Spider-Man’s Puddlegate Brings Gamers’ Distrust to Light
Insomniac’s Spider-Man is out this Friday for PS4, but before it received a raft of critical acclaim yesterday, a number of gamers were all worked up because of the apparent absence of a puddle. Yes, really.
It’s a ridiculous thing. What does it matter if there was a puddle in the game a year or so ago that isn’t there now? It doesn’t affect the gameplay in any way, does it? The truth is there’s a small but vocal minority of gamers that will find anything they can to complain about, both before and after a game has launched. Whether it’s some content that has been cut or visuals that have been altered in some way, they’ll take to message boards to whine that they’ve been duped. And while such an opinion is blinkered, ignorant of the fact that games undergo changes throughout development for a myriad of reasons such as performance optimisation, it does also highlight that there’s a worrying distrust between those who make and market games, and those who play them.
Spider-Man‘s “puddlegate” isn’t an isolated incident. Similar controversies have happened many times before. Perhaps Watch_Dogs is the most famous example. Some gameplay footage gets shown off at an event, it blows people away, and then when the game finally gets released it doesn’t quite live up to what was originally shown. There are usually simple and honest reasons for it; the gameplay was running on a high-end PC, for example, or during development cuts had to be made due to timescale or performance issues. The result is the same no matter what the reason though; some gamers feel like there are some underhand tactics going on. They feel cheated, and become disgruntled. If they preordered the game on the assumption that the gameplay that they had seen was what they were going to get, they often feel like they’ve been the victim of a bait and switch.
The fact of the matter is, gamers should keep their expectations in check, and also be aware that things change. Don’t assume that the gameplay footage you see at E3 is actually representative of something that will release in a year or so’s time. Wait for reviews or hands-on impressions with final retail code before you splash the cash and you’re less likely to feel like you’ve been duped when games don’t quite have the sheen or features you expected. And if a game has been noticeably downgraded at release and you’re not happy, vote with your wallet rather than being abusive online. Nothing constructive will come from shouting at a developer, but poor sales may change a company’s future conduct. Oh, and in the case of Spider-Man, it turns out that the game has actually received an upgrade since it was shown-off. So there.
Perhaps situations like the Spider-Man fiasco could be avoided if developers were more open about the development process. Being more forthcoming about the footage shown at events might be helpful too. Questions like “is it actually running on a console? And if so, which model?” is something that gamers shouldn’t have to ask when they’re supposedly being shown gameplay footage. Developers and publishers are so keen for consumers to preorder their games that they want to show them in their best light. It’s all well and good, but it’s not always entirely honest. Just like the occasional bullshots that find themselves on the PlayStation and Xbox stores, trailers and other footage can often be misleading, and no amount of fine print can make that okay. Over the years, I feel such practices have played their part in developing an “us versus them” attitude amongst certain gamers. One that occasionally rears its ugly head.
The truth though, is that developers and publishers just can’t win. Being open about the development process and the struggles within it would just no doubt lead to the same ire from those complaining about Spider-Man‘s changes. They’d no doubt call them lazy, that they’re not doing their jobs right, that they just don’t care. And of course, none of that could be further from the truth. You’d have to be a bit tapped in the head to think that developers are going out of their way to make games worse. It’s really not in their best interests. It’s true that some terrible games get released, and that sometimes games are marketed disingenuously, but that’s because the aim of a business is to make money. Video game developers and publishers aren’t your friends, they’re entities wanting to sell you a product. And they know that products sell well when they’re good.
Controversies like puddlegate are born out of the vicious spiral that has developers and publishers wanting to raise the bar where possible, while gamers just expect it. Gamers want bigger worlds to explore with more realistic graphics, and developers and publishers are keen to provide them. When expectations are not met, or even simply perceived to have not been met, however, the shit hits the fan and names are dragged though the mud. While I think it’s wise for gamers to have some scepticism regarding the products that are marketed at them, the unhealthy vitriol displayed by some of them is what prevents developers from sharing the troubles they encounter during the development process, and how they find ways around them. It would be interesting to hear, no doubt, but as long there’s a vocal minority that’s eager to jump to conclusions and won’t engage in sensible discussion, we’ll all remain in the dark.
