Support NeoGAF

[watdaeff4]

People second-guessing and downplaying the amount of work, kind of work, etc that developers do, in addition to being hostile and demeaning does suck and I can empathize with them.


Now I wonder how many of them who are complaining have also been critical or toxic to their local cashier, coffee barista, nurse, policeman, etc, etc.

It's toxic, but I see it unfortunately as part of what culture has turned many into and developers are not isolated in this

 

[Admodieus]

He’s 100% right. And if you’re trying to justify the toxicity for one reason or another (“micro transactions”), you’re part of the problem.

If you don’t like a game or find its business model repulsive, move on. I’m a big Mass Effect fan and was looking forward to Andromeda. The reviews and impressions informed me it’s a game that probably isn’t up to the standard of the first three. Instead of harassing the devs behind it, I simply took it off my wishlist and moved onto other games at the time...you know, like a normal human being would do.

The comment about YouTube personalities influencing younger kids to think this way is definitely worrying.

 

[Shifty]

The guy has a point, though I feel like it would have been better suited to a blog post than a litany of tweets. Also "we this, we that, lay off the ad hom" is a little preachy, OP.

But, on topic, how do you fix an ignorant vocal minority? Trying to spread knowledge and teach is a good start, but if developers are insulating themselves from the conversation like that, who's actually going to get the information out there?

As it stands, the gaming press and YouTube are the medium's primary source of information, the veracity of which varies wildly depending on who you're listening to.

 

[peakish]

I think it's on a case by case basis. I am still upset about changes to Roadhog in Overwatch. Why? I bought the whole game for that guy. Blizzard basically deleted a game I loved. Why wouldn't I be upset and "toxic"?

Or consider Hearthstone. People invest a lot of time and money into that game. I've put a few hundred in. So when decisions are made, I am involved. I can't just walk off and say "well I will just go play something else", because that is walking away from an investment.

Edit: that said, I appreciate the explanatory angle Blizzard has been taking. I just wish they would bring back Roadhog and Dreadsteed.

I think being upset about something is fine, but we all choose how we partake in a discussion about it. In my opinion discussions are too often framed as a fight between developers and players, ignoring why a change or decision is made ("fuck off Blizzard", "idiot developers", "who asked for this"). Most likely it was made because they believe it results in a better game for all or most players, and they weighed pros against cons before going through with it (presumably backed by some data or play tests that the player base does not have access to).

If the discussion is framed like that -- starting out with trying to identify what problem a change attempts to solve and then debating whether it will or if this is the right way to do it, -- the discussion climate can change a lot ("they're trying to solve this, I think this is a bad way to do it"). Since you mention Overwatch and Hearthstone, I remember liking some comments that Harbleu made about the Roadhog change. He didn't just whine about a change that he disliked a lot. Instead, he identified what problem Blizzard was trying to solve (not that difficult, they outright said what it was) but explained that he thought this was a bad way to do it in since it killed a large part of the Hog's identify. Clear, non-toxic feedback. Similarly, Brian Kibler doesn't agree completely with how Blizzard works to balance Hearthstone but he almost always frames his comments with trying to understand some principles behind them, eg. keeping a basic card (war axe) super simple.

I'm not going to pretend that I'm perfect but threads don't go bad by some people slipping up in a discussion that's otherwise made in good faith. Rather, lots of people seem to start out angry or even seek shit out to complain about. Like, I don't have a ton of interest in Lawbreakers and thus simply don't post in threads about it. But open one up right now and the first comment is likely to be made by someone just shitting on it. I imagine that doesn't exactly encourage developers to engage.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

Anyone have a link about that design tricks that got people angry that he mentions in his first tweets ?

People don't know how to differentiate normal here-and-there asset flipping from shovelware, mainly.

Fits into this topic I think. I agree with Randall and Bleszinski both. Nothing bothers and disappoints me more in this industry than the consumers. Not "lazy devs" or "greedy pubs", but obnoxious assholes.

I know of a few choice quotes from Oblivion, but those were from when GAF was getting mad at them for not having "the right art" for Pillars (and made a few choice comments about foreign interns).

He is right. There is just so much the public don't understand (and aren't willing to understand) that it makes any sort of communication pointless. It isn't worth the outrage and general nonsense.

Aren't willing to understand is they key phrase. Most people react in anger if an actual dev dares ruin their worldview of an evil publisher or a lazy developer.

