I don't know how to send private messages

[Captain Australia]

Might have to be cuddly steam buddies or something.

I'm not into posturing, I really don't care about scoring points. I offer this sincerely in the hopes that it'll receive at least a moment of consideration. (and although by the arbitrary CHOP, you clearly value the final word, I've got an OCD thing about unfinished conversations)

Guys - in how you engage the public, you are FEEDING the unhealthy dialogues, and all your accusations to the contrary about how detractors are malicious, wrong, manipulative, etc etc .. they won't change that.

Just briefly consider this - my profile:
- infrequent sometime visitor
- like the game, mostly supportive
- interested in zombies
- disinterested in the community and any politics
- vaguely interested in some of the pending programming outputs but I've learned to park my expectations, I'm really just here to stay connected

Posting a couple of threads about zombie outbreaks in general, I see a topic that vaguely interests me about how the Mondoids (IMO) almost feel like misdirection "look at all this stuff we're working on" (to mask the fact that, if you look over the last 4 years, there might be a handfull out of 200 that actually have outcomes visible to the audience).

I start to read, and see some horrible and ugly dialogue, and chip in that I think it's ugly and imprudent. And then, caught up in it, get carried downstream.

My point is simple: you couldn't have mishandled me any better if you TRIED. It's almost as if your goal is to isolate and alienate anyone in the audience who hurts your feelings.

My second point is also worth considering: I think your own posture, tone and language of choice is equally or more isolating, hurtful and

look up the second definition of the word "conceit." I'll wait

(look it up: I'll wait --- it's almost a meme for "youre an idiot and I'm narcicistically clever)

I expect this irony is lost

(see above)

juvenile and maliciously inaccurate

(everyone loves being called juvenile and malicious)

derogatory and pointed mudslinging

(check the definition of derogatory, I'll wait. Heh. Jesus wept)

The final point is simple. The onus is on YOU to be the adult, like it or not.

As a vendor, you are host and trusted advisor, you want me at your table eating your food and listening to your music. You want my attention and good will. As a consumer, I want to like and trust you. I want you to succeed and want to support your future projects.

That's the goal .. but could the mix of elements have gone any more wrong ?

I'm sure that my exchange with you thisafternoon is one of hundreds. In fact .. uh .. Rathlord (heh) .. said as much, that I'm not unique and there are worse out there. I'm sure there have been some distressingly ugly exchanges.

But just to pull it back and consider your goals. It's a simple question:

- do you want to alienate what would otherwise be advocates ?

I anticipate a strident "but we this, you that" kind of answer. It's the wrong answer.

The right answer is: "No, we want more advocates".

Now, in closing, here is my OPINION on WHY things are going wrong and maybe offers hints at the remedy:

You think when I ask "do you want to alienate your advocates?", the question is self-important, it's about empowering me. It's not: it's about empowering you.

I predict you'll see this as passive aggressive criticism or something. I see it as a chance to get a valuable perspective. Ignoring any reality, which outlook is preferrable ?

Re-strategise, guys.

[PIJÁGORAS pero que tiene sida]

What "things are going wrong"?

[Captain Australia]

Sorry mate, it's a bit of a back-and-forth exchange. The "things that are going wrong" relates to official dialogue - exchanges between folks on the creation team and folks out in the public.

(Usually on a topic where the consumer is seen as hostile or unreasonable)

[PIJÁGORAS pero que tiene sida]

I get the context. I read as much as I could stomach from the thread you are refering to. But I think that "what is going wrong" has extremely little to do with the indie's strategy.

I am not going to engage in a long conversation about this because I understand we don't need to agree, but this game's future does not depend on that part of the crowd who won't put up with it's ♥♥♥♥, and that is why I don't clearly see "what is goung wrong".

[Captain Australia]

Yes mate, I wouldn't suggest any of it falls into the "mission critical" bucket - but that said, I personally reckon that public goodwill is a huge part of any recipe for success.

