaster330 · Jul 23, 2008 9:08 AM

Would you rather have a game such as Spyro please fans or critics? What im trying to say is for example, Spyro was criticised for being more of the same thing by a few critics but now that Spyro is different, its being criticised by some fans for changing. So now the critcs are (sort of) happy for the change but some fans are not. So i think that i would rather a game please fans, because they are the ones that are going to be buying it. But critics are also important because they might have an influence on a person buying it or not. So yeah what do you think

Fletch_Talon · Jul 23, 2008 10:00 AM

Critics don't make up the majority of sales, customers/fans do.

Not all fans will listen to, or even read a critic's review.

A lot of fans will buy something just because it has a certain name (ie. Mario, Sonic, Spyro)

So I think the fans are clearly more important.

Adam Thurman · Jul 23, 2008 7:11 PM

If creative people were in love with writers block or what ever you call it for computer graphics than critics would have more attention from the creators. It is not all that important to please critics because the critics are trying to influence the fans which is going to make it harder for them to if the creator had gone public with his opinions to attempt to influence them for the good of the creation.

If you think about it this way you can imagine why they make web cites for people to see. Then there are fan cites like this one that were created to keep the game, book, or whatever popular. Popularity is an issue but if the creator the guy who made it in the first place knows what hes doing than he can keep his creation from going down in shame.

This is true for anything one just needs effort to keep it going. The sad thing is that the creator would get board of it and move on to something else after getting so many people to like it and they wont stop bothering them. Look what has happened to the book of Hairy potter and the debates are still going on on the Internet.

dragon protector x · Jul 23, 2008 8:49 PM

Fans because they are the ones who buy the game and make the game possible....Who cares what the critics think.....Tap over there mouth would do better for sociaty then people would think.....

ratchet · Jul 24, 2008 4:08 AM

What kind of question in this, seriously? Fans ofcource, the whole reasons Critics review games is so that people can know if the game is good or not, fans are the people who like the game or have followed the series before. Critics dont have to be pleased, but in order for a game to sell more, critics do a good job on swaying the sales, a badly rated game normally doesn't sell as well (on exception for some games like psyconauts which rated very well but sold miserably, or on games like ETD where they rated pretty poorly but sold pretty well (still got platinum)).

Spyro was criticised for being more of the same thing by a few critics but now that Spyro is different, its being criticised by some fans for changing. So now the critcs are (sort of) happy for the change but some fans are not. So i think that i would rather a game please fans, because they are the ones that are going to be buying it. But critics are also important because they might have an influence on a person buying it or not. So yeah what do you think

Spyro "not changing" was one of the many things that critics said about spyro 2 and 3, and pretty much one of the only bad points, in reality, critics praised the originals much more than TLOS, who they did commend for finally changing the series, but dissed and applauded on many other reasons, so that statement you made didn't really prove anything.

Your question is "what is more important, fans or critics liking the game", now firstly, what do you mean by "important", do you mean does it sell well more if fans or critics like it, or it is just a better game if critics or fans like it?

TheManiacOnWheels · Jul 24, 2008 9:59 AM

Fans. Critics have been sour about Spyro lately anyway. Besides, it the fans that by the games, not the critics.

dragon protector x · Jul 24, 2008 6:01 PM

I have the solution to shutting the critics up.....WIth them to a chair with duct tape over their mouths and shove them in a closet.....solves the problem right there...

Paranoia · Jul 24, 2008 7:34 PM

I voted fans because most of the people who buy the games are fans. If you please the fans, then the game will go over well with the people it was meant for.

bmah · Jul 25, 2008 1:43 AM

Keep in mind that you're trying to please as many people as you can, not just the fans. So even though I think fans are extremely important, the critics are also important in a sense that they give more of a general point of view to the casual player who might've never played a Spyro game before.

cynderfan · Jul 25, 2008 6:04 AM

Fans keep the whole thing running.
Critics are just *Beeeeeeeeep*.

bmah · Jul 25, 2008 6:45 AM

You probably didn't read what I just typed above.

