588 réponses à ce sujet

[Dorrieb]

Blair Brown wrote...
No it doesn't.  He made his own opinion, one that I share, and that is all.  He did not endorse anything else.  To make the conjecture that because he is not going through each post in this thread and saying what you want, which is to tell everyone who posts something against the article that they are wrong, he is endorsing what others say is a bit of a leap.

Then using your made up example to project the future of how people will act and that they learned it from the dev's.... going a bit far.

From 'saying what I want' to 'please don't call people douches and wankers' is more than a bit of a stretch, don't you think?

Blair, context is everything. I have actually read what you and Allan wrote, with care. In itself it's no big deal, a little bit disdainful at worst. In context it is part of a thread in which people have called Richard Cobbett a wanker. In that context, Allan's opinion is that he agrees with those who have called Richard a wanker, although of course he would never do such a thing himself. From that, those people take encouragement.

I don't suppose that either you or Allan are intentionally endorsing such behaviour, but nevertheless that is the message that you're signalling. It isn't possible for you to be a neutral party here. By not discouraging loutish behaviour you encourage it.

As for whether projecting how people will act is going a bit far, I suppose we'll see. It was only a few weeks ago that David Gaider was complaining about the toxic environment on these forums, and he was absolutely right, but if you want them to improve you need to start by setting an example. That is the entirety of my message to Allan and to you. To everyone else, I regret that I brought up the article in the first place. I did it because it is a news item of relevance to the interests of people who read this forum, not as a provocation and certainly not so that you could pour filth all over it.

[Renmiri1]

Dorrieb wrote...

stormhit13 wrote...
Every single opinion journalist on the planet has thicker skin than you're giving them credit for. You might not have the stomach for it, but I assure you that you're defending someone who most certainly would not feel wronged by anything in this thread.

True, Richard is a big boy writer.

But think. In this thread, Richard has been called a hack, an idiot, a douche, a wanker, and worse.

Huh ?

Are we reading the same thread ? 

I saw no one calling the guy a wanker or a douche.  I myself stopped short of calling him a hack because I can't judge his entire work for one particularly poorly written piece. So I limited my criticism to the article per se. Do I think he is an idiot ? Perhaps, but I haven't called him that nor have seen anyone getting personal with the article writer.

You are the one that seems to be taking this very personally, even seeing words that arent in the page. Are you ok ? Having a bad  day ? Is he your boyfriend, father, relative, etc ?

Take a step back and dry your tears, no one is offending him personally we are just pointing flaws in one article he wrote. I'm sure if he listens to criticism he can improve and write better articles from now on 

Modifié par Renmiri1, 13 février 2013 - 12:42 .

[JimboGee]

No more spiders ? what?! theyre like an RPG staple. Ban arachnophobes thats what needs banning. And can I just say Seperated mulitplayer is what I called for. Thankyou and goodnight.

[cJohnOne]

Dorrieb wrote...

stormhit13 wrote...
Every single opinion journalist on the planet has thicker skin than you're giving them credit for. You might not have the stomach for it, but I assure you that you're defending someone who most certainly would not feel wronged by anything in this thread.

True, Richard is a big boy writer.

But think. In this thread, Richard has been called a hack, an idiot, a douche, a wanker, and worse. Does Allan Schumacher endorse talk like that? I'm going to guess that no, he does not. But his response seems to signal that he does. It tells them that he's okay with it, that he is on their side, that their behaviour has his stamp of approval -- his official stamp of approval, because it comes with 'BioWare' on it.

And they love him for it, because it means that 'he is not a corporate drone', he 'tells it like it is', he is not afraid to 'call 'em as he sees 'em' and if that offends you, 'too bad'.

Now flash forward to the release of DA3 and, god forbid, it falls short of fans' expectations and the forums explode like a septic tank in summer. Hundreds of posters are rude and abusive to BioWare and its employees. In vain, moderators try to explain to them that it is okay to express negative opinions, but not by being abusive and disrespectful. Only they don't think they are being abusive, do they? They're only telling it like it is and calling it as they see it, and who taught them that?

That's all the point I wanted to make.