In my experience the general approach should be to try and turn detractors into advocates.

You won't always succeed, but in trying you can actually even get more ripple-effect support.

So when the recipe actually works in reverse - advocates <-> detractors ..

.. well, it's worth some diagnosing (IMO)

You can't win every fight.
You shouldn't fight every fight.
If you see everyone as a potential advocate: there is no fight.
It takes two parties to fight: one party fighting = noise.
Save fighting for the zombies.

[Captain Australia]

I'm just not that in to you.

You'll never know for sure until you try, sweetheart.

[Balogna Jelly]

As an outside viewer, I'd just like to point out that everyone involved in this (and another) thread have gotten their say, and have aired out their grievances. At this juncture I would personally say that no more as of right now can actually be said, and it would be a good time for all parties involved to step back, and consider the words of the other party as certain viewpoints from each party involved are completely valid.

That said, for the well-being of all parties involved and the community in general I would recommend this thread get locked as well. Not that I'm any type of moderator of course, but seems like a good point to take a break, right? :)

[Rathlord]

Cheers for the feedback, we'll keep it in mind.

Edit: You do have to be friends to PM on Steam. Feel free to add friend me if you'd like clarification on anything I said. Taking my posts completely out of context just furthers my feelings that you aren't an advocate at all, however, as does the entire tone of this post. And again, you haven't hurt my feelings. I am not my job, I am not TIS, and there are worse people than you on here every single day.

[Captain Australia]

Heh. Good job, guys. One instance where my expectations were utterly met, I suppose.

Sorry for the meritless crap, I'll refrain going forward. as it's clear you see right through my alterior motives and recognise my destructive, irrelevant and misinformed (actually, derogatory and outright malicious) viewpoint for what it is. I'm just a carbon copy of all of the other misdirected trolls who have tried to articulate similarly vapid viewpoints before me.

You saw right through me .. well done.

I should know better and behave better!

At least a lesson was learned here.

[JasonB]

A good forum is a moderated one. If you want to see what it looks like when a developer lets consumers have reign over the forum, look at the train wreck that is the PayDay 2 Steam community. The worst voices and worst elements have taken over and they spit on the developers day and night no matter what they do, for a game they paid $20 for and have gotten years of free content out of.

This is why there's a balance between being an authoritarian that crushes nearly everyone under the ban hammer, and being like a malfunctioning immune system that allows every undesirable element to do what they want at the risk of wreaking havoc on the "body."

I know you think you're being really smart. But you're essentially saying that the same tired old duplicate threads should be allowed to clog the forum just because you haven't gotten the answer you wanted regarding development speed.

Continuing to browbeat the developers, even behind a facade of pretentious writing as you've done here, is still browbeating. Not to mention sarcastic and coy antagonizing, while you're at it ("Good job, guys. One instance where my expectations were utterly met."). Your talk of the developers empowering themselves by allowing tedious, pointless topics to resurface comes at gunpoint of you being personally satisfied, so it really is ultimately about you.

The adult thing to do would be to accept the answers they've given about why this or that is the way it is, and move on.

[sanguine]

Originally posted by Rathlord:

Cheers for the feedback, we'll keep it in mind.

Edit: You do have to be friends to PM on Steam. Feel free to add friend me if you'd like clarification on anything I said. Taking my posts completely out of context just furthers my feelings that you aren't an advocate at all, however, as does the entire tone of this post. And again, you haven't hurt my feelings. I am not my job, I am not TIS, and there are worse people than you on here every single day.

As someone who's been in this from the Google Wallet days, to me, you constantly come off condescending, arrogant and generally higher-than-thou.
We never had any beef with each other, that's just my impression as a bystander, judging from your comments on here as well as your forums. They never defused a situation, instead they just fueled the glim.

Same goes for EnigmaGrey, he just got a lot better at it compared to a year ago, plus he is pretty much one of the only two or three people who seem to be helpful.