I dunno, isn't like 99% of this due to the fact that game developers don't tell the general gaming public how hard this stuff is? If no one ever spreads the information about how costly it is to implement multiplayer or switch engines, why would you expect the average joe to realize how damn hard/expensive it is?

Then tell me why you literally have videos on Kickstarter about the money aspect, where the first comment is "why are you talking about the money? Why is it important?".

You also have threads on GAF about how devs are lying about the dev costs. IE the Skullgirls thread.

 

[Zarth]

I'm a experienced programmer working on multiplayer and dedicated servers at a major developer/publisher. Just saying that most people won't believe me.

Even folks that know what I do who are friends question me when I tell them how these things work, or how its not always straightforward or simple.

Folks on forums and comments are generally worse. They will not only tell me I have no clue what I am talking about but will then go on to lecture me about how to do the things I've done daily for years.

This is why we are candid with so few, often other developers who actually understand what this stuff takes.

 

[hodgy100]

I'm a experienced programmer working on multiplayer and dedicated servers at a major developer/publisher. Just saying that most people won't believe me.

Even folks that know what I do who are friends question me when I tell them how these things work, or how its not always straightforward or simple.

Folks on forums and comments are generally worse. They will not only tell me I have no clue what I am talking about but will then go on to lecture me about how to do the things I've done daily for years.

This is why we are candid with so few, often other developers who actually understand what this stuff takes.

haha I get this.

I had a friend tell me "you dont know everything about game development" when I was explaining how something is implemented. I never claimed to know everything about game development, but I very much so had an idea on how the topic i was talking about was done.

we (devs and the community) need to split devs as a whole from the individual. its very rare that a singular person is responsible for something you dont like in a game. instead its multiple wrong descisions made over a long period of time by multiple people. Targeting an individual or a group of individuals makes no sense and it wont achieve anything other than make that developer miserable.

Critique is fine. targeted harassment isn't basically.

 

[Risk Breaker]

I'm a experienced programmer working on multiplayer and dedicated servers at a major developer/publisher. Just saying that most people won't believe me.

Even folks that know what I do who are friends question me when I tell them how these things work, or how its not always straightforward or simple.

Folks on forums and comments are generally worse. They will not only tell me I have no clue what I am talking about but will then go on to lecture me about how to do the things I've done daily for years.

This is why we are candid with so few, often other developers who actually understand what this stuff takes.

Same. I work on projects with large multiplayer player bases, and I'd love to talk more about what we do and why do it, but it's pretty much impossible to discuss anything related to development.

I mean, sometimes you can't even show that you're having a good time while working, or taking a small break to relax with some colleagues after work because you'll be called lazy and asked by aren't you working on X feature instead, to put it lightly.

Even in "educated" spaces like GAF, you are often ignored unless you really make a huge thing out of being a AAA dev.

 

[kyser73]

Looking at the current scuttlebutt about Sucker Punch in the Sony WWS thread is another example of how bad discussion can get - repetition of discredited rumours, and a lot if ignorance about how companies & people work.

 

[Raylan Targaryen]

I dunno, isn't like 99% of this due to the fact that game developers don't tell the general gaming public how hard this stuff is? If no one ever spreads the information about how costly it is to implement multiplayer or switch engines, why would you expect the average joe to realize how damn hard/expensive it is?

The people that act like developing is easy probably don’t even know how to use Excel. It was never about a lack of understanding how hard it is, it’s about stfu and do what I want

 

[hodgy100]

The people that act like developing is easy probably don’t even know how to use Excel. It was never about a lack of understanding how hard it is, it’s about stfu and do what I want

That and the Dunning Kruger effect

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

 

[More_Badass]

Same. I work on projects with large multiplayer player bases, and I'd love to talk more about what we do and why do it, but it's pretty much impossible to discuss anything related to development.

I mean, sometimes you can't even show that you're having a good time while working, or taking a small break to relax with some colleagues after work because you'll be called lazy and asked by aren't you working on X feature instead, to put it lightly.

Even in "educated" spaces like GAF, you are often ignored unless you really make a huge thing out of being a AAA dev.

That's sad. There's something so compelling about developers passionately talking about their design process and the mindset behind design. See Tom Francis' videos or GDC talks for good examples. It's part creative process, part puzzle solving and logical problem solving, part psychology. It's wonderful and it's shame that this atmosphere prevents more devs from opening up about their work

At best, you have TIGSource devlogs.

