Game devs starting to call out some of the *crazy* vitriol

[alanschu]

I notice this in more than just gaming (I saw some articles about geek culture as well, and how people can be VERY exclusive in their views with things like cosplay = consent type stuff, and fake geek girl), but this article I came across is in response to some balance changes in Black Ops 2.

 

 

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/07/24/httpwww-pcgamer-com20130724cod-developer-receives-death-threats-following-blops-2-gun-tweaksutm_sourcetwutm_mediumemputm_campaignuk/

 

Basically, you get some level of death threats because of some game balance.  Now, I think it's reasonable safe to assume that the threat isn't genuine, and might even just be someone trolling up a storm.

 

I think there's undoubtedly some level of "well that's the internet for you" but, to me it does seem that there's a bit more outspokenness about these types of things (extending beyond just gaming).

 

I've been told I need to have a thicker skin (especially when I first got started) as it comes with the territory of being a dev.  I think I have gotten better, although still have my moments where I get snappy and jaded.  At the same time, is it all only on me?  I remember being told that my Mom should have aborted me so that DAO would have had some competent QA.  I gave him points for creativity....

 

 

I never have agreed with the idea of "it's the internet, not much you can do about it" although admittedly had zero clue what could be done to do about it.  In the geek culture article I read, they had suggested the idea that frankly, the culture needs to self-police more aggressively.  It's probably the best way to do so, so maybe calling out "these guys are being stupid" helps paint a light?  Does it just make the devs seem like whiners?  Should he just "suck it up?" (If so, why?  Note, I *will* follow up with further questions if someone does feel this way)  I think forums tend to self-police relatively well.  They tend to have a hegemony that will push out overly contrary posts, doubly so if they are hostile.

[Malcador]

PC Gamer fell short with 'too horrible to quote' to be honest, I'd like to see what nasty things people wrote to him to judge. I suppose insults stating one should DIAF or something like that shouldn't probably be made, so that is on the fans to be a little less vitriolic. If it's just them stating the developers are clueless or stupid or so on, the developers should just harden up.

 

Forums self policing, well, heh, you can end up with a groupthink that way pretty easily.

[alanschu]

 

 

Forums self policing, well, heh, you can end up with a groupthink that way pretty easily.

 

Agreed.  Forums often become insular because of this.  It's more just an example of self-policing, less so as to whether or not it's holistically only appropriate self-policing.

 

 

I actually prefer people to just say "You made bad decisions that I think were wrong."  I definitely have my trigger points (I hate being called lazy) and I try to understand that when someone says I'm lazy, they are probably more meaning "You made a bad decision that I think was wrong."

 

 

 

 

PC Gamer fell short with 'too horrible to quote' to be honest, I'd like to see what nasty things people wrote to him to judge.

 

It's a degree of shaming, which I definitely feel can be used very inappropriately and it can be unproductive.  I do agree, however, if it's "FYAD" versus "This was dumb" that's different.

[Tale]

The ideal is really that all commentary is some sort of actionable signal that gives a clear idea of concerns or problems. ("The balance is unfair because of X and Y."

 

The realistic ideal is that people express themselves in ways that are understandable enough that, at the very least, conveys how they feel about things, whether it's good or bad, and the developers end up struggling to puzzle out why. ("This new change makes things unfun." "This game sucks.")

 

The intolerable BS is people having trouble controlling themselves to such a degree that they try to cause emotional harm to other human beings.

 

I can understand people who think that perhaps the developers have themselves a malicious or negligent attitude, and that may spur harder to control emotions and confrontational actions ("your stupid and should be out of a job."). But death threats and mockery don't even contribute to that ("DIAF, fatty"). It crosses that line beyond benefit of the doubt.

[Malcador]

Need some one that's pro-abusive comments, else this thread is going to get mighty boring.

[Tale]

Need some one that's pro-abusive comments, else this thread is going to get mighty boring.

Nah, let's do this instead.

 

What is the appropriate response to abuse?

[Amentep]

 

Need some one that's pro-abusive comments, else this thread is going to get mighty boring.

Nah, let's do this instead.

 

What is the appropriate response to abuse?

 

By whom? The target of the abuse or the community that houses the abuser? Or both?