You seem to  have a double standard with respect  to professional writers and rest of us not to be respected steaming masses.  How dare us have an honest opinion.  Or am I the only one who sees it that way.  My response is more like lol than to take you seriously.

[rapscallioness]

Ack, I hate watching an OP cry...

edit: but..she called us Swarming Anusfish...Swarming AnusFish? Lmao!

I'm not really familiar w/the term, but is that a more civilized thing to call ppl than a "Wanker"? If someone had said that Richard came across as a Swarming AnusFish, then that would have been better?

Yesss, I must admit, the phrase does have a certain charm.

Modifié par rapscallioness, 13 février 2013 - 01:35 .

[Dorrieb]

[quote]Renmiri1 wrote...
Huh ?

Are we reading the same thread ? 

I saw no one calling the guy a wanker or a douche.[/quote]

Then allow me to help. Let me show you a bit of what you've had to say since Allan posted his harmless opinion:

[quote]nightscrawl wrote...
I read the "article."... Be critical all you want, you don't have to be an a** about it.[/quote]

There's one. I think I can figure out a**

[quote]nightscrawl wrote...
the author is full of crap (subjective of course)[/quote]

[quote]bleetman wrote...
anyone with any genuine talent for writing left years ago[/quote]

[quote]Renmiri1 wrote...
He wants respect as a professional journalist he should try writing a professinal article[/quote]

[quote]SKRemaks wrote...
Are you actually comparing this hack to J.K. Rowling?[/quote]

[quote]Renmiri1 wrote...
The guy ...doesn't deserve to be called a journalist. Because he isn't[/quote]

[quote]Renmiri1 wrote...
He gets from me the same respect as the average BSN troll. Less even. [/quote]

Prize for creativity:

[quote]billy the squid wrote...
the author drank half a bottle of
whiskey before mashing his face into the keyboard and presenting the
innarticulate mess to the editor.[/quote]

Actually Richard doesn't drink.

[quote]Renmiri1 wrote...
My 14 year old's fanfic is done with more care and research![/quote]

[quote]Renmiri1 wrote...
I already think the article author looks like a total arse.
 [/quote]

[quote]Nomadiac wrote...
I just think he's a douche...  he comes across as an immense wanker...[/quote]

Do you begin to see it?

[llandwynwyn]

>enter thread
>look around
>leave

This game isn't even out and this section is filled with toxic bs.

[JimboGee]

To be honest the article is a mess. And nobody likes journalists...not even journalists. When you present an opinion to someone in whatever format you have to be prepared for the backlash. It's just a bit of name calling whats the big deal ?

[Renmiri1]

Dorrieb wrote...

Wanker ? Douche ? I don't see anyone calling him that. Do You ?

My apologies if I offended your boyfriend but he seems to be big enough to dish insults such as the ones he wrote without basis, on a professional article.

Me I'm just a BSN poison swamp dweller   I apologize for letting the insults get a bit personal, I didn't know he had someone related to him posting here on BSN.  His article is BS but for all I know he must be a marvelous person to inspire such spirited defense. 

Feel better now ?

[Dorrieb]

Renmiri1 wrote...
Wanker ? Douche ? I don't see anyone calling him that. Do You ?

Nomadiac wrote...
I just think he's a douche...  he comes across as an immense wanker...

It was at the bottom of the list.

[Renmiri1]

Dorrieb wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...
Wanker ? Douche ? I don't see anyone calling him that. Do You ?

Nomadiac wrote...
I just think he's a douche...  he comes across as an immense wanker...

It was at the bottom of the list.

I stand corrected.

But seriously, you shouldn't take this personally. You go into someone's house and insult their food / decor and family, you get some people mighty cranky. This is a Dragon Age forum and people here love the game. You post links to a piece that is calling it names, people might get a bit testy.. And some are more polite than otheres. 

I don't think you are being fair blaming Allan for it though. Nutpicking in a user forum is easily done and I can bet with you I can find some very nasty comments on the PC Mag site.

Here on the forum Bioware mods usually block / ban people atacking each other but they have a lot of patience with people who attack the Bioware games. I don't see why they should ban / block people who get a bit carried away defending their games. Look at how many threads you have with people saying DA2 or ME3 are a pile of poo.. If they don't censure those I don't see why they should censure the ones where a bad written article gets eviscerated.

