Developer Apologizes for Accidentally Threatening Kittens
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
That's exactly what the joke you're complaining about is doing. Yet for some reason you completely miss the humour and attack it as if it's serious when it's patently not. Why?UNHchabo said:
Not really, the poor developers are still getting bombarded with hate and calls for people to be fired directly in response to the joke.Xanadu84 said:
Read the rest of my post, especially "There's no relationship between the pitch and the product". This is not a comedy game, so this "joke" has no bearing on the content of the game.GoaThief said:
To put it another way: what if they said they would donate the $5000 to a charity no matter what, but if they weren't Greenlit, the money would go to the Westboro Baptist Church? Yeah, this is a more extreme example, but in both cases the publisher would be attempting to get people to Greenlight the project based on something other than the merits of the game itself. That's emotional manipulation.Res Plus said:
+1.jon_sf said:
It's this sort of humor that makes me smile a bit and feel some warmth in my cold, dead heart.
I dont know, maybe its Valve using the community to know what games (these cheaper and more mediocre kind of games) should and shouldnt be on Steam. I dont know honestly but there isnt anything wrong with having a publisher in this situationMcoffey said:
Well, it's not clear from the trailer that there's any humor whatsoever in this game; I don't think a game can get away with this unless it's as blatantly comedic as Deathspank or Bulletstorm.GoaThief said:
There's also the matter of delivery. If I punch my friend lightheartedly, compared with coldcocking some guy who was walking down the street, those may be the same mechanical action, but the context and delivery are radically different.
Ignoring your poor analogy, your new objection now boils down to the humour not being slapstick/too dry. You don't have to enjoy it but the "outrage" is silly.UNHchabo said:
I also like how you shift the focus to one solitary trailer in an attempt to justify your initial claims despite them being refuted in the article itself. Integrity, don't you just love it?
No, the problem is that the humor wasn't stated anywhere. The first time I saw any indication that the game might have any humor in it is in reaction to the backlash, with the statement "Understand that there is some dark humor in the game and they wanted to play off of that." Previous to that, there was the trailer, and the text on the Greenlight page, neither of which contain any mention of humor.GoaThief said:
There's no outrage on my part; I'm simply saying that this was a dumb decision, and that they should have thought it through more thoroughly before trying to play off of emotional reaction to get press for the project.
It could be worse. They could be pushing turkeys out of helicopters.
In other news, I'm intrigued by this idea of getting people to do things by announcing a reward that might be impossible to give. Has Valve SAID they were going to greenlight another batch of games before October the 15th? Because from what I've seen they seem to just be hammering on the code, not using it. They've just been providing people with less and less feedback as time goes on (percentages were removed for logged-out users, then for logged-in users, then AFAICT for devs) and haven't given the nod to anything even though the (at last report) top 10 has likely all surpassed some of the original greenlights in votes.
In other news, I'm intrigued by this idea of getting people to do things by announcing a reward that might be impossible to give. Has Valve SAID they were going to greenlight another batch of games before October the 15th? Because from what I've seen they seem to just be hammering on the code, not using it. They've just been providing people with less and less feedback as time goes on (percentages were removed for logged-out users, then for logged-in users, then AFAICT for devs) and haven't given the nod to anything even though the (at last report) top 10 has likely all surpassed some of the original greenlights in votes.
The article is well written. The underlying topic of the article is "meh" in my opinion. The three pages here of opinions as to why/why not the article is offensive are infinitely more interesting. Thank you teh internets! Oh, and also, there's no such thing as bad advertising. How did the greenlight go, before and after the "offensive" announcement? I wonder...
Now, I am going to go punch my chihuahua in the spine. SPINEPUNCH! Look at his little curly tail wagging. So cute. Who's a good Trogdor? Clearly he was not offended. I say that. He'll probably blog negatively about it later.
Side note: Kittens?!? Flight of the Conchords are writing songs for 100's of sick kids:
Now, I am going to go punch my chihuahua in the spine. SPINEPUNCH! Look at his little curly tail wagging. So cute. Who's a good Trogdor? Clearly he was not offended. I say that. He'll probably blog negatively about it later.
Side note: Kittens?!? Flight of the Conchords are writing songs for 100's of sick kids:
Hilarious.Ishigami said:
~but someone right now is reporting you and screaming (well, typing) bloody murder.
People *choose* to be overly-sensitive douchebags. It's in the same vein as white-knighting "male feminists". Basically "I wish to be perceived as if I truly care (about stupid shit)".
~and now, someone is reporting me and screaming (well, key-bludgeoning) bloody murder.
We can be ban-buddies.
Never blame on malice what could be attributed to stupidity. It seems much more likely that they made a bad joke and didn't anticipate the reaction.uncanny474 said:
Not that I actually believe them to be stupid for making that joke. Some people need to calm down. Jokes are just jokes, and this is the internet, weren't dead baby jokes really popular for a while? Or are dead cats worse than dead babies in this cat obsessed web?
