David Jaffe gives in to bad IGN review, tunes down "offensive" content in his videogame
- Thread starter Nature Guardian
- Start date
Recommended Videos
What does that even mean? I've been asking you for proof and only that - I've yet to actually comment on the actual in any capacity. And "confusing"? My goal is quite literally the opposite - I want clarification.Nature Guardian said:
As predicted! Thank you for showing I was correct.Nature Guardian said:
Also, I'm not asking you to discuss it with me - I am asking for proof. So far, this is literally the only thing I've asked you for.
Let me remind you that the change was due to IGN's review. This is the entire crux of the thread.Nature Guardian said:
And I'll humour you - it'd be censorship if the developers were FORCED to make the change against their will. Did that happen? I don't know. I LITERALLY DO NOT KNOW. It's because you have yet to prove it to me and everybody here.
With that said, let's remember two things: first, censorship is the suppression of free speech/expression. So, again, if the change was forced, then it's going to fall under it. However, let's also remember that free speech goes both ways - the developers are absolutely free to do whatever they want but the public is also absolutely free to express whatever thoughts they want about the game. This is very important - if people were not allowed to voice any negative opinion, then that would ALSO be censorship. If the devs willingly made changes, then that is certainly not censorship. It is, in fact, categorically part of their freedom of expression.
So, once again, I will repeat myself: show proof. This is what I have been asking from the very start. Show proof that the developers made the changes because of outside factors.
Wait, I just started reading the whole thread....
Is there an announcement for this change?
If not, why this Thread exist?
Is there an announcement for this change?
If not, why this Thread exist?
It's almost like gamers have some sort of outrage culture that OP very definitely wanted to be part of or something... hm... curious... no, wait, the other one, tedious.DoPo said:
This is the most defensive reaction thread I've ever seen. My god, I wish I had more popcorn.
And it's totally fine that you like that.
...Gameplay's utter arse though. Guns are weightless and everything's so floaty, and the camera angle is an utter mess for effective combat. Probably should've put a little more ironing into that instead of writing all those 30+ second long monologues, good grief.
And it also means that this game is still incredibly stupid. It's cool dude, you can like stupid things, it's just you liking them doesn't make them not stupid anymore. And this game is powerfully stupid. Unimaginably stupid. It is, quite frankly, impressive at how stupid the developers have made this game. It has set new world records in volume of stupidity. It's stupidity is so potent that Spongebob Squarepants looks downright academic in comparison.Nature Guardian said:
And it's totally fine that you like that.
...Gameplay's utter arse though. Guns are weightless and everything's so floaty, and the camera angle is an utter mess for effective combat. Probably should've put a little more ironing into that instead of writing all those 30+ second long monologues, good grief.
Literally after I saw your message I check its official site and I found something.DoPo said:
http://drawntodeath.com/en-us/topics/10887-the-announcer-doesn-x27-t-say-funny-things-anymore
However I didn't yet found why the developers done it. No reason what so ever.
On a sidenote, I really like the art of the game and the over edgy characters you can select.
Also a Shark-Waifu had been spotted.
Best game ever.
Also a Shark-Waifu had been spotted.
Best game ever.
So you cant be bothered to find the official developer blog where they announced the change? No, I am not linking it to you. You can find it yourself.DoPo said:
Seriously, I am trying to find the blog you are talking about, but I can't fimd it.Nature Guardian said:
I only saw some updates from the official site which tell you can put your face in the game.
Also a cartoon bunny with tits update
Best game ever.
Out of having some time to kill, I googled 'drawn to death developer blog'. first page results included the primary website and Jaffe's twitter. Neither of these mention the change. The rest are other blogs, reporting that the game is out and/or free on PSN.Nature Guardian said:
So yeah, this developer blog where he makes official announcements isn't even first page material when searching for it (or second page, where I gave up).
So, you can't be bothered to do literally the single thing I've asked of you? Methinks you're getting way too defensive over this.Nature Guardian said:
Ooh, by the way, I forgot - I did ask you for something else, too: you were supposed to show me when did I want the game censored. No worries, I'll be here when you decide to stop squirming around and shifting the goal posts.
I googled "drawn to death dev blog" and it's not there. Checked the official website [http://drawntodeath.com/] and there is listed there. Checked the developer website [http://blog.bartletjones.com/] and there was even less info.
I finally managed to track it down as a video on YouTube. From the video description (only source of changelog, as far as I can find):
Not a mention of censorship. I even watched the video to see what they say about that change. And here we go (cut to only the relevant part):
So, there we go - I did your job for you. They say they are going to change it for about a week. Then they literally tell you that you shouldn't care - you, who have already played through the training. And frankly, it sounds like a change not unlike all the balance changes that were mentioned before - it's in order to get more people to play the game and stick with it. I don't see you complaining about the "Russian jackhammer" (whatever that is) being changed, nor do I see you decrying the matchmaking changes as censorship. It's this one thing that you should have already went past and not bother with that gets your ire. It's literally a change that the devs said they might roll back, if they feel like it. Moreover, it doesn't even sound like it's an IGN review that caused it, it seems like they actually have some idea that it could be a problematic area. Now pay attention here before you jump to more conclusions - this is literally why they would do this.
There. Thread is built on top of misinformation and lies: PROVEN!
Thank you for your participation, you are no longer needed.