Somehow you are taking the reaction to the article personally. You shouldn't, it is not your fault people disagree with the article or consider it badly researched and written. If you want to help the guy who wrote it, tell him to research the game better before he submits something to print. and to avoid all the name calling. And to clearly mark opinion pieces as opinion. 

[Renmiri1]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Wait a minute. Did you really post a thread promoting an article of someone you are related to? read, giving him hits?

Did that really just happen?

And crying fould when people didn't agree with the article 

Nah, no one knows what OP is to the writer. Several people have asked her / him why she is taking the artcle criticism so personally, and we get no answer. Her / his only regret is to expose the poor article writer to us unwashed heathen who dare not agree with him and point errors in his writing.

Modifié par Renmiri1, 13 février 2013 - 03:39 .

[karushna5]

@dorrieb

I agree they were uncalled for to say those things...but in another thread, I saw Allan defending the article a bit. Saying an opinion against something when others are a certain way is misplaced anger. They can barely defend themselves, often enough, and commonly just avoid the forums when they are personally attacked. Sometimes the devs swoop in, but not all the time. You can hardly expect them to go that distance with everything that gets brought up to this board.

And it does all the time, from voice actors, to the producers, where people will get outraged all around. Gaider is insulted fairly often on the forums, often with no real argument from the devs partly because they are tired from it everywhere. All they would be doing on these forums is cleaning up the hatred if they tried. To expect them to defend even those who are insulting them is very unfair, especially since you are not taking a lesser high road and not insulting either.

It is better to not take things personal, the Internet can be a pretty harsh place, better let it be harsh and take it on the cheek than wade in the muck, eh? At least fight the ones being cruel. Perhaps if the devs were not defending themselves they would say as such like they did in the Twitter thread awhile ago?

[Conduit0]

OP starts thread about opinion piece.
BSN picks the poorly written article apart.
OP gets knickers in a twist and calls entire thread a bunch of "swarming anusfish".
OP then chastises Allan for endorsing name calling.

Internet logic at its finest.

[Dorrieb]

@karushna5

It isn't about censorship or control, it is about BioWare posters setting an example in their own posts.

Look at this thread as a whole, if you have the time. You'll find that comments became vicious after Allan posted what I'm sure he thought was a harmless opinion. Why? Because there were unintended levels in that exchange.

On one level, Zelto's question was 'What did you think of the article?' Which is a perfectly reasonable question. On another level (unintended, Zelto is completely innocent in this), the question being asked is 'Do we have to be respectful, or is it okay to be abusive?'

Again on one level Allan's answer was that he didn't care for it very much, which is a perfectly valid opinion. On another level, however, what he signalled was 'I don't care, knock yourselves out.' It's in the tone of his response, rather than in the words themselves.

And after that, comments became more and more hateful. Why not? Teacher said it was okay. Then he reaffirmed his opinion and there was another jump in viciousness. It's all right there for you to look at if you don't believe me.

I find it very telling that one poster called the article 'a piece of crap (subjectively of course)'. Why add 'subjectively'? Because Allan had expressed displeasure at anyone claiming that anything was 'objectively' this or that, and they did not want him to disapprove. Allan didn't say anything about not being abusive, however, so it isn't against the rules to call it 'a piece of crap' or worse... as long as it's 'subjectively'.

With the right word in the right place a BioWare poster can influence the course of a discussion, and I'm going to credit them with enough sense to know that.

[Nomadiac]

Dorrieb wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...
Wanker ? Douche ? I don't see anyone calling him that. Do You ?

Nomadiac wrote...
I just think he's a douche...  he comes across as an immense wanker...

It was at the bottom of the list.

I did go too far in criticising Richard Corbett, and I apologise. I don't know him or his character, and I shouldn't have posted my initial reaction to the article, though it's all too easy on the internet to post something without actually considering it. 

I still think this is a poorly written article, though. It comes across as lacking in research - Loghain didn't have a beard, the Light/Dark side meter doesn't exist in Dragon Age, and it's already been confirmed that DA3 will have a voiced, human protagonist.

