Spoiler Alert

In article <7e2c4793-36d3-41cf-86dc-08c4c13550a3
@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, eddysterckx.RemoveThis@hotmail.com says...
> Hi,
>
> Over at the Shrapnel blog Scott Krol raises the interesting question
> of why a lot of people dislike hearing about the plot of a movie
> before they're watching it, yet seem to want to know everything about
> a game before they buy it.
>
> http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/blog/2008/01/24/when-spoiler-alerts-d...-matter
>
> Is it just the $50 price tag which makes us investigate games so much
> before purchase ?
>
> I was just thinking that a movie for 2 + candy stuff + drinks
> afterwards usually sets me back around 30 Euro, which is $50 - double
> that if we're having a light dinner there first, so from a pure price
> point of view I should investigate movies just as much before I go
> watch them. Which we don't. We rarely know which movie we're going to
> see until we get there and have a look at what's available. Then we
> base our decision solely on the movie poster, maybe influenced a bit
> by a particular actor being in it, and how many weeks it's already
> been playing - but that's it.
>
> So why do we completely forget we spend $50 on a stinker of a movie
> the day after and don't blame the cinema complex, nor the developer
> for ever releasing it, but react completely differently when it's
> about a $50 wargame ? Is it because we care more about wargames ?
>
> When I first start playing a new wargame I usually already know a lot
> about it from articles, reviews and the forums. I usually skim or read
> the manual first too so I know what I can expect. This leads to
> moderate reactions - if you already know the game's a bit iffy, you
> won't be hugely disappointed by it - if you know this is WOTY material
> you nod your head when you discover it is. No utter joy, no utter
> despair, which are both experiences I *do* have with movies.
>
> Which leads to the question of whether going into a wargame without
> knowing anything about it can create the same extremes of joy or
> despair. And if is this something you'd like.
>
> The funny thing is that while the blog was posted today, I had been
> thinking about this for some time - Cthulhu fans think alike
> probably - so as I'm expecting Advanced Tactics in the mail any day
> now I've been purposely avoiding the forum and everything else
> connected with this game. I'll go into this game utterly unprepared -
> let's see what gives.
>
> Greetz,
>
> Eddy Sterckx

It's apples, and oranges. Advanced Tactics isn't a story. A story
isn't the same, if you already know what's going to happen.
--
Song of the moment: "Flightless Bird, American Mouth."
By Iron & Wine, from the album The Shepherd's Dog.
----
Slick:
http://www.aktuellekamera.de/archive.php/393/OEZ/2007_12_21_21:58:25
----
http://www.curlesneck.com
----
Epi
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

In article <MPG.2203799a9a943ac2ca.TakeThisOut@news.east.earthlink.net>, epicat1212
@hotmail.com says...
> In article <7e2c4793-36d3-41cf-86dc-08c4c13550a3
> @e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, eddysterckx.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com says...
> > Hi,
> >
> > Over at the Shrapnel blog Scott Krol raises the interesting question
> > of why a lot of people dislike hearing about the plot of a movie
> > before they're watching it, yet seem to want to know everything about
> > a game before they buy it.
> >
> > http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/blog/2008/01/24/when-spoiler-alerts-d...-matter
> >
> > Is it just the $50 price tag which makes us investigate games so much
> > before purchase ?
> >
> > I was just thinking that a movie for 2 + candy stuff + drinks
> > afterwards usually sets me back around 30 Euro, which is $50 - double
> > that if we're having a light dinner there first, so from a pure price
> > point of view I should investigate movies just as much before I go
> > watch them. Which we don't. We rarely know which movie we're going to
> > see until we get there and have a look at what's available. Then we
> > base our decision solely on the movie poster, maybe influenced a bit
> > by a particular actor being in it, and how many weeks it's already
> > been playing - but that's it.
> >
> > So why do we completely forget we spend $50 on a stinker of a movie
> > the day after and don't blame the cinema complex, nor the developer
> > for ever releasing it, but react completely differently when it's
> > about a $50 wargame ? Is it because we care more about wargames ?
> >
> > When I first start playing a new wargame I usually already know a lot
> > about it from articles, reviews and the forums. I usually skim or read
> > the manual first too so I know what I can expect. This leads to
> > moderate reactions - if you already know the game's a bit iffy, you
> > won't be hugely disappointed by it - if you know this is WOTY material
> > you nod your head when you discover it is. No utter joy, no utter
> > despair, which are both experiences I *do* have with movies.
> >
> > Which leads to the question of whether going into a wargame without
> > knowing anything about it can create the same extremes of joy or
> > despair. And if is this something you'd like.
> >
> > The funny thing is that while the blog was posted today, I had been
> > thinking about this for some time - Cthulhu fans think alike
> > probably - so as I'm expecting Advanced Tactics in the mail any day
> > now I've been purposely avoiding the forum and everything else
> > connected with this game. I'll go into this game utterly unprepared -
> > let's see what gives.
> >
> > Greetz,
> >
> > Eddy Sterckx
>
> It's apples, and oranges. Advanced Tactics isn't a story. A story
> isn't the same, if you already know what's going to happen.
>
I think I took it wrong before. I still think it's apples, and oranges.
Going to a movie is about more than just seeing a movie. It's about
spending an evening out. Even if you only go to the movie theater.