Oh, yeah - there isn't an official blog. That was lie. Check my post above for the actual info, though. The way I found it is through a news article on PlayStationLifeStyle.net [http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2017/04/13/drawn-death-update-2-06-now-live-changes-detailed-new-video/] which, since you also did the googling, will recognise is not in any way the "official dev blog" at all. In fact, it's not in any way affiliated with the devs. The website just took the video description from a YouTube clip and basically re-posted it as a news article. I followed the source to the YouTube channel and found the video that did have the change in it.Elijin said:
Since you insist on wanting proof (because me playing the darn thing and witnessing the change is not proof enough?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-Jqj_cfGDY&feature=youtu.be
Specifically: "You guys that have already played won't notice this but we softened up the harshness of the frog in the training and defaulted the announcer to informative only. It's an experiment of sorts... Again, you guys won't notice it."
Except this is nowhere close to what happened. They changed all of the controversial dialogue and did not give you the option to change it back.
Go read the threads in the Reddit forum and the official forum for further proof, since apparently my firshand experience with the change was not enough proof.
And if you think the change was good, you like censorship.
Specifically: "You guys that have already played won't notice this but we softened up the harshness of the frog in the training and defaulted the announcer to informative only. It's an experiment of sorts... Again, you guys won't notice it."
Except this is nowhere close to what happened. They changed all of the controversial dialogue and did not give you the option to change it back.
Go read the threads in the Reddit forum and the official forum for further proof, since apparently my firshand experience with the change was not enough proof.
And if you think the change was good, you like censorship.
So what you're saying is, the thing people were questioning you about, that you then told everyone to go 'find themselves' does not exist?Nature Guardian said:
A youtube video is not an official developer blog.
Anyway, I'm all for this change. For two reasons:
1: You made ridiculous comments about how if you think the change is good you like censorship. I now like it just because you're amusing.
2: If they're prepared to tinker with the writing rather than see it as the unopposed pinnacle of greatness you do, it means one day the game might actually have some clever writing with enough tinkering.
Ultimately this topic remains hilarious as you ignore anyone who says anything you cant twist your way, while being the most defensive fan ever.
Okay, I know the internet has absolutely no clue what this term means anymore because they've run it into the ground, but in the interest of academia and futilely attempting to combat spreading misinformation, an artist making a change to their art of their own volition is not "censorship". At least not in the way that most people who toss the word around like popcorn mean it. Strictly speaking, it can be argued to be a form of "self-censorship", whatever the blazes that is and I only mention because it's the latest buzzword that internet censorship bois love, but in that context censorship is not the bad thing that said internet talking heads mean it to be, because it's still not "actual" censorship; i.e. the artist still has the option to not make whatever change they're making.
Moreover, when the change is explicitly described as being potentially temporary and designed to keep the interest of more people, arguing against it is actively stifling the artist's own intentions because you're too hung up on your own personal ideals. They are noticing something is causing people to lose interest in their product and are actively attempting to fix that, and you are arguing that they shouldn't because it personally offends you. Which, in the context of the art in question being a multi-player game, is pretty counterintuitive, really. Surely you should want more people to play the game if you really like it so much.
How did you manage to guess that? It's almost like THAT'S LITERALLY BEEN THE THING I'VE BEEN ASKING YOU FOR OVER AND OVER AGAIN!Nature Guardian said:
It's almost like you have been deliberately ignoring what I've been saying.
And just to prove the point, you link to the video that I already linked to and cut to the exact partNature Guardian said:
I'm not asking for proof that the change was made - I trust you that much, I am asking for proof that it was a forced change. More specifically, that it was due to IGN. You have completely failed to show that.Nature Guardian said:
Hey, you know you're also past due on showing show what I've said about the game, right?Nature Guardian said:
But of course it is! Director's cut in movies: censorship. Balance changes in a game: censorship. A redactor fixing a typo in a written work: censorship. Musicians making a remix of their song: censorship. Me quoting only part of your message, instead of all of it: censorship.shrekfan246 said:
Even the spellchekcar is tryign to cesnor me.
The really funny part is that if Nature Guardian was actually opposed to censorship, he wouldn't be trying to make people shut up. Because, that would also be censorship.
Did the reviewer at IGN actually say they were offended by the humor itself or more that they were offended that the developers thought so little of their customers' sense of humor that they would basically make MEMES the Game? Genuinely asking since the latter is what I would assume after looking at some gameplay footage (no I don't really want to go read an IGN review, I dislike their content in general).
The game just seems painfully unfunny. This isn't 90's humor, this is modern teenage memes humor taken to an extreme. Seems to me that the developers are softening the entrance to the game so that people are eased into it without immediately thinking "this is the shit I'm going to be listening to? Fuck that, refund time."
Also, based on what the OP linked as evidence, there's nothing to suggest that the Devs changed the game because of IGN's review. Could it be that they changed the game because they thought it might make them more money? As someone else mentioned in this thread, it's capitalism, not fascism.
But sure, leap for the top shelf on conspiracies right away just because the devs change some lines in the TUTORIAL.
The game just seems painfully unfunny. This isn't 90's humor, this is modern teenage memes humor taken to an extreme. Seems to me that the developers are softening the entrance to the game so that people are eased into it without immediately thinking "this is the shit I'm going to be listening to? Fuck that, refund time."
Also, based on what the OP linked as evidence, there's nothing to suggest that the Devs changed the game because of IGN's review. Could it be that they changed the game because they thought it might make them more money? As someone else mentioned in this thread, it's capitalism, not fascism.
But sure, leap for the top shelf on conspiracies right away just because the devs change some lines in the TUTORIAL.
A lot of people complained about the oversexualized design of Dragon's Crown. Would you have been fine with the developers desexualizing their work to appeal to all those people?
And so many people complained about Mortal Kombat's violence that a rating system was born out of it. Do you really think Mortal Kombat would still be Mortal Kombat if they removed all the violence from all versions?
And so many people complained about Mortal Kombat's violence that a rating system was born out of it. Do you really think Mortal Kombat would still be Mortal Kombat if they removed all the violence from all versions?