Corbett also writes (and captions the images) in a rather sensationalist manner - perhaps it's part of his job to get attention and clicks, but that doesn't mean that tabloid-style writing is good.

And that 'we' in the title (which is what led to my earlier tirade) really shouldn't be there. It just shouldn't. Richard Corbett doesn't speak for anyone but himself. He may possibly represent PC Gamer's view, but I still think they realise that giving DA2 a 94/100 and then trashing it doesn't give them much credibility, and that Corbett is just writing as an individual.

So I apologise to Richard Corbett (or the metaphorical representation of him that accepts apologies on his behalf), and the OP, for saying that he is a 'douche' and 'comes across as an immense wanker'. I still don't think this is a good article by any means, but I'll refrain from commenting on people personally in the future.

Modifié par Nomadiac, 13 février 2013 - 06:28 .

[Nomadiac]

Dorrieb wrote...

@karushna5

It isn't about censorship or control, it is about BioWare posters setting an example in their own posts.

Look at this thread as a whole, if you have the time. You'll find that comments became vicious after Allan posted what I'm sure he thought was a harmless opinion. Why? Because there were unintended levels in that exchange.

On one level, Zelto's question was 'What did you think of the article?' Which is a perfectly reasonable question. On another level (unintended, Zelto is completely innocent in this), the question being asked is 'Do we have to be respectful, or is it okay to be abusive?'

Again on one level Allan's answer was that he didn't care for it very much, which is a perfectly valid opinion. On another level, however, what he signalled was 'I don't care, knock yourselves out.' It's in the tone of his response, rather than in the words themselves.

And after that, comments became more and more hateful. Why not? Teacher said it was okay. Then he reaffirmed his opinion and there was another jump in viciousness. It's all right there for you to look at if you don't believe me.

I find it very telling that one poster called the article 'a piece of crap (subjectively of course)'. Why add 'subjectively'? Because Allan had expressed displeasure at anyone claiming that anything was 'objectively' this or that, and they did not want him to disapprove. Allan didn't say anything about not being abusive, however, so it isn't against the rules to call it 'a piece of crap' or worse... as long as it's 'subjectively'.

With the right word in the right place a BioWare poster can influence the course of a discussion, and I'm going to credit them with enough sense to know that.

You're wrong about this. Allan didn't influence what I said. If anything, what he said would have moderated it. 

And I never thought I'd see the day when a fan wanted game developers to become PR drones.

Modifié par Nomadiac, 13 février 2013 - 06:33 .

[AmstradHero]

Dorrieb wrote...

Blair Brown wrote...
To make the conjecture that because he is not going through each post in this thread and saying what you want, which is to tell everyone who posts something against the article that they are wrong, he is endorsing what others say is a bit of a leap.

Then using your made up example to project the future of how people will act and that they learned it from the dev's.... going a bit far.

From 'saying what I want' to 'please don't call people douches and wankers' is more than a bit of a stretch, don't you think?

Blair, context is everything. I have actually read what you and Allan wrote, with care. In itself it's no big deal, a little bit disdainful at worst. In context it is part of a thread in which people have called Richard Cobbett a wanker. In that context, Allan's opinion is that he agrees with those who have called Richard a wanker, although of course he would never do such a thing himself. From that, those people take encouragement.

By not discouraging loutish behaviour you encourage it.

Seriously? This isn't a schoolyard for goodness sake.  It's not up to the devs to chide someone everytime they say a bad word. Yes, there are rules of conduct, and I'd agree that those boundaries have been pushed a bit, but suggesting that the devs are condoning the behaviour because they're not publically reprimanding those people is utterly ridiculous. We're adults here. Behave like it. Also, if you can't take the crack that someone made about him being drunk while having written the article as anything more than a joke, then you really need to lighten up. It's called hyperbole for the purpose of amusement.

Furthermore, you can't then continue complaing if you start calling anyone and everyone who has criticised the article part of a group of "swarming anusfish". There are plenty of people here who have raised criticism without resorting to personal attacks like that - so for you to stoop to name calling and then keep on claim foul is disingenuous.

