793 réponses à ce sujet

[Kurokenshi]

The Demonologist wrote...

But didn't he do all that apologizing and explaining back there?

Where's the issue now? 

True he did. But where is all this flaming coming from? Why is it so wrong to ask questions on these forums?

I was under the impression thats what it was designed for?

And some stuff being said here just really gets my nerdrage going.

[The Demonologist]

We're an influence, but not to the extent where we can say "Bioware, do this." and they'll do it.



If we all say "Hey Bioware, we'd love to see this!"



Then we may see it in a slightly different form.



That is influence, to the extent that we inspired whatever it is they added. It isn't to the point where we can freely demand stuff and expect it to be added.



I posit, that whatever supposedly controversial thing we complain about, the more asinine or foaming-at-the-mouth raging we are about it, the -less- likely we are to get it! Just so it's known, I mean.

[The Demonologist]

Kurokenshi wrote...

The Demonologist wrote...

But didn't he do all that apologizing and explaining back there?

Where's the issue now? 

True he did. But where is all this flaming coming from? Why is it so wrong to ask questions on these forums?

I was under the impression thats what it was designed for?

And some stuff being said here just really gets my nerdrage going.

Mine too. I think us gamers also have serious self entitlement issues, but meh.

Want to go burn down some villages with the fiery power of nerdrage conmigo?

[Khavos]

senojones wrote...

And if that same friend walked into your topless breakfast establishment, and started giving you more ideas of how to make your new investment better, and you made the decision to listen, would you still think he has no collaborative effort? Would you deny his influence on making the choice to make this decision when the public asked about it?

If I was that friend, I would punch you in the face.

To respond to your second statement, what do you think this forum is for? Granted the majority of public forums are filled with ignorant people or trolls.

First of all, no, you wouldn't.  You already described yourself as an "experienced gamer."  You're not punching anybody in the face unless it's with a D-pad.

Second of all, if he wanted to spout off ideas, he'd be more than welcome.  Since it's my money that's tied up in the joint, I can implement the ones I like and not implement the ones I don't.  If he suddenly started claiming even a tiny fraction of ownership or responsibility of the enterprise, I'd point out that it's my cash and my work; he doesn't get to make decisions.

When you leave a comment card at a hotel, are you suddenly collaborating with management in running it? 

[Fexelea]

Khavos wrote...

Fexelea wrote...

You are confusing the content of the post with the manner of the post. It is the manner that has been interpreted as condescending.

What about the manner was condescending?  The dictatorship analogy? 

I'm genuinely trying to understand this, by the way.  It simply sounds like a case of the truth hurting, which I find a little bizarre.  

Ok, if you are genuenly trying to understand, then I will do my best to explain the reasons why I think this was an unprofessional post. Take into account that I subscribe to John Reed's argumentative rules.
There are two intellectually-honest debate tactics:

1. revealing errors or omissions in your opponent’s facts

2. revealing errors or omissions in your opponent’s logic

Stanley Woo wrote...

It's kinda funny that this topic
keeps coming up over and over again. People who claim to be old enough
and mature enough to handle sex and nudity in a game seem to believe
that any lack of sex and nudity in the game is a sign of
self-censorship. They generally don't believe that a game can be called
"mature" without explicit sex and/or nudity.

Introducing a word such as "claim" is what could be defined as aggresive questioning of the subject's veracity, and adding "old enough" and "mature enough" implies an acceptable threshold to "handle" sex and nudity. Putting these together, we have an ad-hominem: an attack not onto the claim that the lack of sex is a sign of self-censorship, but instead onto the posters who made the claim. Ad hominems are a big no-no of professionalism, or any repectable debate, to be honest.

Secondly, generalization: Tying the above ad hominem is a further fallacy: generalization. This can also be classified under "Selective Observation". Lumping together a group of people under one unsupported observation, when combined with the previous ad-hominem, makes his argument innapropriate.

Stanley Woo wrote...

I can understand how it must seem to
players who really, really, really want to see HBO- and Showtime-like
sex and nudity in our stories, but that's not what makes our games
great, and ironically, insisting on sex and nudity tends to make people
look immature. Just because you'd like to see
somehing--anything--doesn't mean that we will do it or agree with your
reasons to include/not include it.

and to both sides of the argument, let's please keep the insults out of the discussion. Thank you.

It is indeed funny to see this, as the further use of a generalization for a veiled ad-hominem is quickly followed by a request to avoid insults. It is not intellectual honesty when making claims as to what doing something makes anyone "look like": this is a subjective statement that serves as the delivery for another accusation of the forumite's persona.

Stanley Woo wrote...

You are absolutely correct. It is not our job to parent the child or
determine what content is acceptable or unaceptable for our players.
But on the other hand, it is not your jobe to dictate what
content we include or don't include in our games. Game development is
not a collaborative effort between developers and gamers; it is a
dictatorship, where we alone determine what content goes into our game.
You the player make the choice whether that content is acceptable to
you (and/or your family) or not.

