That describes me. He was going on and on about the Xbox One reveal, and I snarked about how he was a one hit wonder. I've regretted that ever since.That was an interesting watch.
My interaction with Phil was quite short, I sent him a mean tweet for whatever reason and he blocked me. In retrospect, I shouldn't have done that.
That's what I feared you'd say. What role does the consumer play in determining whether a video maker should have free license to maker a video of a dev's game, or whether money/favors should be exchanged?
The dude made Fez. This video brushes that off as a happy accident. Wow.
I think this thread is almost as much of an experiment as the video itself was.
When someone is cast in a positive light, or at least in a way you can relate to you get more positive feedback.
In this thread I see a lot of people saying they never had a problem with him or that they understand him, these are the kinds of things I haven't seen in the standard Phil Fish threads.
My own perception was that he wasn't a bad dude until Marcus Beer said something I completely agreed with, at that point I jumped on the hate bandwagon because I was disappointed with how Phil handled being spoken of negatively by Marcus Beer. Now, sitting here after watching this video I start to think, there really is a lot more to a thought process and most people (including myself) can probably go a long way towards improving their outlook.
More of these kinds of videos please, I want to be a smarter person!
Then you have a selective memory. Speaking for myself, my views of him have been consistent.
Then you have a selective memory. Speaking for myself, my views of him have been consistent.
An absolutely superb video that ignores one very important point: once he developed a revenue-generating audience for his company, Mr. Fish had a responsibility to be famous "correctly" NOT for his audience but for his company and those who were employed by it.
The fact that Mr. Fish simply couldn't grasp that concept indicates either a significant degree of either selfishness or naivete or possibly both.
This.1) Video is pretty good
2) I still don't understand why people hate Phil Fish
1) Video is pretty good
2) I still don't understand why people hate Phil Fish
I share the same opinion on this subject, and hope (I think I heard) YouTube has put something in place for it.Well, to an extent, he is right about it.. if you just flat out record footage with music and put it up.. that's like ripping a music video and putting it up. You shouldn't profit from that as the entire thing required a minimal amount of effort and time for you.
However, if I'm playing a game, recording myself playing the game, and talking about the game over the music from the game as we go on.. I'm putting up EFFORT and TIME of my own. That means that I have done something with something else. It's like reading a book to a camera. I am performing the content and performances are something I have made
Was this video made by Phil Fish himself? Lol, what on earth. It's like a Phil Fish apologist video, although I see the author is attempting to make it into some point about internet fame.
Didn't understand the random last point about Fez being his third indie game, either. Regardless, I never take headlines and news pieces to be the sum total of anyone anyway, and realize the media/forums/blogs like to blow things up. Doesn't mean people can't criticize negative statements someone makes in public though.
I don't want greedy draconian publishers trying to scam my favorite content creators out of the money they get for doing creative work. If you want my money get me to buy your game. It is a literally completely one sided issue.
The big content creators who actively oppose the idea of sharing revenue are motivated by money, it is their job. The big publishers who support the idea of effectively stealing ad revenue from the content creators are motivated by money, they think they are losing money or being devalued by having videos of their thing on Youtube and they want the money they areentitled to. The key difference is that there are fundamental laws and rights that protect creative works. Assuming those laws are ethical, the content creators are undeniably right, and the publishers are undeniably wrong.n't
One is fairly making money off of a creative work, the other is pure fucking greed. You ask what role the consumers play in all this, and although they play a huge roll by providing 100% of the revenue to both the publisher and the content creator, it doesn't really matter, because the content creator is protected by rights and laws. If you try and fuck the content creator by cutting their profits, in the end you are just fucking the consumer. If you seriously want to bend the community over the counter this bad as an indie developer, I truly sincerely hope you never achieve even moderate success, because if you hate your customer you don't deserve a penny, which happens to tie directly into this thread about Phil Fish being an asshole.
Utterly fantastic video, he put how I've felt about Phil Fish for years so much better then I ever could. And then taught me more that I never actually considered!
I'm glad some people who "hated" Phil Fish are considering the argument being made in this video. Not that liking Phil Fish is necessarily "right", but there's certainly more to him and his fame than most people initially consider.
Nah, Phil Fish is a total dickhead, I don't hate the 'concept' of him, I think he's an asshole as a person. Did that come off right? I understood the nickelback thing completely but when he started applying it to fish it flew over my head, I was pretty sure that people hated him a few years back because he was regularly being a vocal idiot, and not because they hated what he 'stood' for or the 'concept' of him. Weird video.
The same thing happened to me with Randy Pitchford from Gearbox Software.That was an interesting watch.
My interaction with Phil was quite short, I sent him a mean tweet for whatever reason and he blocked me. In retrospect, I shouldn't have done that.
Have you met him? How much time spent with him do you think is required to make that judgement?
I think what you mean to say is: "From my limited exposure of Phil Fish from various biased reporting on the internet and from not speaking with him directly I've come to the conclusion that that image of him is a total dickhead". Did that ocme off right?
I'm a little taken aback by this. Are you seriously saying I have to know someone personally in order for me to call them a dick? I'm sorry I didn't grow up with the dude but being a fool on social media and having a vitriol relationship with a business partner while coming off as a narcissist kinda makes you look like a dick. But I'm sure if I took him out to dinner I would find out he's actually a really nice guy who just likes to explode over message boards and tell people to choke on his dick instead of criticizing his work.
This video goes out of the way to point out that he said that Anita Sarkeesian was a "hero". It contrasts this with the fact that he told someone to suck his dick and then to choke on it.
That is a rape joke, whatever way you want to look at it Phil Fish out there on the Internet making rape humour.
I'm a little taken aback by this. Are you seriously saying I have to know someone personally in order for me to call them a dick? I'm sorry I didn't grow up with the dude but being a fool on social media and having a vitriol relationship with a business partner while coming off as a narcissist kinda makes you look like a dick. But I'm sure if I took him out to dinner I would find out he's actually a really nice guy who just likes to explode over message boards and tell people to choke on his dick instead of criticizing his work.
Did you like Fez? Great if you did. You didn't? Oh you can do better?Did that come off right?
You're going in circles, I don't know if you got missed somewhere or if you didn't read all my posts but i'm not talking about his influence or he being famous, I'm talking about a social problem which a part of it is exposed in the documentary.
I'm talking about the lack of tolerance when it comes to famous people and the false premise of freedom of speech and freedom of thought.
It doesn't have anything to do with the amount of people that knows about him but the fact that people knows that he is famous. He could know hundreds of people without being famous and yet no shit storm would have happened, however since people consider him someone "special" he becomes common target and if we add Internet he becomes a easy common target.
And would you mind to explain to me what does this mean:
I'm actually saying that you shouldn't call anyone a dick, regardless of them being it. It's worse if you don't know the person and you don't let them defend themselves. Then it's just vitriol. And that's bad. Internet has too many people spreading this hatred that it's up to all of us to stop it. Call it out when we see it. Sure, think that he's a dick but try not to post it. It just makes things worse for everyone nothing good can come of it.