 

[HariKari]

There's an entire apparatus built around developers that involves nothing but praise and never questioning the narrative. Message boards often go negative (and too far) but they serve as a necessary counterpoint to what passes for game industry media these days. Same for youtube. People also don't need to articulate their points perfectly for their feelings about a given thing to be real for them like this shooting feels bad or this map is designed bad. I'm always reminded about netcode complaints and how players are continually told they don't know what they are talking about, yet developers end up focusing attention on improving the netcode, often times greatly benefiting their projects.

A sub-current of negativity surrounding a title usually means a great number of people paid good money for something and had a bad experience, like any other product met with criticism. There are 'haters' that circle nearly every franchise, even on GAF, but they seem to be greatly outnumbered by people who go into things with an open mind. I think Randall is mixing in the lowlifes and obvious trolls with regular, well meaning people. Modern platforms like twitter are definitely signal boosting what is a minority of the community.

Ignoring the GG trolls for a moment, I ultimately feel like a half dozen developers or publishers get deservedly put in the spotlight for every single one that doesn't deserve scrutiny. At least on GAF, the issues that get major traction seem to be worthwhile causes or dealing with ethically questionable actions. Developers and publishers would prefer those conversations to not be a thing, but that's not reasonable. It's important to talk about most of them.

 

[Yopis]

Really cool thread. I don't work daily in game development. For testing I visited a studio that worked on AAA mp portion of a game.

Met alot of devs, and got a restricted tour of offices. Those people are just like any of us. Hard working men and women,who are extremely smart and dedicated.

This was for a publisher, that gets made fun of often here also. Really makes me think twice when I see lazy comments or worse. They treated me well.

Super cool to get knowledge on how development all works.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Personally I disagree with the idea that the fanbase thinks everything is easy so they refuse to talk being unique to games. That happens in every industry. Boss askd you for something, has zero clue abiut the implications of what they are asking vut still underplays it. It's not new. You combat this by having a more open and dynamic dialogue. You don't combat it by saying nothing.

 

[thumb]

There's an entire apparatus built around developers that involves nothing but praise and never questioning the narrative. Message boards often go negative (and too far) but they serve as a necessary counterpoint to what passes for game industry media these days. Same for youtube. People also don't need to articulate their points perfectly for their feelings about a given thing to be real for them like this shooting feels bad or this map is designed bad. I'm always reminded about netcode complaints and how players are continually told they don't know what they are talking about, yet developers end up focusing attention on improving the netcode, often times greatly benefiting their projects.

I think you highlight an important issue: while it's true that toxicity, abuse, and so on is inexcusable, it is also true that gamers have almost no one to hold the industry's feet to the fire. Games media is largely complacent, and seems extremely hesitant to push back on developers and publishers. Who do we really have that's willing to call things out? Perhaps Jim Sterling, who else? I want to emphasize again that I don't think this near-vacuum of gutsy journalism excuses abuse, but I do think it adds fuel to the fire and contributes to a sense of being unheard.

And expecting technical acumen from your critics is too much, as you note. But I do think the industry could do more to educate enthusiasts about how games are made. I don't think doing so will "solve" the issue, but it needs to be part of the solution.

 

[More_Badass]

And expecting technical acumen from your critics is too much, as you note. But I do think the industry could do more to educate enthusiasts about how games are made. I don't think doing so will "solve" the issue, but it needs to be part of the solution.

It's hard to educate if people don't want to learn

And devs have been trying to educate for years. There are tons, tons of resources that explain and present game dev on a layperson level. Articles, dozens of dev blogs, talks and channels and tutorials and featurettes

 

[Venfayth]

Personally I disagree with the idea that the fanbase thinks everything is easy so they refuse to talk being unique to games. That happens in every industry. Boss askd you for something, has zero clue abiut the implications of what they are asking vut still underplays it. It's not new. You combat this by having a more open and dynamic dialogue. You don't combat it by saying nothing.

What do you think about the part where he talks about being harassed by scores of internet trolls (or just assholes) when he does speak out?