Dorrieb wrote...
To everyone else, I regret that I brought up the article in the first place. I did it because it is a news item of relevance to the interests of people who read this forum, not as a provocation and certainly not so that you could pour filth all over it.

If casting something in a negative light is "pouring flith", then you'd better lump that entire article in the category of "pouring flith" over DAO and DA2, because it it continually casts the game in a negative light, and moreover, does so without a great deal of accuracy or validity, unlike many of the criticisms levelled at the article itself.

Yes, there are some cases where people have gone too far and personally attacked the author, but that doesn't mean that all the criticism raised is invalid.  Conversely, just because some of the criticism raised in the article is valid, that doesn't mean it's not a bad article. It is, for numerous reasons that have been elaborated on in this thread. That doesn't mean that any reasonable person thinks that means that Richard is forever a bad person or a bad journalist who shouldn't have a job - it means he wrote a bad article. The fact that you're defending him and the article so vehemently makes it seem like you have a vested interest.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 13 février 2013 - 06:31 .

[Fredward]

Dorrieb wrote...

Blair Brown wrote...
No it doesn't.  He made his own opinion, one that I share, and that is all.  He did not endorse anything else.  To make the conjecture that because he is not going through each post in this thread and saying what you want, which is to tell everyone who posts something against the article that they are wrong, he is endorsing what others say is a bit of a leap.

Then using your made up example to project the future of how people will act and that they learned it from the dev's.... going a bit far.

From 'saying what I want' to 'please don't call people douches and wankers' is more than a bit of a stretch, don't you think?

Blair, context is everything. I have actually read what you and Allan wrote, with care. In itself it's no big deal, a little bit disdainful at worst. In context it is part of a thread in which people have called Richard Cobbett a wanker. In that context, Allan's opinion is that he agrees with those who have called Richard a wanker, although of course he would never do such a thing himself. From that, those people take encouragement.

I don't suppose that either you or Allan are intentionally endorsing such behaviour, but nevertheless that is the message that you're signalling. It isn't possible for you to be a neutral party here. By not discouraging loutish behaviour you encourage it.

As for whether projecting how people will act is going a bit far, I suppose we'll see. It was only a few weeks ago that David Gaider was complaining about the toxic environment on these forums, and he was absolutely right, but if you want them to improve you need to start by setting an example. That is the entirety of my message to Allan and to you. To everyone else, I regret that I brought up the article in the first place. I did it because it is a news item of relevance to the interests of people who read this forum, not as a provocation and certainly not so that you could pour filth all over it.

Do you want the devs to be completely anodyne? No thanks.

[Kidd]

I just realised that since this is page 14 and OP's complaints about Allan's conduct started on page 7, we've now had half of the thread's worth of posts fighting over it. Can we bury this hatchet already and get back on topic?

[Siegdrifa]

Dorrieb wrote...

Richard Cobbett speaks words of wisdom, and he is also tasty and nutritious.

OP, what bother you is how the article was treated in this thread out of principle or because you seem to have respect for the man and find a voice in his words so you seem to react as if the whole thread is walking without respect on your opinion too ?

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 13 février 2013 - 06:54 .

[Firky]

I jumped into the thread several pages back because the dev comments irked me slightly - the one about it being indistinguishable from fan feedback.

I think because,
a) Some fan feedback can be really good - fans are knowledgeable.
Writing about games can be quite a time consuming and thankless task, generally (even with the money.) It's really nice to be complimented on good writing. (When it's good.)
c) They're obviously employing the guy - the writer of the article - because he has professional qualities they want, which includes all that stuff like making deadlines, knowing the audience etc.
d) People tend to tar all of games commentary with the same brush when, IMO, it's radically different between people, outlets, genres, criteria, kind of pieces, etc etc.

But, that's the "person who writes about games'" perspective. Allan's perspective is the dev's and, if he read it looking for useful feedback, like a dev might do, I'm guessing, then it's probably fairly easy to see that it really wasn't any more useful than all the rest of the fan feedback he's read. It just genuinely wasn't much use to him.

Modifié par Firky, 13 février 2013 - 07:08 .