Maybe a good question would be whether, or not, people investigated a
rented DVD as much as a game.
--
Song of the moment: "Flightless Bird, American Mouth."
By Iron & Wine, from the album The Shepherd's Dog.
----
Slick:
http://www.aktuellekamera.de/archive.php/393/OEZ/2007_12_21_21:58:25
----
http://www.curlesneck.com
----
Epi
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

On 25 jan, 13:47, Giftzwerg <giftzwerg....RemoveThis@NOSPAMZ.hotmail.com> wrote:

> A game can cost ten times that

Well, at this point in time I'm not sure money plays a big role in the
equation. Thought experiment : say you win a wargame in a WOTY
election, you're full of anticipation for it and it turns out to be a
dog. At that point it doesn't matter anymore, nor does it hurt less if
you paid $50 for that game or nothing. What hurts is the time lost,
the frustration you experienced when grappling with the UI, the crash
just when you were about to save etc. And that's irrespective of the
money you paid for it - at least for me it is.

I just remembered a statement you made many moons ago : <not verbatim>
if the game is $50, I'm going to get $50 worth of entertainment out of
it, whether it is by playing and enjoying the game when it's good, or
trashing it in here when it's not. Maybe for me the monetary aspect is
less of a factor.

> [1] It was actually fabulously good. Best horror flick in the last
> forty years, and I've seen 'em all.

Sold - my wife just adores horror movies so that's another $50

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

In article <b3b7b3d7-3787-4ef7-953e-
bdc18cdf26ec.TakeThisOut@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, eddysterckx.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com
says...
> On 25 jan, 11:50, Epi Watkins <epicat1....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Going to a movie is about more than just seeing a movie.  It's about
> > spending an evening out.  Even if you only go to the movie theater.
>
> Why don't we see buying a new game like that ? - I can download it and
> start playing it within the hour, for the same price as an evening at
> the movies. If I don't like the game I should be be able to shrug and
> move on just like with a bad movie, but I don't. When a game is bad I
> feel a bit frustrated, when it contains too many bugs I'll complain
> about it left and right. When someone mentions a real stinker of a
> movie I can laugh about it and say "man, that was one hell of *bad*
> movie - remember <insert scene / event> - hilarious"
>
> Anyway, my post was more about allowing myself to be pleasantly
> surprised by movies, but by being too prudent with games, disallowing
> myself to be surprised - good or bad.
>
> Greetz,
>
> Eddy Sterckx

You're more disappointed, and such, because a movie is just a few hours
of your life. A game is something you'd potentially be playing for
years. There's a lot more hope, for the game to provide a lot more than
a movie. There's a lot more room for disappointment.
--
Song of the moment: "Flightless Bird, American Mouth."
By Iron & Wine, from the album The Shepherd's Dog.
----
Slick:
http://www.aktuellekamera.de/archive.php/393/OEZ/2007_12_21_21:58:25
----
http://www.curlesneck.com
----
Epi
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

In article <7e2c4793-36d3-41cf-86dc-08c4c13550a3
@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, eddysterckx.RemoveThis@hotmail.com says...