 

[thumb]

It's hard to educate if people don't want to learn

And devs have been trying to educate for years. There are tons, tons of resources that explain and present game dev on a layperson level

I'm thinking more on a micro-scale. For example, individual community managers, posting on their respective forums or reddit, breaking down what goes into changing a specific thing in their game. I think this sort of educational material is more likely to be read than a more generalized resource.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

There's an entire apparatus built around developers that involves nothing but praise and never questioning the narrative. Message boards often go negative (and too far) but they serve as a necessary counterpoint to what passes for game industry media these days. Same for youtube. People also don't need to articulate their points perfectly for their feelings about a given thing to be real for them like this shooting feels bad or this map is designed bad. I'm always reminded about netcode complaints and how players are continually told they don't know what they are talking about, yet developers end up focusing attention on improving the netcode, often times greatly benefiting their projects.

A sub-current of negativity surrounding a title usually means a great number of people paid good money for something and had a bad experience, like any other product met with criticism. There are 'haters' that circle nearly every franchise, even on GAF, but they seem to be greatly outnumbered by people who go into things with an open mind. I think Randall is mixing in the lowlifes and obvious trolls with regular, well meaning people. Modern platforms like twitter are definitely signal boosting what is a minority of the community.

Ignoring the GG trolls for a moment, I ultimately feel like a half dozen developers or publishers get deservedly put in the spotlight for every single one that doesn't deserve scrutiny. At least on GAF, the issues that get major traction seem to be worthwhile causes or dealing with ethically questionable actions. Developers and publishers would prefer those conversations to not be a thing, but that's not reasonable. It's important to talk about most of them.

This is my view also.

It's completely deplorable that there are utter psychos who bury themselves in the gaming community and perpetrate unthinkable bullshit against innocent people within the games development sphere.

Unfortunately, however, developers aren't going to win much sympathy if they continue to keep lumping in these wackos with perfectly sensible players who may want to express genuine criticisms about an experience with a game they paid for.

Broad sweeping statements that address all gamers and label them purely on the basis of the small community of genuine nutters don't really help anyone.

Perfectly well meaning consumers of videogames do often self-identify as gamers. So claiming all gamers as toxic, even if that's not your actual intent, communicates that you're happy to hold responsible both the well-meaning gamers as well as those with mal-intent for the actions of the latter.

I entirely agree with the premise of the tweets from the developer in the OP and I agree that more needs to be done to root out toxic individuals and bring them to account for their indiscretions, but generalizations like this neither help nor further that cause.

 

[Pixieking]

There's an entire apparatus built around developers that involves nothing but praise and never questioning the narrative. Message boards often go negative (and too far) but they serve as a necessary counterpoint to what passes for game industry media these days. Same for youtube.People also don't need to articulate their points perfectly for their feelings about a given thing to be real for them like this shooting feels bad or this map is designed bad.

It's trite, but two wrongs don't make a right. A positive-leaning press should not mean that the community is allowed to be toxic, especially when that toxicity is scattershot - lazy devs, evil publishers, SJWs ruining games. Consumers absolutely need to start articulating points well, not just because it's respectful, but because then everyone wins - devs/pubs aren't shouted at, they learn what consumers want, and the toxicity level lowers. I don't work in the industry, but I turn off when I read any comment - anywhere - that a) involves swearing, b) involves stereotyping, and c) is just "make it better". The consumers who take part in the back-and-forth with developers that being in a community is - implicitly or explicitly - need to raise their game. They need to be more intelligent, more knowledgable, more articulate, less angry, and less prone to irrational outbursts.

I'm always reminded about netcode complaints and how players are continually told they don't know what they are talking about, yet developers end up focusing attention on improving the netcode, often times greatly benefiting their projects.

A (complaints) and B (satisfactory resolution) aren't necessarily connected here.

(All this generally speaking, of course).

 

[Stopdoor]

There's an entire apparatus built around developers that involves nothing but praise and never questioning the narrative.

This is such a bizarre opening line that it's hard for me to take the rest of your post seriously. An entire apparatus. Around... every developer? What even is the "narrative"? It's such a bizarre way to talk about a creative project.

Devs want feedback, the ultimate gist of this thread is that people should be less hostile about it. Like if I was dev I'd doubt I'd be interested in talking to you when you're accusing me of being part of an apparatus and narrative. Why put myself through that when I get the same but less crazy sounding feedback from nicer people?

 

[SeeNoWeevil]

There's a lot of jealousy from gamers towards developers. Obviously it's seen as a pretty intellectual and desirable role. The assumption seems to be that they're all rolling around in dirty pots of cash, Scrooge McDuck style after scamming all the poor helpless gamers with some lazy loot boxes and evil DLC. Plenty of YouTubers make good money parroting this bile back at gamers and re-enforcing the toxic attitude. People who play videogames or talk about videogames seem to think they're actually *in* the industry when clearly they know absolutely nothing about modern development. Some of those are very popular here and criticism of them usually gets you called out as a shill/corporate ballwasher.