Your whole team should resort to support and moderating escalated situations instead of getting dragged into conversations like these, because I've never seen you turning the conversation around.

[Rathlord]

With over 10,000 posts as of years ago, you may be right that occassionally things don't swing my way, and it's pretty easy to point a finger at any moderator on any forum, especially a Steam forum, and say "I've seen things go to hell in a handbasket for you." You're welcome to your opinion, but if you actually go back through my post history you'll find quite the opposite is true in reality. Some people can't be talked down.



We're all human, here. I've made mistakes, so has every other moderator in history. In many cases, though, I think you'll find people's reactions speak for themselves and show their true colors in the end. You'll find most of the people who take issue with me are the ones who try to cleverly mince words to hide their antagonistic behaviors, and I refuse to play that game.

[JasonB]

I think the moderators talk to everyone like people, and some take that as condescension because some customers are used to treating employees like a door mat.

I agree that perhaps instead of having "heated" back and forths between players and moderators, perhaps topics should just be closed with a short reason and that's it.

But, then people would complain that nobody is listening, or that the moderators are being dictators who won't talk to the community. Doesn't seem like there's any way for everyone to win and keep their dignity without everyone being a little more understanding.

[Rathlord]

If we lock topics, people yell "censorship." If we try to treat people like adults, people yell "condescension!" If we don't engage, people yell "they've given up, they don't care!"

It's a no-win game. All we can do is keep doing what we're doing and deal with it as best we can. At the end of the day all we can do is trust that most discerning customers will see through the thin veneer of lies that most trolls weave.

[Quikel]

Personally, I think that everything has been said now.
In my original post (that is now locked), I was ultimately upset by the wording of the past Mondoids. Things got out of hand pretty quick and by the time the thread reached page 3 the mods and others were discussing philosophical implications of some sort. Also, in between we had to hear that we all have 0 idea how a game is developed and therefore we could not have possibly any grasp of the whole development process.

While I do agree that i have no idea how write code, I do have an idea how words can incite hype and frustration. My opinion still stands that if the only information you provide is about little side notes someone is working on for X-weeks straight, while there are still two or three other major features that you teased (in grand fashion) ages ago, then people will ultimately get sour. This was my whole point. Nobody needs a masters degree in informatics to get that.

In that regard I dont think you do yourself a favor when you continue to give out information on stuff that is so miniscule compared to the things you teased, while ignoring the latter. Also, reading in August 2017, close to two years later, that you are"approaching the point at which the new animation system is merged into the main game code" is something that is hard to fathom.

At that point it does not matter if anyone who reads this has the knowledge to understand the implications, since the audience for the Mondoids is common people and not game devs. Its just the poor choice of words and the sort of information you decide to give out in these mondoids that made me dread them. Telling someone from the community "Hey, its two years since we wanted to add the animations to build 34 and there were some hickups but we are close to the point where we add them to the games code." What do you expect a commoner to think after reading this?

As the other thread already stated: People dont seem to care that much about all these little gimmicks but about the big features that were teased. Telling us "We came up with a clever formula for gas consumption on cars" while everyone expects a focus on something else entirely is counter-productive.

Mondoids can still be a good thing but not in their current fashion.

[Rathlord]

Orange, I thought your OP was a fairly reasonable post with some good points. I can 100% understand your frustration.

That being said, we're back at the same problems. I never said you couldn't possibly fathom development. I'm saying sometimes experts with years of industry experience may know better than people with other careers and areas of expertise. Good illustration being this:

Telling someone from the community "Hey, its two years since we wanted to add the animations to build 34 and there were some hickups but we are close to the point where we add them to the games code." What do you expect a commoner to think after reading this?

This doesn't mean "close to the point where we add them to the game's code," this means "we're ready to merge the branch where the dev was working on them with the main code branch." It doesn't mean they're just being worked on, it means the two branches of the game are being merged together to bring them live.