Edited July 24, 2013 by Amentep

[Tale]

I was thinking target.

 

Answer both, I'm interested.

[Malcador]

Nah, let's do this instead.

 

What is the appropriate response to abuse?

For the target, equal abuse back, I'd say.

[Amentep]

IMO, the Target has to take the high road. Someone who hurls anonymous abuse is looking to have their target either capitulate ("we're sorry!") or to get them to react back ("Why you little..."). EDIT - and as Deathdealer mentioned if illegal activity is involved of course authorities have to be notified. Back when I was on an unmoderated group, there was a poster who took to calling anyone who disagreed with him a child molester to try to cow people from disagreeing with him. He was sued for libel and booted by his ISP.

 

The community shouldn't tolerate the member's behavior and should be clear on that. If its a moderated community than appropriate actions should be taken. If its unmoderated, the community needs to cut the person out; they can't go "oh, but s/he sometimes posts good stuff" because you're only encouraging the abuse hurler to continue on their path.

 

IMO.

Edited July 24, 2013 by Amentep

[Guest Slinky]

I don't understand the point of this. Of course devs, or anyone else shouldn't have to suck anything up. If I'd get a death threat, in any form or for any reason, I'd call the cops and I dont expect anything less from others.

 

The world is full of nutjobs who might lose it if they see a wrong shaped cloud in the sky, I wouldnt take any chances.

[Malcador]

Well for one who knows what was said to upset him so, could be 'die in a fire for nerfing my gun you moron!' or 'I am going to kill you for this!'. First one, in an online context, is shrug worthy to me, the latter has more room to warrant further action.

 

That's a pretty funny story though, Amentep. Good revenge on him

[alanschu]

 

Nah, let's do this instead.

 

What is the appropriate response to abuse?

For the target, equal abuse back, I'd say.

 

 

I don't know.

 

I have been snappy back to people that I think are being unreasonable.  Sometimes it may be like "Oh that Allan guy is pretty witty" but other times I'm sure it comes across as "That's kind of a **** response.... That Allan guy shouldn't let people get to him."

 

 

I'd probably be more inclined to agree with Amentep, in that validating the attacking by responding could very well be counterproductive.  Feeding the trolls and all that.

 

Having said that, as an observer I do find Rockstar's responses to be quite entertaining sometimes XD.

[Tale]

I'm of two minds. Aaryn Flynn's now infamous twitter response is not one I can condemn. But it probably didn't help the situation. There may have been no way to help that situation.

[Malcador]

I'm of two minds. Aaryn Flynn's now infamous twitter response is not one I can condemn. But it probably didn't help the situation. There may have been no way to help that situation.

Certainly could have been more cutting. "Whatever, ****ing moron" is pretty weak.

[alanschu]

Yeah, as a person I can understand Aaryn's response.  If I had seen the situation unraveling live, I can't say I wouldn't have responded similarly.  Having said that, it certainly added more fuel to the fire, especially in the eyes of those that feed off the reaction (who then try to egg on further responses).

 

 

I have to admit that while 90% of me or so goes "Whoa police, you went way too far" with the kid that went to a jail for his comments after a LOL game, there was like 10% skoodenfroody because of it.  (I find LOL, due to its sheer size, has no shortage of people that make me want to finish work on my internet punching device....)

[alanschu]

 

I'm of two minds. Aaryn Flynn's now infamous twitter response is not one I can condemn. But it probably didn't help the situation. There may have been no way to help that situation.

Certainly could have been more cutting. "Whatever, ****ing moron" is pretty weak.

 

 

If I recall, Hepler's initial responses were a bit more directly antagonistic, although highly criticized at a lot of places where I saw, as it started to play on stereotypes of many male gamers and was basically seen by many as an insulting remark towards gamers in general.

 

It definitely led to a defensive response and further antagonism in general.  In this case, defending oneself may have led to further scrutiny, to the point where the option left was "remove myself from social media" (which I think is bad for developer-customer interaction).

[Malcador]

Hm, her response was also kind of unimpressive, but can't think of anything better to strike back with.

 

I still think developers shouldn't waste their time on social media like twitter or something similar to interact with their customers. Forums are good enough for that, no ?

