Cliff Bleszinski Labels Notch a "Pouty Kid" - Updated

[Adultratedhydra]

I dont understand the sudden calvalry of defense notch consistently gets. Minecraft was a one hit wonder. WHat has he done to follow that up rather than attempting to port it out the butt to every platform besides nintendo products? I mean seriously. If this was somebody like the guy behind sid miers i could see the massive wall of defense, but this is JUST notch. Ugh.

Notch gets a lot of white knights flock to his defense if anyone ever dares say anything even slightly not positive about him for some reason. I've never hated notch but i also don't think he is anyone special, especially after watching Indie game the movie, that documentry made me dislike indie devs more than sympathise with them.

OT: The Douchebag in chief is 100% Right in this case. The internet is acting like their favorite Wall Noise band just signed on with a well known producer and suddenly isnt cool anymore. Careful internet, Your hipster is showing.

 

[Vault101]

I dont understand the sudden calvalry of defense notch consistently gets. Minecraft was a one hit wonder. WHat has he done to follow that up rather than attempting to port it out the butt to every platform besides nintendo products? I mean seriously. If this was somebody like the guy behind sid miers i could see the massive wall of defense, but this is JUST notch. Ugh.

Well to be fair if I made mine craft I'd want to port the hell out if it

 

[Raioken18]

Notch made the right decision.

He was initially just trying to help out the kickstarter devs, understandable, trying to help the little guy.

Facebook takes over, why on earth would Notch still back Facebook? They don't even need his backing and it's not guaranteed as part of the sale. If he still backed it he pretty much would just be giving Facebook a massive draw card for free. Also have you seen Facebooks micro-transaction laden games? It's not what Notch intended Minecraft to be on any platform, and he has the right to make that decision.

So thankful for that decision.

Notch is like the Bono of gaming, comparatively Cliffy B is like the Joan Rivers of gaming.

 

[Kingjackl]

I know some people are just going to dismiss Cliffy B because he made Gears of War while Notch made Minecraft, but he makes some good points in his blog. Name-calling notwithstanding, Notch's decision was a knee-jerk short-sighted action that isn't going to have any practical repercussions except reducing the likelihood he's going to see a return of the ten grand he donated. Even if Minecraft doesn't end up on Oculus Rift, other games are and that won't change anything.

Look at John Carmack. He didn't pitch a fit or make a whole bunch of vapid statements about the evil of big corporations. His response on Twitter was simply: "I am coding right now, same as last week." Business as usual, all it means is a change in ownership and a massive increase in funding for the project. I'm sure the OR team are going to put that money to good use, but people who think like Notch are going to regret bailing in the long run.

 

[michael87cn]

I think if you pay $10,000 for something and they take your money, only to decide they want more money and are going to radically change their product to get it, even though they got more money than they needed (and asked for) to make their product to begin with.... and I think anyone would be alright to complain... even withdraw from the project... I mean... you get what you pay for... usually.......

 

[Adultratedhydra]

I think if you pay $10,000 for something and they take your money, only to decide they want more money and are going to radically change their product to get it, even though they got more money than they needed (and asked for) to make their product to begin with.... and I think anyone would be alright to complain... even withdraw from the project... I mean... you get what you pay for... usually.......

What about the Oculus Rift is being Radically changed pray tell?

It's still going to be open source, the people involved in creating it are still there, facebook has stated they will basically not be changing anything outside branding. Infact the only change that sticks out is the fact that it's going to be cheaper But i suppose the internet can make that out as a bad thing.

 

[deadish]

I find it funny that Cliff is the one saying that given how often he used to whine about "the internet pirating my games" all the time...only for the 360 versions to be pirated like crazy.

I can understand why Notch would be upset, he wanted to help out a small and young company and was excited so he put in $10,000. What he didn't want is for a huge company like Facebook to come in and just completely buyout the company. Hell, honestly I wish Oculus would have released the retail version, and then Facebook could have come in later and bought them, but then again Zukerberg is trying to get the "next best thing" always. I mean hell, $19 billion for an app, and I thought Balmer was crazy when he bought Skype for $8.5 billion when it wasn't really profitable, and still isn't really.