TheManiacOnWheels · Jul 25, 2008 11:22 AM

dragon protector x wrote:

I have the solution to shutting the critics up.....WIth them to a chair with duct tape over their mouths and shove them in a closet.....solves the problem right there...

That'd work XD.

Misa · Jul 26, 2008 9:36 AM

Yes.. Yes they are

36ILikeSpyro36 · Jul 26, 2008 6:14 PM

fans - fans buy the games. plus what they say is more valid because they play the games more.

critics - nobody really cares what critics say. (unless the critics agree with them. =P )

i think fans are more important to please. =P

Taco Godess · Jul 27, 2008 8:18 PM

I hardly ever listen to critics unless I want to know what they think about a game that I like. I'd rather buy/play the game first. So I voted for fans.

Besides, fans buy the games.

spyromaster330 · Jul 29, 2008 9:21 AM

ratchet wrote:

Spyro "not changing" was one of the many things that critics said about spyro 2 and 3, and pretty much one of the only bad points, in reality, critics praised the originals much more than TLOS, who they did commend for finally changing the series, but dissed and applauded on many other reasons, so that statement you made didn't really prove anything.

I wasn't trying to prove anything. I was just saying.

Rose · Aug 01, 2008 8:03 PM

I /never/ read critic reviews, so I'll have to say fans. :]

bmah · Aug 02, 2008 4:32 AM

Rose wrote:

I /never/ read critic reviews, so I'll have to say fans. :]

Then that's a really bias and unfair assessment, because you didn't take the critics' point of view into consideration.

I'd say that both fans and critics are important.
Critics are underrated simply because they're harsher. Most of them give a stricter review because they want to help ensure to the public what games are generally good or not (there are some plain dumb reviewers though). No one wants a crappy game, so that may be why a lot of critics are nitpicky.
Fans in general know more about the game they're devoted to, which is a good thing. The bad thing though is that they rarely take into consideration the opinions of casual players (i.e. anyone else who is new to the game) unlike critics.

Fletch_Talon · Aug 02, 2008 7:51 AM

bmah wrote:

Rose wrote:
I /never/ read critic reviews, so I'll have to say fans. :]
Then that's a really bias and unfair assessment, because you didn't take the critics' point of view into consideration.
I'd say that both fans and critics are important.
Critics are underrated simply because they're harsher. Most of them give a stricter review because they want to help ensure to the public what games are generally good or not (there are some plain dumb reviewers though). No one wants a crappy game, so that may be why a lot of critics are nitpicky.
Fans in general know more about the game they're devoted to, which is a good thing. The bad thing though is that they rarely take into consideration the opinions of casual players (i.e. anyone else who is new to the game) unlike critics.

i wont say critics dont have their place, or that theyre unimportant, but in the end, its fans and normal consumers that buy the majority of games and its a select few of those who will base their decision entirely on a review

i use reviews to help me to an extent but if im a fan of a game, like zelda, ill usually buy it regardless of what a review says

#1 Jul 23, 2008 9:08 AM

Are fans more important to please then critics?

#2 Jul 23, 2008 10:00 AM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#3 Jul 23, 2008 7:11 PM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#4 Jul 23, 2008 8:49 PM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#5 Jul 24, 2008 4:08 AM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#6 Jul 24, 2008 9:59 AM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#7 Jul 24, 2008 6:01 PM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#8 Jul 24, 2008 7:34 PM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#9 Jul 25, 2008 1:43 AM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#10 Jul 25, 2008 6:04 AM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#11 Jul 25, 2008 6:45 AM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#12 Jul 25, 2008 11:22 AM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#13 Jul 26, 2008 9:36 AM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#14 Jul 26, 2008 6:14 PM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#15 Jul 27, 2008 8:18 PM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#16 Jul 29, 2008 9:21 AM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#17 Aug 01, 2008 8:03 PM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#18 Aug 02, 2008 4:32 AM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

#19 Aug 02, 2008 7:51 AM

Re: Are fans more important to please then critics?

Board footer