 

[Sini]

Lot of people seem to think publisher=developer here, ugh.

 

[More_Badass]

This is my view also.

It's completely deplorable that there are utter psychos who bury themselves in the gaming community and perpetrate unthinkable bullshit against innocent people within the games development sphere.

Unfortunately, however, developers aren't going to win much sympathy if they continue to keep lumping in these wackos with perfectly sensible players who may want to express genuine criticisms about an experience with a game they paid for.

Broad sweeping statements that address all gamers and label them purely on the basis of the small community of genuine nutters don't really help anyone.

Perfectly well meaning consumers of videogames do often self-identify as gamers. So claiming all gamers as toxic, even if that's not your actual intent, communicates that you're happy to hold responsible both the well-meaning gamers as well as those with mal-intent for the actions of the latter.

I entirely agree with the premise of the tweets from the developer in the OP and I agree that more needs to be done to root out toxic individuals and bring them to account for their indiscretions, but generalizations like this neither help nor further that cause.

I don't get that view at all? I don't see it as generalizing, but rather that talking to those "perfectly well meaning consumers of videogames" opens you up to relentless harassment from the crazy toxic mob. It's like trying to calmly talk to someone on the side in the midst of a riot; well yes, i'd love to have a meaningful chat with you patient sir but the bottles are already flying this way as we speak

 

[Pixieking]

Lot of people seem to think developer=publisher here, ugh.

Yup. It's like people just, like... don't know anything about the industry they consume, but want to say something about it anyways.

It's almost like this is an issue we all need to examine, especially in the context of this thread.

 

[thumb]

This is such a bizarre opening line that it's hard for me to take the rest of your post seriously. An entire apparatus. Around... every developer? What even is the "narrative"? It's such a bizarre way to talk about a creative project.

Devs want feedback, the ultimate gist of this thread is that people should be less hostile about it. Like if I was dev I'd doubt I'd be interested in talking to you when you're accusing me of being part of an apparatus and narrative. Why put myself through that when I get the same but less crazy sounding feedback from nicer people?

The statement could have been qualified better (e.g., larger development houses), but I think the apparatus being addressed is marketing, PR, and community management. And to a lesser extent, a complacent games press. "Narrative" I took to mean focused on talking points and a general refusal to go off-script in interviews to answer legitimate issues.

The above problems are necessarily less for smaller developers.

 

[Pixieking]

Edit: nevermind. Not getting into this one.

 

[SeeNoWeevil]

Lot of people seem to think publisher=developer here, ugh.

Criticism is usually aimed at the collective under the umbrella of 'dev', which I think is what the original tweet is aimed at.

 

[PrimeBeef]

Reminds me of the idiots that cry broken promises and cut content after Blizzard shows stuff they are working on that a year or more later got changed or removed.

 

[Venfayth]

Venfayth's guide to games criticism:

1) Criticize the game however you want
2) Don't criticize the people who made the game because you know nothing about them or what they know about the game. If there's a problem with the game, they probably know already, they made the game to begin with.

Note: 2 does not mean 1 shouldn't happen. 1 is super important no matter what. It just means don't be a fucking dickwad.

 

[HariKari]

I don't get that view at all? I don't see it as generalizing, but rather that talking to those "perfectly well meaning consumers of videogames" opens you up to relentless harassment from the crazy toxic mob. It's like trying to calmly talk to someone on the side in the midst of a riot; well yes, i'd love to have a meaningful chat with you patient sir but the bottles are already flying this way as we speak

I think the approach matters a great deal here. A coordinated effort like Blizzard's excellent Overwatch dev updates communicates a large amount of information in an easy to digest manner, whereas a single dev trying to address things on twitter in an ad hoc manner is likely to get dogpiled. I see a lot of good engagement by community managers on subreddits in particular, and it helps when they come armed with technical information to back up their statements. "We'd like to, but we'd have to tear down two other systems to do so, which means delaying content..." Suddenly players are a lot more reasonable with their asks. It doesn't stop some issues from building up or boiling over, but it helps a great deal.

Being closed off completely seems like the least desirable approach.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

It's hard to educate if people don't want to learn

And devs have been trying to educate for years. There are tons, tons of resources that explain and present game dev on a layperson level. Articles, dozens of dev blogs, talks and channels and tutorials and featurettes

Some gamers don't want to learn. Sure. Some do though.