"And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition." - Notch

That reminds me, I thought Notch surrendered all Minecraft development to Jens Bergensten and promised not to get involved. So, in theory, he should have no say in the matter whether or not Minecraft gets Rift support.

Notch owns Minecraft ... He is just having someone maintaining the code base for him.

 

[Weaver]

I don't think Notch is being childish at all. He has an ethical reason to stop the game. In this case, disagreeing with Facebook and their egregious privacy policies. Why would he help support a company he philosophically disagrees with?

As a hypothetical: If you were writing a book and the publisher you were going to go with was bought out by a political party you despised, would you really still publish with them?

 

[xaszatm]

I don't think Notch is being childish at all. He has an ethical reason to stop the game. In this case, disagreeing with Facebook and their egregious privacy policies. Why would he help support a company he philosophically disagrees with?

As a hypothetical: If you were writing a book and the publisher you were going to go with was bought out by a political party you despised, would you really still publish with them?

Depends on how much money I currently have. If I had Notch's money, then I could be picky, like him. That said, I still say that he made the right move for him, if not for other people. And I can certainly respect that. Having large stacks of cash does bring a certain form of freedom, especially in whom we decide to deal business with.

 

[Frankster]

Name-calling notwithstanding, Notch's decision was a knee-jerk short-sighted action that isn't going to have any practical repercussions except reducing the likelihood he's going to see a return of the ten grand he donated. Even if Minecraft doesn't end up on Oculus Rift, other games are and that won't change anything.

From what I understand Notch had no interest in getting a "return", this was simply "oh this is a cool idea by little guys who need a bit of help, imma help em out!" kinda motivation.
Then facebook bought up the operation and it went from helping the little guy to giving facebook a big boost (whose policies he doesn't agree with according to other posters here) when they don't really need help, let alone from him. Money isn't the factor here.

I don't think this is intended to change anything so much as to not support something Notch didn't initially sign on for, the gesture is symbolic rather then practical. Whilst one can perceive a petulant response here, I feel it's kinda like someone being a bit annoyed at something and another going "TROLOLOLOL U MAD", basically exagerating the base emotion so as to make fun of it.

"but people who think like Notch are going to regret bailing in the long run."
They sure will if they don't have the financial security Notch does.

 

[Whateveralot]

I mean hell, $19 billion for an app, and I thought Balmer was crazy when he bought Skype for $8.5 billion when it wasn't really profitable, and still isn't really.

Skype was simply bought because of Lync. Microsoft was looking for a new technology to integrate into their business-market-aimed VoIP / Videoconferencing tools with, along with taking down MSN in the process.

Microsoft had a really good reason for buying Skype.

Facebook buying Oculus? I'm sorry but this makes no sense (other then Facebook searching for other, more profitable markets).

 

[Strazdas]

A petty bully is whining about other kids. and we are paying attention. well done. I don wonder does Cliff crap get reported jut for clicks, after all, its 4 pages long already!

I tried to read his words, but all I saw was shit.

Hell, I only hear shit when he actually talks.

how... does shit sound. i never imagined "listening to shit" in literal sense.

it's still the exact same product with the exact same user base.

This is competely false. While it is still same product that Mark Zuckberg himself said he want rebranded, the user base is completely different. the hardcore gamer group that backed the kickstarter is tearing it o bits. they lost their audience, and while they may gain one from facebook, its a completely different userbase.

but that really doesn't change the fact that he's right.

Do provide the irrefutable proof that its a fact. because as far as i see its only your opinion.

Pretty much. Here's a quick test to see who is being the bigger asshole in this situation.

Facebook (my interpretation): "We don't intend to interfere with the Oculus Rift's development, and have a lot of ideas for additional uses for this device"

Notch (again, interpreted): "I don't like Facebook, so I'm going back on what I said I was going to do, and I'm not going to add functionality to my game that many of my customers were looking forward to."

Oh, how nice of you to completely ignore that Zuckerberg himself said that he wants things changed. And knowing facebook history, its never for the better. Cliff is being an asshole for asshole sake, while Notch has good reasons to back out. So please redo your test with more information.