I think explaining why this particular choice of words was unprofessional is redundant. However, in short:"Game development, in itself, is not a dictatorship. Dictatorship development is what Japan used to do, when development teams could be controlled under one person. The "rake" structure is now obsolete, as games require the existance of several artistic, operational and financial leads to make the title work. Even the old-school Japanese tyrants such as Kojima are learning that is not the way to go anymore.

Putting the phrase in context, however, one can understand that the writer intended to declare its authority over the created content. Whilst this is a fair assertion, the word dictatorship is unprofessionally dramatic because of its connotations and PR-wise inadvisable due to the nature of the market. Yes, gamers do not make the games. But they sure buy them, and curtly reminding them of their inability to participate in the creative process is counter-productive to a company that is revamping its social features.

-----

In the end, I do not disagree with the content of the quoted posts. I don't think customers should "demand" their requests be met. However I do think the manner in which the content was expressed left much to be desired and was disrespectful towards those who had the feeling of a polite request instead of a demand.

[Khavos]

Fexelea wrote...

In the end, I do not disagree with the content of the quoted posts. I don't think customers should "demand" their requests be met. However I do think the manner in which the content was expressed left much to be desired and was disrespectful towards those who had the feeling of a polite request instead of a demand.

And we're back to, "He told you the truth in a way you didn't like."

Something tells me that no one's going to come up with a better argument. 

[corebit]

The "dictatorship" description is also used by Ghostcrawler, the lead class balance developer in World of Warcraft in the class role forums in response to complaints. This word is nothing new in game forums.



If you use government analogies, dictatorship (and oligarchy too) is the best fitting term.

It's not a democracy. People don't get to vote on the stuff they want in a game.

It's not anarchy. There is a central control over the game (the devs)



It's really funny seeing people getting twisted and bent out of shape by a simple word. Omg, how fascist of Bioware!

[The Demonologist]

Overthinking it, definitley.



We know Stanley Woo loves us too, roight?



There were bad choices of words here and there, roight?



So I still wonder where the problem is, besides my oh so sensitive skin ever so slightly tarnished by the choice wording.

[Fexelea]

Khavos wrote...

Fexelea wrote...

In the end, I do not disagree with the content of the quoted posts. I don't think customers should "demand" their requests be met. However I do think the manner in which the content was expressed left much to be desired and was disrespectful towards those who had the feeling of a polite request instead of a demand.

And we're back to, "He told you the truth in a way you didn't like."

Something tells me that no one's going to come up with a better argument. 

You asked what was wrong with the manner of his posts, I explained.

Your assertion as to the validity of that argument is irrelevant, as you have no authority over other people's feelings on the matter. You also have no responsibility over those feelings, so I don't see why you insist on discussing this issue by asking for explanations that you then dismiss with a subjective view.

Lastly, ad hominems and generalizations are not "the truth". They are fallacies. So maybe what people are upset about are those.

Modifié par Fexelea, 08 février 2010 - 09:06 .

[senojones]

Khavos wrote...

First of all, no, you wouldn't.  You already described yourself as an "experienced gamer."  You're not punching anybody in the face unless it's with a D-pad.

Second of all, if he wanted to spout off ideas, he'd be more than welcome.  Since it's my money that's tied up in the joint, I can implement the ones I like and not implement the ones I don't.  If he suddenly started claiming even a tiny fraction of ownership or responsibility of the enterprise, I'd point out that it's my cash and my work; he doesn't get to make decisions.

When you leave a comment card at a hotel, are you suddenly collaborating with management in running it? 

I'm not about to get into defending my ability to fight, because thats just retarded.

At what point did I say this friend is claiming ownership or responsibility of your enterprise? I never even said this friend asked for anything or that you had to listen to anything he said, he was only trying to make your enterprise better. He didn't do it for any other reason other than hes your friend, and thats what friends do.

Is it that hard to grasp the concept of respecting your friends ideas that ended up benefiting you?

[Khavos]

Fexelea wrote...

Khavos wrote...

Fexelea wrote...

In the end, I do not disagree with the content of the quoted posts. I don't think customers should "demand" their requests be met. However I do think the manner in which the content was expressed left much to be desired and was disrespectful towards those who had the feeling of a polite request instead of a demand.

And we're back to, "He told you the truth in a way you didn't like."

Something tells me that no one's going to come up with a better argument. 

You asked what was wrong with the manner of his posts, I explained.

Your assertion as to the validity of that argument is irrelevant, as you have no authority over other people's feelings on the matter. You also have no responsibility over those feelings, so I don't see why you insist on discussing this issue by asking for explanations that you then dismiss with a subjective view.

