What happened to the "expansion" concept of games that did well??

[J1M]

Yes, and to avoid having the story spoiled. But I can't recall a recent game where that would matter due to writing decline.

I don't believe in spoilers. Science says that this isn't a thing. This notion of spoilers is based on something that people invented only recently, with this weird trait of valuing ignorance. Throughout human history, people have KNOWN how the story was going to end from the beginning, and thus had no effect.

So here's some:

1. The ship sinks.

2. Everyone makes it back to Earth.

3. The Spartans lose.

Did people ultimately like those stories anyway, even though we all knew how they were going to end?

Nonsense. If you are told who the killer is at the start of a murder mystery movie it absolutely lowers your enjoyment.

The same is absolutely true of major twists in games, whether they be story/location/mechanic.

"Science" is either trying to prove an unintuitive result because that stuff is catnip for leftists or they are too stupid to construct a proper study.

[Norfleet]

Nonsense. If you are told who the killer is at the start of a murder mystery movie it absolutely lowers your enjoyment.

It doesn't, no. I mean, I already read the book. That's the reason I'm even bothering to watch the movie in the first place. Otherwise I wouldn't even know what this **** is or why I should be watching it.

I mean, when the communications go down and the moment of tension builds, is the movie somehow ruined by the fact that you already know they all back it back to Earth, because some of us actually lived through that event, and others have, at least, possibly paid attention to it in school? Does knowing that the Spartans will eventually be betrayed and defeated ruin the movie? No, it does not.

The same is absolutely true of major twists in games, whether they be story/location/mechanic.

Nope. "Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!".

"Science" is either trying to prove an unintuitive result because that stuff is catnip for leftists or they are too stupid to construct a proper study.

Except it's not even unintuitive. The notion of "spoilers" didn't even EXIST before modern mass-media, and may be a Western-specific phenomenon. Japs, for instance, clearly don't believe in that **** because the spoiler is right there in the title.

[rusty_shackleford]

Science says that this isn't a thing.

I don't trust articles published in journals with titles that are contradictions:

Psychological Science

[Val the Moofia Boss]

My reaction to spoilers varies. I think they only somewhat bother me if I am extremely invested/immersed in a work at the moment and the story has done an excellent job creating suspense that I really wonder if the heroes are going to make it. Especially when the author has in fact written works with bad endings for the heroes before, so I know that the threat is true. But the momentary annoyance soon passes. I remember being PMed Trails of Cold Steel 3 and 4 spoilers by some ******* (he had even changed his username to that spoiler) and being mildly frustrated, but later on that wore off and I would say the spoiler actually increased my enjoyment of the work because it tempered my expectations knowing that the writers weren't going to deliver a satisfying payoff to what they had promised. So I went in having already that part off and looking for other things to appreciate. And for any large time or monetary commitment, I think you had a responsibility to inform people to tell people about the experience they are getting into so that they do not feel like they have been lied to or have wasted their time/money. I think having people risk being pleasantly surprised or very disappointed is only practical for really short or cheap works.

I think being "spoiled" can also make me look forward to something more, being reassured that this story is actually going somewhere (especially if it is dozens+ hours long with very sluggish pacing) and that there will be interesting stuff happening. LoGH has several moments where the narrator says "and the next time these two characters met, it was not as friends but as enemies!" which helped make the sluggish pacing more palatable.

[J1M]

Nonsense. If you are told who the killer is at the start of a murder mystery movie it absolutely lowers your enjoyment.

It doesn't, no. I mean, I already read the book. That's the reason I'm even bothering to watch the movie in the first place. Otherwise I wouldn't even know what this **** is or why I should be watching it.

I mean, when the communications go down and the moment of tension builds, is the movie somehow ruined by the fact that you already know they all back it back to Earth, because some of us actually lived through that event, and others have, at least, possibly paid attention to it in school? Does knowing that the Spartans will eventually be betrayed and defeated ruin the movie? No, it does not.

The same is absolutely true of major twists in games, whether they be story/location/mechanic.

Nope. "Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!".

"Science" is either trying to prove an unintuitive result because that stuff is catnip for leftists or they are too stupid to construct a proper study.

Except it's not even unintuitive. The notion of "spoilers" didn't even EXIST before modern mass-media, and may be a Western-specific phenomenon. Japs, for instance, clearly don't believe in that **** because the spoiler is right there in the title.

I published a post on the prestigious magazine known as RPGHQ just above this one that says otherwise. I guess now science can undertake a meta-study!

You know what else the Orient failed to have a notion of before contact with The West? A fork.

I flatly reject the idea that spoilers have not always been understood in The West since at least a day after jokes were invented. As I'm sure you have experienced when someone told the punch line to a joke before the joke itself and that made it less funny. Just because some historian can't find the word spoiler before 1880 or whatever doesn't mean it wasn't a well understood concept.