> Over at the Shrapnel blog Scott Krol raises the interesting question
> of why a lot of people dislike hearing about the plot of a movie
> before they're watching it, yet seem to want to know everything about
> a game before they buy it.
>
> http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/blog/2008/01/24/when-spoiler-alerts-d...-matter
>
> Is it just the $50 price tag which makes us investigate games so much
> before purchase ?

Back up, though. Some games *can* be spoiled by advanced information.
RPGs, for example, or some of the better FPSs, are spoiled even worse
than films sometimes; finding your first suit of Power Armor in FALLOUT
is supposed to be a "Yaaaayayyaaah!" moment, not a matter of doing a few
things and opening the right locker.

But in the case of wargames, I'm not sure it's even possible to "spoil"
the better ones. Heck, I've played through some COTA scenarios dozens
of times, and each game plays out a bit differently. A movie is
different; every single time I watch CLOVERFIELD, [REDACTED] is going to
[REDACTED], and that always makes me [REDACTED].

> I was just thinking that a movie for 2 + candy stuff + drinks
> afterwards usually sets me back around 30 Euro, which is $50 - double
> that if we're having a light dinner there first, so from a pure price
> point of view I should investigate movies just as much before I go
> watch them. Which we don't. We rarely know which movie we're going to
> see until we get there and have a look at what's available. Then we
> base our decision solely on the movie poster, maybe influenced a bit
> by a particular actor being in it, and how many weeks it's already
> been playing - but that's it.
>
> So why do we completely forget we spend $50 on a stinker of a movie
> the day after and don't blame the cinema complex, nor the developer
> for ever releasing it, but react completely differently when it's
> about a $50 wargame ? Is it because we care more about wargames ?

Wait a minute, though. I've - more than once - been so incensed by the
quality of a film or the conditions in the theater that I've demanded an
immediate refund. And got it. So I'm not so sure that some of us are
any more forgiving of shitty films as we are of shitty games.

And your example is slightly unfair in that a good percent of the money
you refer to really isn't tied to the film itself. Sure, I can drop
$100 on a night of cinema with Mrs. G., but if the film stinks, it
doesn't dampen my enjoyment of the dinner, or the wine, or the company.
For that matter, the popcorn tastes pretty good even when the movie
sucks. So my direct exposure to the film costs is the $18 for our
tickets, and I'm less critical of an $18 game than I am of a $50 title.

And another quick point. On two occasions in my life I've gone to a
theater and had the movie "crash", with something happening that
prevented the show. In both cases, we were immediately refunded our
money, offered profuse apologies, and given free tickets to a subsequent
show.

Ever seen a game designer or publisher even *acknowledge* showstopper
bugs - to say nothing of instantly doling out refunds and free games?

That's so rare it's like J.D. Salinger's backlist.

> When I first start playing a new wargame I usually already know a lot
> about it from articles, reviews and the forums. I usually skim or read
> the manual first too so I know what I can expect. This leads to
> moderate reactions - if you already know the game's a bit iffy, you
> won't be hugely disappointed by it - if you know this is WOTY material
> you nod your head when you discover it is. No utter joy, no utter
> despair, which are both experiences I *do* have with movies.

I think it's because the experience is wildly different - so different
that it's almost incomparable. Think of three examples:

(1) The film HOUSE OF GAMES. Great film that's utterly ruined if some
clod reveals the secret. Utterly dependant on being surprised.

(2) The novel SHOGUN. 1,200 pages and it all comes down to the very
last sentence. Boom. Yet I've read this a dozen times with no
particular diminishment of enjoyment.

(3) An HTTR scenario which I've played to tatters, but with different
outcomes and different moves and different tactics each time.
>
> Which leads to the question of whether going into a wargame without
> knowing anything about it can create the same extremes of joy or
> despair. And if is this something you'd like.

Depends on the game. Something like an HTTR scenario has decent
replayability. A HARPOON scenario? Not so much, once you realize that
the Tu-22s the AI controls just fly down an arrow-straight threat axis.

--
Giftzwerg
***
"The Democrats are having the hardest time with the new [Iraq] reality.
Every candidate is committed to 'ending the war' and bringing our troops
back home. The trouble is, the war has largely ended, and precisely
because our troops are in the middle of it."
- Fareed Zakaria
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

eddysterckx.RemoveThis@hotmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Over at the Shrapnel blog Scott Krol raises the interesting question
> of why a lot of people dislike hearing about the plot of a movie
> before they're watching it, yet seem to want to know everything about
> a game before they buy it.
>
A game is not a movie. I don't have to worry about bugs in a movie keeping
me from seeing all of it or possibly even crashing and/or damaging a
multi-thousand dollar possession of mine. Movies do not have a pattern of
stopping partway thru and never showing the ending, while computer games
have a long established pattern of being defective. (Oh, maybe not the
majority but a large enough percentage that the likelihood can't be
dismissed.)