Perhaps you should reread what I quoted.  You wrote it yourself.

You state you do not disagree with what was posted.  You further state you disagree with the manner in which it was posted.

How is, "He told the truth in a way you didn't like" at all inaccurate? 

[jobney]

It's hard to believe that in a game where almost every female has clothing that is painted on top of a nude 3d model that this is even an issue. Not every game that is 18+ needs a nipple. There are many other ways to get your nipple fix. If you need more then Afterlife or Miranda's ****** can offer then just do a Google search.



A lot of recent films had to hold back to get an R rating and not an NC-17 rating. Why? Because over half of all theaters will not show an NC-17 movie. The developers goal is to find the sweet spot that makes the most money. Someone should not have to justify a game to their wife but many do. I know I would have a hard time explaining to my wife that this action RPG with an awesome story just happens to have nudity. I might have the same issue if my wife played Chippendales' solitaire.



You don't want the game play to take a backseat to a story in your local newscast about grown men playing video/computer games with nudity and alien sex. It would be "Hot Coffee" all over again.

[Khavos]

senojones wrote...

I'm not about to get into defending my ability to fight, because thats just retarded.

At what point did I say this friend is claiming ownership or responsibility of your enterprise? I never even said this friend asked for anything or that you had to listen to anything he said, he was only trying to make your enterprise better. He didn't do it for any other reason other than hes your friend, and thats what friends do.

Is it that hard to grasp the concept of respecting your friends ideas that ended up benefiting you?

So if Bioware said, "We decided to implement Idea X, which we liked when we saw it on the forums," you'd be peachy keen and back to believing that you play an important role in game development? 

Sounds like an easy fix. 

[senojones]

corebit wrote...

The "dictatorship" description is also used by Ghostcrawler, the lead class balance developer in World of Warcraft in the class role forums in response to complaints. This word is nothing new in game forums.

If you use government analogies, dictatorship (and oligarchy too) is the best fitting term.
It's not a democracy. People don't get to vote on the stuff they want in a game.
It's not anarchy. There is a central control over the game (the devs)

It's really funny seeing people getting twisted and bent out of shape by a simple word. Omg, how fascist of Bioware!

World of Warcaft is the perfect example of how BAD a game can be and still do so well in terms of numbers. I was apart of the WoW community for a while, and had a lot of experience in the "end-game" as well as talked with a lot of similar players.

I cannot even begin to explain the amount of problems their development team had when it came to balancing their classes, and how retardedly long it took to fix them. If you have any experience in the era when Death Knights came out then you will know exactly what Im talking about.

Ghostcrawler is very unliked in the gaming community, for the exact additude he takes on his responses to the WoW forums, the worst thing Bioware could ever do is actually follow in the footsteps of WoW.

[Fexelea]

Khavos wrote...

Fexelea wrote...

Khavos wrote...

Fexelea wrote...

In the end, I do not disagree with the content of the quoted posts. I don't think customers should "demand" their requests be met. However I do think the manner in which the content was expressed left much to be desired and was disrespectful towards those who had the feeling of a polite request instead of a demand.

And we're back to, "He told you the truth in a way you didn't like."

Something tells me that no one's going to come up with a better argument. 

You asked what was wrong with the manner of his posts, I explained.

Your assertion as to the validity of that argument is irrelevant, as you have no authority over other people's feelings on the matter. You also have no responsibility over those feelings, so I don't see why you insist on discussing this issue by asking for explanations that you then dismiss with a subjective view.

Perhaps you should reread what I quoted.  You wrote it yourself.

You state you do not disagree with what was posted.  You further state you disagree with the manner in which it was posted.

How is, "He told the truth in a way you didn't like" at all inaccurate? 

I am very aware of what you quoted. Maybe you should re-read it yourself, in the context of the post and our previous discussion.

Stanley mixed fact with inflammatory opinion. My agreeing with the fact does not negate the further fact that he included fallacies and persona attacks that were innapropriate. He didn't say the truth in a way that I didn't like. He said some truths and added some untruths, which detracted from his argument as a whole since the focus was shifted by his -maybe unintentional- aggressiveness.

[Khavos]

Fexelea wrote...

I am very aware of what you quoted. Maybe you should re-read it yourself, in the context of the post and our previous discussion.

Stanley mixed fact with inflammatory opinion. My agreeing with the fact does not negate the further fact that he included fallacies and persona attacks that were innapropriate. He didn't say the truth in a way that I didn't like. He said some truths and added some untruths, which detracted from his argument as a whole since the focus was shifted by his -maybe unintentional- aggressiveness.

That's odd, because you quoted several of his posts, and then, at the end, stated that you do not disagree with the content of the quoted posts.

[senojones]

Khavos wrote...

