NLSC Your source for basketball video games.
We’re at midcourt, and the ball is about to go up…it’s Monday Tip-Off! Join me as I begin the week here at the NLSC with my opinions and commentary on basketball gaming topics, as well as tales of the fun I’ve been having on the virtual hardwood. This week, I’m tipping things off with a response to the ironic use of “new game bad, old game good” that shills are using to shout down criticism.
It’s undoubtedly obvious from both my articles and commentary on the NLSC Podcast that I greatly dislike thought-terminating clichés. One that I’m seeing pop up rather frequently these days is a derisively sarcastic “new game bad, old game good”; an ironic echo intended to mock and dismiss a preference for a previous release. It’s being trotted out a lot in the Mortal Kombat subreddit in the wake of criticism of Mortal Kombat 1, and we’ve certainly seen it (or words to that effect) in the basketball gaming community. And yes, since I’m writing about it, it obviously grinds my gears!
That isn’t to say that there’s no credibility to the sentiment. It’s a phenomenon that I’ve discussed before, and as I acknowledged at the time, it is true that pretty much every NBA 2K game – at least over the past decade or so – has been labelled by some people as being the worst in the series when it was new, only to be effusively praised later. Of course, the key words here are “some people”. There are others who are far too quick to call every new game the best ever, so it goes both ways. The point is that there’s nuance and context that’s ignored when we defend games by dismissing valid criticism with “new game bad, old game good” sneering. It’s an oversimplification.
In a post on X, choc declared that people who “hate” NBA 2K, Madden, or Call of Duty are never happy with the product, and insinuated that it’s about their lives rather than the actual quality of the games. That’s a questionable and problematic assertion to begin with, but he followed it up by suggesting that the games aren’t enjoyed until it’s too late, noting that you can find posts declaring that every NBA 2K game sucks. I won’t go into the “you hate the games because your life isn’t going well” argument because frankly it’s ridiculous, but there is some truth in the latter claim. However, it also ignores the reasons why people said a game sucked, and why opinions change.
Indeed, there are numerous reasons why every year we see people saying that the latest game sucks and that an older one was better. It simply isn’t the “gotcha” that choc and the people agreeing with him seem to think that it is. I’m going to break my usual editorial format here with a point-by-point list, because I know how easy it is to look at paragraphs and dismiss what they have to say: “I’m not reading all that”, “I’m happy for you, or sorry that happened“, or even the classic “tl;dr”. I’m afraid I can’t break it down into 280 characters or single pithy one liner, but here are nine reasons why “new game bad, old game good” is an oversimplified, thought-terminating cliché.
Nine Reasons the Ironic “New Game Bad, Old Game Good” Retort is a Bad Faith Argument
- The obvious: not everything gets better, and not every sequel is better than or equal to its predecessor(s). There are numerous examples of missteps and games that didn’t live up to the hype when it comes to the NBA 2K series, the NBA Live series back in the day, and plenty of other video game series. So yes, sometimes, the new game is bad, while the old game was good (or at least superior to the new one)!
- Criticism from a vocal minority doesn’t represent widespread dislike for a game. No game is perfect, and even those that come close can’t possibly meet everyone’s expectations. As such, there’ll always be people saying that the new game sucks. Sometimes that criticism will be fair, sometimes it’s overblown, and some people are just impossible to please. Bottom line however, the vocal minority doesn’t speak for the majority, even if their volume suggests that they do. It’s disingenuous to treat their opinions as the consensus.
- Negativity is more popular and cathartic to express, especially online. In other words, we mostly tend to hear from people who have a negative view, even if it isn’t the popular sentiment; again, a vocal minority. The people that like a game simply just play it rather than constantly announce their opinions on social media and in discussion forums. It’s also easier to talk at length about what you don’t like as opposed to what you do, which can skew the discourse in a negative direction.
- Fresh eyes can lead to a fresh perspective. There have been a number of games that I didn’t like when they were new, or the first time that I played them. It usually comes down to different expectations, a good game making an unusually poor first impression, or something else that impacts my critique. Upon revisiting those titles and giving them a second chance, I’ve come to see them in a different light. Our first impressions don’t necessarily have to last, and we’re allowed to change our opinions if our experiences influence us to do so. In the discourse, it’s also important to note that…
- Not everyone follows up on their initial impressions. You might be able to find posts where people are grumbling about an old game, which was their honest opinion at the time. What you may not see are positive impressions following a patch, or simply spending more time with the game, because they never followed up on their original posts. Again, when people are enjoying a game, they’ll often just play it instead of constantly saying so. Alternatively, they may have followed up, but if you don’t look for those posts, you’re only seeing the negative ones that may not be their final word about a game.