I would be more understanding if after more details on the future of OR were released but as it stands things seem to be running like normal but now with big daddy Facebook backing them up with their huge wallet. Why hurt your consumers who desperately wanted Minecraft on OR because you have personal beef with them? I don't know, maybe Notch knows stuff we don't about the whole deal. He certainly has every right to cancel the deal don't get me wrong. It just seems a bit premature to me is all.

This wrongly implies that costumers that wanted minecraft on OR actually still want OR.

Remember kids. The rules say to judge a statement by its content...except for Cliff Bleszinski.

but there is no content. only a person whining on a stage that somone else did something he didnt like.

So? Would you still feel the same way? Does looking at the above scenario from a different viewpoint give you better insight into why many feel the way they do and why many stopped supporting the OR?

actually id feel safer with NSA. At least they dont sell the data to the highest bidder but keep it for themselves. and at least on the surface pretend to catch few criminals with it.

Minecraft was a one hit wonder. WHat has he done to follow that up rather than attempting to port it out the butt to every platform besides nintendo products?

Well, he is constantly adding more content to the game and updating it. Thats like saying WOW was a one-hit wonder released 10 years ago. what has it done since. And it wasnt even ported either, so tis done even less. yet literally millions of people are playing it still.

OT: The Douchebag in chief is 100% Right in this case. The internet is acting like their favorite Wall Noise band just signed on with a well known producer and suddenly isnt cool anymore. Careful internet, Your hipster is showing.

Ironically that you took that alegory to make, its as if you didnt knew just how much studios mess with bands and how they hold the contracts to hold bands hostage. Seriuosly, you picked a very bad example.

Skype was simply bought because of Lync. Microsoft was looking for a new technology to integrate into their business-market-aimed VoIP / Videoconferencing tools with, along with taking down MSN in the process.

Microsoft had a really good reason for buying Skype.

Well, Microsoft also bought MSN before, then completely ruined it (yes, i used MSN BEFORE microsoft bought it and after all the way till they closed the servers) I also used Skype before and still use after they bought it. And lets jut say, "microsoft destroys everything it touches" cannot be more true.
The point is, MSN was a more popular VOIP service by the time they bought it then skype. however they drove their users away by taking away features, ruining the UI and adding advertisement all over the place. By the time they got around to doing anything about it the userbase was dead. Same thing with HOtmail (now known as live mail, or as of few motnhs ago, integrated into the "one" concept). While hotmail was fine for its time, microsoft bought it and sat on it doing nothing but taknig away features. Its actually pretty damn decent NOW, but noone is using it anymore.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

Despite your feelings towards the man he does have a point. That's sort of the problem when people start making a name for themselves, whether it be good or bad, people will never be able to seperate the opinions from the person. If the situations were reversed I can almost coldy predict the forum chatter.

History will decide on whther or not Occulus made the right call. Frankly I think they did. It's 2 BILLION DOLLARS PEOPLE! No company would turn down that kinda cash, and it's not like they're gasing Jews to get it.
So if your living in a VR occulus powered future yo can thank Mark for it, but if the VR goes nowhere then you can just keep on hating it.

Whilst Notch is within his rights not to make it anymore, it really is turning up his nose and walking off with his ball. The only person that benefits at the end of day is him.

 

[Sunrider]

I'm not a huge fan of Notch by any stretch. He does some cool stuff, he says some silly stuff, but he is nowhere near the douchebag level of Cliff Blezinski.

 

[Adultratedhydra]

History will decide on whther or not Occulus made the right call. Frankly I think they did. It's 2 BILLION DOLLARS PEOPLE! No company would turn down that kinda cash, and it's not like they're gasing Jews to get it.

The only response you're going to get with that is "The money shouldnt matter to them." But then the people who say that probably thought oculus was going to remain independant forever. Poor misguided youth.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Cliffy B, as noted on numerous previous occasions of him saying something in regards to anything, is an asshole.

not whether it's status can count as indie or not.

Is this really what you want to use as a summary of Notch's motivations?

 

[Jandau]

First of all, I don't give two shits about the Oculus. I'm not interested in what it's offering and I don't think it'll ultimately have anything other than a small niche audience. I don't really care if it works out either way.