[Hurlshort]

It is now part of our curriculum in many school districts to try and teach kids not to be internet dickwads.  We call it digital citizenship.  I have no clue if it will be effective, I think I can do a pretty good job talking with kids about this stuff since I've been dealing with you guys for so long but a lot of my coworkers are clueless.

[HoonDing]

First world problems.

[alanschu]

How do forums differ from something like twitter?  My default action on the forums when I am angry is to disengage, regardless (it explains my breaks on even this forum from time to time).

 

 

I actually think more diverse groups and types of fandom interact with content creators via social media than they do with forums.  Forums are still for the decidedly hardcore, IMO.  You have to integrate more directly with the whole culture (which may suffer from Group Think) of the board.

 

On twitter, I can literally reply directly to the content creator without much filters and it's pretty easy for him or her to see said response.  I actually just shared a brief exchange with Jake Solomon.  It can be hard keeping track of all the responses to a post of mine on the BSN, or even this forum.

 

 

 

 

First world problems.

 

On the part of both sides, really.

Edited July 24, 2013 by alanschu

[Malcador]

It is now part of our curriculum in many school districts to try and teach kids not to be internet dickwads.  We call it digital citizenship.  I have no clue if it will be effective, I think I can do a pretty good job talking with kids about this stuff since I've been dealing with you guys for so long but a lot of my coworkers are clueless.

Hah, seriously ?

 

Well for a forum, you can write more, is easy to moderate and I imagine it's not as naggy as Twitter can be for developers (though I assume this is notifying them on a phone in this case). Probably reduced contact as well, many people have Twitter accounts but not many will bother registering with a forum to blather out some abuse to a developer.

 

Essentially is easier to be detached from the consumer.

[Raithe]

My default on the internet is my default in the "real world".  Wheaton's Law. Don't be a ****.

[Zoraptor]

Need some one that's pro-abusive comments, else this thread is going to get mighty boring.

I'll step up to the plate. But I'll also shift the goalposts a bit to an easier target...

 

The subject of abuse has to be seen in a certain amount of context. It's a given that it's creepy, unpleasant and that most people who say such stuff wouldn't if they were face to face rather than online, or don't really mean what they say. If they do, they're in the genuinely crazy bracket.

 

But, to a large extent the obsessive fan who is going to be upset by nerfing is exactly who the games companies are primarily targeting. They want people to spend money on unlocks, on selling/ buying items, to invest their time and more importantly their money into their games. They don't- by and large- care much about the rampant abuse that happens in voice chat and the like, only when it spills over into their real world. So on one hand they're saying that people should spend time in the game, maybe spend extra real money to buy stuff, care about it, refine your skills, be an arse online to your fellow gamers. On the other, they're saying that they have the right to arbitrarily reduce the effectiveness of your tactics and equipment, including stuff you may have bought with real money; and shouldn't post "I'm going to asterisking kill you you asterisk, gonna asterisk your dog and your mum too!"* to a dev despite not (generally) having any problem with someone saying it in game to another player.

 

To reiterate, I'm not defending the abuse, at best it's either childish or trolling, at worst it's the symptom of a disturbed individual. But unique snowflake provisions for those who work at games companies is a bit... precious, if it isn't consistently applied and if you are actually targeting the obsessives in the first place.

 

(I see incidents like the Hepler one as fundamentally different. I didn't agree with what Hepler said as an adventure game would have suited her comments better, but she's perfectly within her rights to hold that opinion and ironically avoiding combat and just playing the story was a touted feature of Fallout from some of those most vociferous in the abuse. But rather than attack that it rapidly became attack her personally. I put that sort of thing into a completely different bracket from an actual change)

 

*No idea what the guy actually sent, of course

[Nonek]

Manners maketh the man, I know that it may be a somewhat old fashioned attitude but i've always believed that one should conduct oneself with a certain amount of dignity. Not to save others feelings, though that is a fortunate by-blow, but to maintain pride in oneself.

 

I can't honestly see the point in threats and such, it's a simple statement that one has lost the argument, and cannot muster adequate logical responses. However I would hold developers to the same strictures, calling ones customers homophobes, entitled and misogynistic when they raise logical and reasoned complaints is also beyond the pale.