The customer vs the chef.... A simple analogy.

[PeaceMaker]

Customer: "Chef, my food, I paid for, is blank and tasteless. What happened to all the delicious ingredients you said you put in the food?"

Chef:"Pah, you just don't know how to eat my food properly! Food is hard to make, you unappreciative cur!"

[tkwoods]

Wow, more fiction...

[minisith]

Publicado originalmente por PeaceMaker:

Customer: "Chef, my food, I paid for, is blank and tasteless. What happened to all the delicious ingredients you said you put in the food?"

Chef:"Pah, you just don't know how to eat my food properly! Food is hard to make, you unappreciative cur!"

Realistic
Chef: Tastes great to me. How about you try a different dish?

[Bombast]

This is a gross mischaracterization of what was said.

The complaint wasn't about whether an audience can say whether something is bad or not, but whether the audience has the appropriate literacy to say *why* something was made badly, and in many case even why they don't like it. And its true. When it comes to audiences, probably 90% or greater of the people into a thing are completely incapable of describing the whys or hows of their obsession.

This is why there are people who honestly think CGI in movies has gotten worse because CGI artist have somehow universally gotten lazier over time, or that somehow the inclusion of women poisoned the fabric of the universe and made the new Ghostbusters bad. Fundamentally incurious people have a bad habit of using internal biases of explaining things they don't understand and don't wish to actually look into.

This isn't new, of course. But like most things, social media obliterating the walls between professionals and creators in the industry and their 'fans' has made everything 10 times worse.

[Wade]

Well, at least Emil wasn't angry like Todd, when Bloomberg reporter asked him why he didn't optimize Starfield he was very angry, red faced and said "Y'all must buy new computers", hahaha

[tkwoods]

d

Publicado originalmente por Bombast:

This is a gross mischaracterization of what was said.

The complaint wasn't about whether an audience can say whether something is bad or not, but whether the audience has the appropriate literacy to say *why* something was made badly, and in many case even why they don't like it. And its true. When it comes to audiences, probably 90% or greater of the people into a thing are completely incapable of describing the whys or hows of their obsession.

This is why there are people who honestly think CGI in movies has gotten worse because CGI artist have somehow universally gotten lazier over time, or that somehow the inclusion of women poisoned the fabric of the universe and made the new Ghostbusters bad. Fundamentally incurious people have a bad habit of using internal biases of explaining things they don't understand and don't wish to actually look into.

This isn't new, of course. But like most things, social media obliterating the walls between professionals and creators in the industry and their 'fans' has made everything 10 times worse.

You are spot on. No one wants to argue the true points, only set up strawmen to mow down.

[AdahnGorion]

I think this is more a kin to it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1C8nl8eBoq0

[coffinwood]

Is this the bad analogy forum for paid haters now or the one for the Starfield game?

[AdahnGorion]

Publicado originalmente por coffinwood:

Is this the bad analogy forum for paid haters now or the one for the Starfield game?

Its the make a good analogy about Starfield and get an award thread?
On a serious note.

I think its perfectly fine, we are debating what is happening and mine actually showcase the issue with Starfield.. The target audiances for this game is split in what they want.