- Bad looks good next to worse. Sure, we might not have thought much of an older game, but if a newer one has even more problems, the former may look far better in comparison! If a series is heading in a bad direction – at least in your opinion – then older releases will end up looking better to you by default, even if you didn’t think much of them originally. You can also still think that the old game is bad, but ultimately prefer it to a new game that you deem to be inferior. This doesn’t invalidate criticism of the newer title.
- If the negative view is the consensus, then there might just be something to it. As the saying goes, where there’s smoke, there’s fire. If the popular view is that a game is underwhelming and mediocre, or indeed downright bad, then it failed to impress and entertain its core audience. The criticism is likely quite justified! Once again though, if an even worse game does come along, then its disappointing predecessor might start looking a lot better. Keep in mind that “We’d prefer a game we disliked at the time to what we currently have” is a backhanded compliment at best!
- Different people have different views. The person who specifically wishes that NBA 2K24 was more like NBA 2K17 has probably long held a positive view of the latter game. Conversely, the person who has never come to like NBA 2K17 probably isn’t holding it up as the gold standard now! If you don’t know that someone has actually changed their stance, it’s fallacious to claim hypocrisy. Indeed, it’s still not a “gotcha” even if their opinions have changed, because there are multiple reasons why an open-minded person will come to re-evaluate their position.
- The criticisms of the old and new games are often different. It would be ridiculous and hypocritical to knock a new game, or favour an old one, when they’re doing the exact same thing, and to the same extent. If the gameplay has drastically changed, then so will some people’s opinions. If microtransactions have become more or less predatory, the level of backlash will likewise differ. Individual reactions, positive and negative, will come down to what we all like and dislike in the games in question. The specific criticisms are pertinent here.
In summary: sometimes, the new game is bad, especially compared to an old one that was good. Not everyone holds the same views of every game, with the vocal minority that often skews negative being louder than the majority that is mostly just enjoying a game rather than talking about it. We all reserve the right to change our mind, and if a new game is particularly bad, it may encourage us to re-evaluate an older one that we were previously quite critical of. Frustration also compounds, leading to an audience that is less forgiving of shortcomings and predatory practices. A fallacious “gotcha” doesn’t invalidate fair, well-reasoned criticism, or a more positive second impression.
Look, I know that gamers can be an unreasonable bunch. I’ve seen people rant about the commentary and/or simulated stats not accounting for the unusual fantasy scenario in their heavily customised roster, when that’s not a reasonable expectation. I’ve seen people flat out make up details in their criticism; whether they truly believe it, or think that the embellishment somehow better makes their point, I can’t say. And of course, I’ve seen people be unnecessarily hostile, rude, and even threatening towards some of the developers, just because they’re displeased with a game. We absolutely need to hold ourselves accountable for any poor behaviour and misguided criticism alike.
However, this knee-jerk dismissal of any criticism of a new game because “people always prefer the old one” is absurd. It ignores the specific reasons why a new game is disliked and an old game preferred, and why someone might change their mind and feel more positive about a previous release in retrospect. It tars all negativity with the same brush, dismissing valid critique and assuming that the vocal minority speaks for everyone. It assumes that we all share the same views and expectations. It demands that we stubbornly cling to unchanging opinions, never reflecting on them. It’s a bad faith argument based on a fallacious “gotcha”, intended to win a performative debate.
Above all, it paints the majority as unpleasable for daring to have standards and speak up when they’re disappointed with a product they paid for. Honestly, it’s shilling! It’s throwing the community under the bus to appear like you’re “one of the good ones” instead of a “whiny hater”. Again, that’s not to say that we shouldn’t hold ourselves accountable for poor behaviour, but personally, I believe in standing with your fellow gamers and consumers over corporations. It’s disingenuous to suggest that all of the criticism is being made in bad faith, and childishly insulting to insinuate that it’s a personal failing if you don’t enjoy the games, either at all or as much as you once did.
Yes, it is possible to outgrow games. Yes, some criticism is wide of the mark. Yes, nostalgia can cloud our vision. However, the “new game bad, old game good” retort ignores that sometimes, that’s absolutely a fair assessment! As ShadyMike put it in response to the above posts on X, if the point is to enjoy what you like and don’t let popular opinion dissuade you, then that’s a good message. However, if the aim is to shout down all criticism and suggest that people are only upset because it’s trendy, I vehemently disagree. “New game bad, old game good” isn’t a universal truth, but the ironic use of that phrase as a sarcastic rebuttal to critique is some apologist nonsense.