The movie industry is a hundred years old and has evolved professional
standards of competence and training structures to teach the skills
necessary to meet those standards. Game programming is, maybe, barely
starting to grope its way towards understanding it needs minimum standards
of competence.

A movie I watch and its entertainment for a couple hours and I don't expect
it to be anything more than "eye candy". Appearance _is_ the point of a
movie. A game is something I expect to be playing for months if not years
and it has to have a solid working something underneath its eye candy.

Those are just the difference I can come up with right off the top of my
head. Let me think about it and I could probably continue for quite some
time.

--
"Reading by the light of a lost Christmas day
It begins...."
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

eddysterckx RemoveThis @hotmail.com wrote:
> On 25 jan, 13:47, Giftzwerg <giftzwerg... RemoveThis @NOSPAMZ.hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A game can cost ten times that
>
> Well, at this point in time I'm not sure money plays a big role in the
> equation. Thought experiment : say you win a wargame in a WOTY
> election, you're full of anticipation for it and it turns out to be a
> dog. At that point it doesn't matter anymore, nor does it hurt less if
> you paid $50 for that game or nothing. What hurts is the time lost,
> the frustration you experienced when grappling with the UI, the crash
> just when you were about to save etc. And that's irrespective of the
> money you paid for it - at least for me it is.
>
> I just remembered a statement you made many moons ago : <not verbatim>
> if the game is $50, I'm going to get $50 worth of entertainment out of
> it, whether it is by playing and enjoying the game when it's good, or
> trashing it in here when it's not. Maybe for me the monetary aspect is
> less of a factor.
>
>> [1] It was actually fabulously good. Best horror flick in the last
>> forty years, and I've seen 'em all.
>
> Sold - my wife just adores horror movies so that's another $50
>
Just bring a barf bag for the two of you. The bouncing, dancing, "Oh look
how artistic I am waving the camera around" POV induces vertigo and nausea
in a non-trivial percentage of the population.

--
"Reading by the light of a lost Christmas day
It begins...."
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

eddysterckx.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Is it just the $50 price tag which makes us investigate games so much
> before purchase ?

It's no the price, it's the investment in *time* that makes the
difference... well, at least for me.

I try to avoid seeing a movie I don't like because I dislike wasting a
couple hours (not to mention the 10 bluebacks or so), but I really
*hate* spending a couple days trying to figure out how a wargame works
only to abandon it afterward beset by stupid AI, cryptic UI... or simply
because I don't like it.

That's a paradox: my gran-gran-father lived in (by today's standard)
dire poverty, but he had a lot of time on his hands: I'm affluent, but
time-starved

Regards,

--------------------
Luca Morandini
www.lucamorandini.it
--------------------
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

On Jan 25, 11:46 am, "James Gassaway" <dtra....RemoveThis@sonic.net> wrote:
> eddyster....RemoveThis@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On 25 jan, 13:47, Giftzwerg <giftzwerg....RemoveThis@NOSPAMZ.hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> A game can cost ten times that
>
> > Well, at this point in time I'm not sure money plays a big role in the
> > equation. Thought experiment : say you win a wargame in a WOTY
> > election, you're full of anticipation for it and it turns out to be a
> > dog. At that point it doesn't matter anymore, nor does it hurt less if
> > you paid $50 for that game or nothing. What hurts is the time lost,
> > the frustration you experienced when grappling with the UI, the crash
> > just when you were about to save etc. And that's irrespective of the
> > money you paid for it - at least for me it is.
>
> > I just remembered a statement you made many moons ago : <not verbatim>
> > if the game is $50, I'm going to get $50 worth of entertainment out of
> > it, whether it is by playing and enjoying the game when it's good, or
> > trashing it in here when it's not. Maybe for me the monetary aspect is
> > less of a factor.
>
> >> [1] It was actually fabulously good. Best horror flick in the last
> >> forty years, and I've seen 'em all.
>
> > Sold - my wife just adores horror movies so that's another $50
>
> Just bring a barf bag for the two of you. The bouncing, dancing, "Oh look
> how artistic I am waving the camera around" POV induces vertigo and nausea
> in a non-trivial percentage of the population.