Developers on the other hand aren't obliged to explain to gamers the process of making videogames, and even without the toxicity in the community, sometimes its just wiser to not try to explain decisions with a very technical basis to uninformed people who will struggle to understand it.

As developers, really the onus is on them to decide what they respond to and how they respond. In some cases, a technical explanation might help critics/gamers better understand why an issue exists the way it does. In others, it might not even make a difference. Does that mean that devs should never ever offer a technical explanation? I would say no, but then I'm not a recipient of the kinds of abuse that devs see from assholes within the online community.

The issue I see though, is that most well-meaning gamers with a genuine concern over an issue in a game, might well be perfectly satisfied with a technical explanation given by a dev, such that they don't respond; in which case the only responses said dev would be more likely to see are those from less-informed 'Dunning-Kruger'-suffering assholes, who think they know better than the devs. So it could simply be a matter of the age-old issue of producers not hearing back from satisfied customers, thus all the producer seems to see are the dissatisfied one's complaints; which then color one's perspective.

 

[The Hermit]

I can't believe I just read this today. This is very true.

People criticism the tricks devs to run some games shocked me to the core. People actually believe it's a magical stuff and when it is revealed it's just some lines of codes some go haywire.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

I think the approach matters a great deal here. A coordinated effort like Blizzard's excellent Overwatch dev updates communicates a large amount of information in an easy to digest manner, whereas a single dev trying to address things on twitter in an ad hoc manner is likely to get dogpiled. I see a lot of good engagement by community managers on subreddits in particular, and it helps when they come armed with technical information to back up their statements. "We'd like to, but we'd have to tear down two other systems to do so, which means delaying content..." Suddenly players are a lot more reasonable with their asks. It doesn't stop some issues from building up or boiling over, but it helps a great deal.

Being closed off completely seems like the least desirable approach.

I agree completely. You answered this far more eloquently than I was going to.

 

[SeeNoWeevil]

I think the problem is gamers get totally screwed over by publisher intentions to maximise profits

Only the stupid ones who don't put any effort into their purchasing decisions. The only time I've felt 'screwed over' was on the odd occasion I impulse bought a game (usually cheap games) without doing any/much research and that was more a feeling of being annoyed with myself for being so impulsive.

 

[Pixieking]

Being closed off completely seems like the least desirable approach.

Really?

I mean, really?

Death Threats Follow Small Call Of Duty Tweak

The Nasty Twitter Hate Sent To the Former Face of Call of Duty

Robert Bowling was paid, in part, to Tweet and keep Call of Duty gamers informed about what was going on. Most of the time he told them about new content, tweaks to the game and fielded fan questions.

 

[StrategyFan]

most game devs just do production

the designs are almost always awful and i respect the opinions of people who play games well (aka whiners on the internet) more than people who produce games well

that being said, games are way too expensive too make. the reason designs suck is that the standard game development process doesn't have room to polish it

 

[Gotdatmoney]

What do you think about the part where he talks about being harassed by scores of internet trolls (or just assholes) when he does speak out?

Obviously that aspect is more in line with media and ebthusiast products but it still isn't unique to games. You can't expect you enthusiest base to ever understand the difficulty of software development if you never take steps to actually communicate or let them in. Then what are you complaining about really? They're mean to us about stuff they dont know and we really havent made a collective effort to inform about?

The stuff he is saying in itself is communicated through twitter. You think Twitter is where people come to get informed?

 

[Pixieking]

I would argue it's on the part of the consumer to be respectful, intelligent and articulate before we're shown how the sausage is made, not after. Show the people who produce the games we're actually adults... Or at least capable of adult conversation.

Or, to put it another way - pretend you're a teacher. Are you going to sit and happily (try to) teach 14 year olds about mathematics and physics when they're screaming abuse at you and flinging shit at the walls? Or are you going to wait for them to behave themselves and respect you before making a start?

Edit:

The stuff he is saying in itself is communicated through twitter. You think Twitter is where people come to get informed?

Nowadays, yes. So much information flows through Twiter first - from Trump's tweets and politics, to news about North Korean Nuclear tests - that it is a news source just as much as a place to chat, post cat gifs or throw abuse at someone.

 

[HariKari]

Really?

I mean, really?

