The definition of entitlement I'll be using is from my shorter oxford dictionary (and as such is the most authoritative source I have available) and is as follows:


You're damn right I'm an entitled customer.
When I pay for something, I expect the descriptions (pre-launch material) to be accurate in its depiction of the goods it's trying to sell.
When something does not conform to the pre-release material, AND fails to mention such omissions from the final product I feel justifiably cheated.
It is just because the product I am being sold has been misrepresented. (legally speaking or not, it does not matter.)

For example, Todd Howard said at E3 that towns and cities in Skyrim would have their own fluid, dynamic economies the player can participate in, or even sabotage.
Obviously, it didn't. I personally didn't mind all that much, but it's still a legitimate complaint.

That's one example of product misrepresentation. The complaint becomes legitimate because bethesda failed to announce cut content before or at release.

Legitimate complains can be made with regards to declining quality within a franchise or sequence of products.

Forgive this departure, but let's take Gibson as an example of a company.
Gibson are indeed a legendary brand of guitars. The list of players that have used them is countless.
Their reputation has been established then substantiated by decades of quality instruments.

Recently and regrettably, they have been using lower quality woods with all manner of corner-cutting methods such as chambering bodies to save on wood.
Their quality control is becoming haphazard and unreliable.
Standards are slipping, no doubt due to them piggybacking off their reputation to some extent.

If I buy a guitar from Gibson, having played a number of their previous guitars, all of which have been excellent in build quality and materials, yet find the guitar is poorly constructed and made from knock-off ebony, I am actually less
entitled to complain compared to playing a game on PC that shows clear signs of fault. (although certainly entirely within my rights to grumble, especially given the price of those things)

The rationale is as follows; I could easily have tried out the guitar, and within a short span of time I would have seen the faults and have the option to avoid the product. On PC, you have to buy before you try, which further legitimises 'whining' about a decline in quality in addition to the misrepresentation complaint. If a company has set a precedent (not talking specifically about beth) of fixing bugs in a timely order, for example, then it is something that is expected from the company. It isn't a contract or agreement, but it's a tacit act of good faith that keeps customers happy.

I think 'whining', as so many put it, is necessary for the good of the consumer. Companies are never your friends.


I must apologise for the formatting, it's rather horrible but I'm a little short on sleep. Please feel free to deconstruct this point for point, I enjoy a good chin-wag.

So you created a thread to state the obvious? Companies see consumers as nothing more than bags of money. They'll take them using the least amount of effort possible.

No, I created the thread to illustrate examples of legitimate complaints.

So you created a post to misunderstand the purpose of this thread?

You can always read reviews and watch videos first.

Which are horribly biased and often paid for, and no guarantee of anything except some guy's opinion.

I give this a big fat meh.

Thank you for your eloquent and enlightening contribution to this discussion.

I hope developers continue to do what they think is right for their games/franchises. It's their babies afterall. You're entitled to not buy the game There's all the entitlement you need.

Sure, I agree. But as consumers, we are entitled to communicate the consensus on what we felt worked and what didn't, so that all involved parties can benefit. Simple, eh?

All your legitimate complaints are so because they are companies screwing over people to make extra profits, which everyone with half a brain knows companies do. No one denies they are legitimate complaints, but that doesn't make it any less annoying to see 200000 posts about the same complaint. No one says your complaint isn't legitimate, but they just don't want to hear it and are every bit as entitled in not wanting to hear it as you are in expressing it. This is the whole concept of "your freedom ends where my nose begins". It's a vicious cycle once you start talking about entitlements in a place where there is free speech because anyone's free to complain about your entitled complaining.

So to summarize: No one is challenging your entitlement, they just don't want to hear you (or anyone) whine, because, let's face it: no one likes to hear a group whine about the same thing incessantly.


Hah, as if developers get that much choice when they have the publisher breathing fire on them.

Isn't that what the forums are for? To communicate what we liked and what we didn't about their games?

I thought forums were for posting as much stupid [censored] as one can before being banned.