So if Bioware said, "We decided to implement Idea X, which we liked when we saw it on the forums," you'd be peachy keen and back to believing that you play an important role in game development? 

Sounds like an easy fix. 

I can sense your sarcastic intention of that response... but if this idea actually influenced the developers to a direction in a specific area of their game, sure.

Modifié par senojones, 08 février 2010 - 09:26 .

[Khavos]

senojones wrote...

I can sence your sarcastic intention of that response... but if this idea actually influenced the developers to a direction in a specific area of their game, sure.

Ideas do influence them, and they've never said otherwise.  What they've said is that they are the ones who make decisions about what goes into the game and what doesn't, not the players.

I have no idea why that's such a difficult concept to grasp, but apparently a lot of people have a hard time with the notion that hanging out and spitballing on the forums != lead designer. 

[Fexelea]

Khavos wrote...

Fexelea wrote...

I am very aware of what you quoted. Maybe you should re-read it yourself, in the context of the post and our previous discussion.

Stanley mixed fact with inflammatory opinion. My agreeing with the fact does not negate the further fact that he included fallacies and persona attacks that were innapropriate. He didn't say the truth in a way that I didn't like. He said some truths and added some untruths, which detracted from his argument as a whole since the focus was shifted by his -maybe unintentional- aggressiveness.

That's odd, because you quoted several of his posts, and then, at the end, stated that you do not disagree with the content of the quoted posts.

You are misinterpreting my post. By introducing "In the end" at the start of the sentence, I was summing up that, had he sticked to the fact, the "content" of the post was agreeable (I even specified what I agreed to regarding demands). However his manner of delivery, which meant including logical fallacies, was disrespectul. Logical fallacies present facts that are not so, therefore there are untruths in his post by default. My apologies if my writing led you to believe otherwise, I thought it had been clear.

Regardles, you had originally stated that this thread was about Stanley stating that they can ignore feedback. I pointed out that most people seem to be upset about the "condescending" way in which he stated that. You asked what had been "condescending", I explained what of what he wrote could be perceived as aggressive logical fallacies.

So the point of this thread was to call out on innapropriate expression. Those who feel strongly on the matter should be at liberty to pursue further explanations, and we have seen Stanley Woo has accepted he might have misrepresented his argument and is trying to re-cast his thinking. This is good.

If you were, as you said, honestly trying to understand the matter, I believe you should now have a clear picture.

[Khavos]

Fexelea wrote...

So the point of this thread was to call out on innapropriate expression. Those who feel strongly on the matter should be at liberty to pursue further explanations, and we have seen Stanley Woo has accepted he might have misrepresented his argument and is trying to re-cast his thinking. This is good.

Yeah.  That's what he's doing, alright. 

[Fexelea]

Khavos wrote...

Fexelea wrote...

So the point of this thread was to call out on innapropriate expression. Those who feel strongly on the matter should be at liberty to pursue further explanations, and we have seen Stanley Woo has accepted he might have misrepresented his argument and is trying to re-cast his thinking. This is good.

Yeah.  That's what he's doing, alright. 

Indeed

[Khavos]

I already said I thought he was a hero for wading hip-deep into the hurt fee-fees brigade in the first place, but I'd still like him more if he stopped trying to do damage control and just left it at called as he saw it.

[JCmorgado]

Well, Let me give my two Cents!



I do not see the point of cuting The Sex Scenes intensity to almost nothing and have the game

full of Hard language dialogs!



This points that the game is a Mature content game and at the same time lakcs Real Normal sex develoments between Charat if Sex happends, there is no point in making sex a part of a relation ship achievement between two charat, and then just cut the sex scenes to avoid Critics from the costumers or community.



It is a stupid move in my opinion, but it is just my opinion.

[Fexelea]

I think he made a mistake, and I praise his effort to clarify the situation. I do not think this makes him a hero, unless we are going to classify every person who sorts thrugh a potential PR infection as one. But it does take guts to admit to an rectify mistakes, so he has my kudos for that. Hopefully the famous PR lore will stick next time: All you say can and will be used against you. Forget about your emotions. Stick to corporate approved terminology at all times. lol

Modifié par Fexelea, 08 février 2010 - 09:46 .

[SpideyKnight]

Guys, is there anyway to stop picking apart every word the man said? He had some things to say, things you may not like but he's just a dude like the rest of us. Do you really need to try his words at the stake for heresy? It's a bit much. Can we just let the nudity thing go? A developer one day will hook it up when they are ready and when they think it adds artistic merit to their game. Heavy Rain has it, go dogpile on that. Have a feeling it's going to need it.



Games are one of the few mediums where outright nudity doesn't help your product in the same way it does movies. If it did Sabatour wouldn't have bombed. It's highly likely that with as niche as Heavy Rain is, it's not going to do well either. Remember they are running a business here, lighten up and let them run it, they've done a bang up job so far.