Having a twitter presence on what is essentially an unregulated wasteland seems to be inviting trouble. People getting harassed on twitter also isn't unique to the games industry, sadly. I specifically said the approach matters and used dev vlogs as well as paid community managers (who actively go out into the community rather than waiting for the worst to come to them) as an example. A one on one twitter exchange risks nothing on the part of the troll. If you post as part of a subreddit or community (just like GAF), that community is usually able to police itself to some degree. The avenue chosen to communicate with the players matters.

I also don't think a handful of crazy people out of the millions of COD players harassing someone on twitter over patch notes like that is indicative of that community or gaming as a whole. It's a great example of Twitter's failures as a platform, though.

 

[Venfayth]

Obviously that aspect is more in line with media and ebthusiast products but it still isn't unique to games. You can't expect you enthusiest base to ever understand the difficulty of software development if you never take steps to actually communicate or let them in. Then what are you complaining about really? They're mean to us about stuff they dont know and we really havent made a collective effort to inform about?

The stuff he is saying in itself is communicated through twitter. You think Twitter is where people come to get informed?

I'm not sure if you're asking me but dev twitters are commonly sourced in news articles and on gaming forums like this one and Reddit.

Do you really think that the trolls and harassment would stop if devs were nice and open enough? It seems like his concern is not with reasonable gamers with reasonable criticisms and concerns about game development, it's with trolls and assholes who call him and other devs lazy whenever they see them not working on the particular thing they want at any given moment.

 

[Sini]

Only the stupid ones who don't put any effort into their purchasing decisions. The only time I've felt 'screwed over' was on the odd occasion I impulse bought a game (usually cheap games) without doing any/much research and that was more a feeling of being annoyed with myself for being so impulsive.

Gamers are generally very stupid indeed, but publishers exploiting them isn't really justifiable by that.

 

[Pixieking]

The more you open yourself to the community, the more the chances of being abused. Twitter is a crappy platform - way too unregulated - but every publisher/developer has to have one, in order to be part of the community. Reddit is absolute gutter trash, it's just it's cleaned-up faster than a lot of places. Same with Steam forums. Same with Gaf - Lord, just a few posts above this there's an incredibly ignorant post that's essentially just "lazy devs" - and it's still a question of "Why open up yourself and your employees to the possibility of the abuse?"

 

[Venfayth]

I also don't think a handful of crazy people out of the millions of COD players harassing someone on twitter over patch notes like that is indicative of that community or gaming as a whole. It's a great example of Twitter's failures as a platform, though.

This seems like a really cheap argument in the face of the reply to that situation from the dev:

https://twitter.com/DavidVonderhaar/status/359662272500609026

It may not be "indicative of that community or gaming as a whole" but it's not an insignificant problem, unless you're willing to tell devs to deal with it - which I think is particularly crass.

Late edit:

Also, to be clear, I'm just saying that we should avoid trying to minimize the impact of shitty trolls while in the same breath blaming devs for using twitter.

I'm all for people using alternate forms of communication if it helps them talk about their game safely.

 

[SeeNoWeevil]

Gamers are generally very stupid indeed, but publishers exploiting them isn't really justifiable by that.

Selling a shitty luxury product isn't exploitation. There are a million and one sources to find out everything about a game before you purchase it. Reviews, videos, lets plays, sometimes demos. It's not hard to avoid shitty games, at all. Sure, if they make shitty changes *after* people have purchased it then that's a different matter entirely.

 

[Schnozberry]

That and the Dunning Kruger effect

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

Yep. People are often too ignorant to know how stupid they are. Hold my beer.

 

[Sini]

Selling a shitty luxury product isn't exploitation. There are a million and one sources to find out everything about a game before you purchase it. Reviews, videos, lets plays, sometimes demos. It's not hard to avoid shitty games, at all. Sure, if they make shitty changes *after* people have purchased it then that's a different matter entirely.

Even making people who normally wouldn't gamble addicted to it doesn't count as exploitation? Huh?

 

[Venfayth]

Even making people who normally wouldn't gamble addicted to it doesn't count as exploitation? Huh?

Not sure if we're veering off-topic here, but what games are creating addicts?

 

[NeonBlack]

Can't the same be said about all entertainment?
Transformers and the DC Universe movies are ridiculed all the time.

Lose a football game/join another team and be called all types of names by fans.

Somebody doesn't like the music you make? Utter trash.

Toxicity isn't good but other communities aren't exactly saints.