That being said, Cliffy is acting like a douche, but if anyone is surprised by that, well, I heard Swiper was swiping again...

 

[Rainforce]

He'd kick himself because he'd be missing out on a large user base.

while I agree that Notch is not acting based on perfect financial interest (since he can afford to make these decisions based on his standards/interests), this claim is a bit uh..."steep".
He already HAS a large user base, and there's not that many gamers left to miss out on.
Second, this somehow implies that by adding Oculus support he will gain more users for his game? How does that exactly work? Either you like Minecraft and played the hell out of it already by now or you don't, but the Rift will not change that.

That Notch, valuing his integrity and creative freedom over money. How childish of him.

So very much. It's a cruel world where people rather want to be people.

 

[Lightknight]

EDIT: I should mention that Notch has already directed us to a mod that allows us to play minecraft on the rift. It already exists.

He had only been in talks about making a slimmer Minecraft version for the Rift for two weeks.

http://kotaku.com/notch-says-hes-canceled-oculus-rift-minecraft-because-1551568311

People make it sound like he was coding something and popped out. 2 weeks of just having started discussing it does not equal serious development. He is concerned that games on the Rift will be forced into weird social aspects like games on Facebook were. But this is hardware, not software that it's being developed on. If that day ever comes then Notch could have backed out. But I get it, he was talking about making a few modifications to the free minecraft version and it isn't worth his time since he already wasn't going to profit off of it.

By making this he was going to support the Rift. Now that it's facebook supported it doesn't need his help at all. So he's going to tip his hat elsewhere. I get that now that I know his version was just going to be a free patch.

snip

If he has a reason to specifically distrust Facebook's involvement. Then sure. Sounds like he just thinks they're creepy and uncertain though, rather than evil or something definite.

He has specific reasons, and stated them in his blog. I get the feeling that you don't think his reasons were good enough, but if that's the case then I'm not exactly certain what reasons would be. They don't need to be "evil", they don't even need to do something "bad", they only need to do things that you personally disagree with.

Because of the nature of investments, if you leave that money in and they do wrong by you or your values, you weren't just complicit in that wrongdoing, you actively supported it. That is a hard thing for many people to deal with, and I don't begrudge anyone for not giving that person or group the chance to make them guilty.

Well, I don't read his blog so maybe there's something more to it (edit: commented on this above). But his official statement was that he finds Facebook creepy. If he has managed to better articulate what triggered his reaction then ok.

Facebook's statement is that the OR team will continue to operate autonomously just like all of their other acquisitions have. So maybe Notch is just allergic to not being as indie as possible? That may sounds like a shot at him. But the hipster community that shirks big business are a valid community and shying away from big business is a valid personal choice. But this is still Notch walking away from the rift and the rift users for minor reasons. It's one thing to remain indie in the development arena. It's quite another to try to remain competitive in the hardware industry.

But for every Notch it seems there's several other developers who certainly aren't going to jump ship for some very specific allergy to big business:

http://www.engadget.com/2014/03/25/notch-oculus-facebook-minecraft/

With Sony entering the market, this was a good move for them.

On a side note... Why would anyone want to play Minecraft in 3D in the first place? It isn't graphically/visually impressive or anything (quite the opposite in fact), sounds like a recipe for an intense migraine to me.

Deeper immersion. If you're going to build stuff in a world you might as well feel like you're in that world.

Poor graphics or not, it has its own charm and there's a reason why it's so popular. It's practically the next generation's legos.

 

[Eternal_Lament]

Cliffy B, as noted on numerous previous occasions of him saying something in regards to anything, is an asshole.

not whether it's status can count as indie or not.

Is this really what you want to use as a summary of Notch's motivations?

If it was one of those things where it had been a bit after the acquisition, then it could be argued that maybe Notch didn't like the new direction the Rift was going with Facebook overseeing it, or maybe they were forcing the Rift to use applications and tools that Notch felt took away from the experience, then I'd give Notch the benefit of the doubt and would say he probably had his reasons. Considering he did this almost immediately after the announcement, when there is no telling what the Facebook acquisition actually means, then I have to assume that Notch's reasons have to do more with status than it does practicality and technology