Gotta agree. The idea was innovative, but it was the first movie to
ever make me physically ill from watching all the shaking. I can
understand the technique, but found it taken to the extreme and mostly
unnecessary.
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

HermanH wrote:
> On Jan 25, 11:46 am, "James Gassaway" <dtra....RemoveThis@sonic.net> wrote:
>> eddyster....RemoveThis@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> On 25 jan, 13:47, Giftzwerg <giftzwerg....RemoveThis@NOSPAMZ.hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>
>>>> A game can cost ten times that
>>
>>> Well, at this point in time I'm not sure money plays a big role in
>>> the equation. Thought experiment : say you win a wargame in a WOTY
>>> election, you're full of anticipation for it and it turns out to be
>>> a dog. At that point it doesn't matter anymore, nor does it hurt
>>> less if you paid $50 for that game or nothing. What hurts is the
>>> time lost, the frustration you experienced when grappling with the
>>> UI, the crash just when you were about to save etc. And that's
>>> irrespective of the money you paid for it - at least for me it is.
>>
>>> I just remembered a statement you made many moons ago : <not
>>> verbatim> if the game is $50, I'm going to get $50 worth of
>>> entertainment out of it, whether it is by playing and enjoying the
>>> game when it's good, or trashing it in here when it's not. Maybe
>>> for me the monetary aspect is less of a factor.
>>
>>>> [1] It was actually fabulously good. Best horror flick in the
>>>> last forty years, and I've seen 'em all.
>>
>>> Sold - my wife just adores horror movies so that's another $50
>>
>> Just bring a barf bag for the two of you. The bouncing, dancing,
>> "Oh look how artistic I am waving the camera around" POV induces
>> vertigo and nausea in a non-trivial percentage of the population.
>
> Gotta agree. The idea was innovative, but it was the first movie to
> ever make me physically ill from watching all the shaking. I can
> understand the technique, but found it taken to the extreme and mostly
> unnecessary.

Hardly innovative. The Blair Witch Project did it almost ten years ago.

--
"Reading by the light of a lost Christmas day
It begins...."
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

In article <JKydnaZOQ9eFBQfanZ2dnUVZ_tKinZ2d.DeleteThis@rcn.net>,
mary.palmucci.DeleteThis@rcn.com says...

> what kind of snacks do they sell at euro movie theaters and have you guys
> discoverd cold drinks yet

When I was about five, I wouldn't drink a cold soda. It had to be warm,
from the pantry. When I was older, and still drinking, I would drink
warm beer, because I was too lazy to keep going to the fridge.

I still drink warm soda, just because it's easier. I like cold soda too
now, though.

--
Song of the moment: "Flightless Bird, American Mouth."
By Iron & Wine, from the album The Shepherd's Dog.
----
Slick:
http://www.aktuellekamera.de/archive.php/393/OEZ/2007_12_21_21:58:25
----
http://www.curlesneck.com
----
Epi
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

On 26 jan, 03:16, "Ray O'Hara" <mary.palmu... DeleteThis @rcn.com> wrote:

> what kind of snacks do they sell at euro movie theaters

popcorn, nachos, candy, icecream, ... you'll feel right at home

This is what it looks like :

http://www.kinepolis.com/be-nl/index.cfm?pageid=10004&cid=KBRU

Yes, it does have 27 theatres, that's why we don't bother checking in
advance what movies they play - there's always plenty of choice.

Just outside the movie complex they build a little fake town with
restaurants and bars - contrary to what you'd suspect the food at the
Mexican restaurant is quite good.

http://www.bruparck.com/village_nl.asp

> and have you guys discoverd cold drinks yet

Have you guys discovered real beers yet

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert 

On 26 jan, 07:15, "James Gassaway" <dtra....DeleteThis@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> Hardly innovative. The Blair Witch Project did it almost ten years ago.

And that was a yawn movie - for the both of us - we couldn't
understand the hype at all. Taste is a funny thing.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx
 >> Stay informed about: Spoiler Alert