Gearbox CEO On Gamer Criticism: "Some People Are Sadists"

[Beliyal]

What exactly is he referring to? It all sounds extremely vague. Does he mean people like Jim Sterling or Angry Joe who are harsch but understandably so or does he mean people who send him threaths and the like? There are always people on the internet who take things too far and there is no excuse for that. On the other hand, if he is referring to harsch criticism, that might be unpleasant for him but from what I have seen it was well deserved.

It's probably poor Jim sterling kicking over his sand castles though...and thank god for him.

Yep, it's exactly about Jim. In the #AskRandy thing on Twitter two days ago, someone asked Randy why he blocked Jim and this [https://twitter.com/DuvalMagic/status/621000081953685505] was the response. I guess he really liked this metaphor.

Apparently, he simply believes that Jim and Angry Joe (and everyone else) are being sadists and that their criticism is unjust and mean for the shits and giggles. That's kinda scary. It implies that Randy really doesn't understand why customers were angry about A:CM and just handwaves it as "People on the internet are just mean lol." Now, that IS true for the most part, but in this case people spent money for his product based on lies and received a sub-par product to boot. I find their ire justified. And I can't reasonably conclude that all of the enraged customers were simply being brainwashed into meaningless anger. When your game fails miserably and makes most of the customers angry, you did something fucking wrong. Own it up.

 

[Agente L]

The thing is, Mr pitchfork, when someone pays you for a sandcastle (especially a 60 dollars sandcastle), you promise an amazing 2 feet tall state of the art sand castle and all you deliver is wet sand thrown on itself, it's not that the buyer is a bully; It's you who is a shitty sandcastle builder.

So take responsabilities for your terrible games. You should be saying "I'm sorry" to your paid customers, not "Haters gonna hate."

 

[crimson5pheonix]

The other irony here is that GG doesn't really seem to target big companies like Gearbox anyway. You hear orders of magnitude more every day about "Wu" or "Quinn" than you've heard in the lifetime of GG about Gearbox.

Could you not? I mean seriously, could you GGers not do this? It's an incredibly annoying derail, meant to start more petty bullshit. In fact, several of the people involved in various slap fights are in this very thread, condemning Pitchford. Hell, I don't think I've read a single post in support of him(Ok, maybe one, and it didn't mention GG). So could you please not?

I always find it's very helpful to read the posts I'm replying to; it helps me avoid mistakes like you just made, thinking I'm a "GG'er" when I'm not. Thanks you for skimming what I said and then responding though, and also for assuming the worst of me.

You probably shouldn't be derailing the thread with GG stuff.

OT: Oh Randy, you so silly. Come talk again when you make a good game that isn't Borderlands.

 

[Loonyyy]

The other irony here is that GG doesn't really seem to target big companies like Gearbox anyway. You hear orders of magnitude more every day about "Wu" or "Quinn" than you've heard in the lifetime of GG about Gearbox.

Could you not? I mean seriously, could you GGers not do this? It's an incredibly annoying derail, meant to start more petty bullshit. In fact, several of the people involved in various slap fights are in this very thread, condemning Pitchford. Hell, I don't think I've read a single post in support of him(Ok, maybe one, and it didn't mention GG). So could you please not?

I always find it's very helpful to read the posts I'm replying to; it helps me avoid mistakes like you just made, thinking I'm a "GG'er" when I'm not.

I did actually. You're talking about this GG shite. So I'm calling it what it is. I know you have a barely concealed contempt for Gamergate, and spend most of your time posting with GG users antagonistically. And that's just as much part of the problem. And you brought it into an unrelated thread. You couldn't even find someone to quote to bring it in, because no-one was talking GG stuff. Except you. You brought it in, and it's unnecessary. It's pointlessly aiming to start fights and arguments. You can already see the stuff starting. What purpose does that serve? Hell, people on all manner of side of that particular, overdone debate, were posting in almost in solidarity against Pitchford's frankly moronic comments.

Thanks you for skimming what I said and then responding though,

See, speaking of mistakes.

and also for assuming the worst of me.

There are worse things than GGers. The most annoying thing about GG stuff is the GG stuff. And you just tried to bring it in. Which makes your posting indistinguishable from theirs. At best, you are the bait that lures in the GG talk. Even the users on this forum who post in support of GG (And I also am not a fan of that, for the record), kept it to the topic, and were largely critical of Pitchford (Which of course, you ignored, to target a buzzword which would create controversy and strife).

But yeah, I did call you a GGer. If the boot fits. Can't think you'd be much a fan of it, but I thought it was the best way to convey the message. Because that's what this sort of posting looks like to others. I'm not assuming anything of you. This is how you present yourself on the forum, and this is how I see it. I'm not interested in making assumptions about your positions, or your character. I'm interested in the posts, and what you did there was entirely unnecessary.

 

[runic knight]

I guess when in doubt, whine about the customers and never admit the fuck up was on you. A shame, I really loved Borderlands two, but the latest one was crap, and between that and a number of other issues, I sort of doubt I will buy anothe gearbox game if they keep up this path. Randy being so unprofessional does help me not feel bad about it though.

Captcha: role model

You cheeky devil captcha.

 

[Kameburger]

I find it interesting that this one opinion was echoed like 3 times in this article, but he's absolutely right. That doesn't make him any less of a nightmare to work with, and any more justified in releasing those games in the clearly broken state they were in. So if he's just mad at the few people who called him out, than fair enough, he still didn't release a great game.

To paraphrase Jim Sterling, I'd like to see how that kind of game would do now that steam refunds is a thing.

 

[Mazinger-Z]

The other irony here is that GG doesn't really seem to target big companies like Gearbox anyway. You hear orders of magnitude more every day about "Wu" or "Quinn" than you've heard in the lifetime of GG about Gearbox.

Could you not? I mean seriously, could you GGers not do this? It's an incredibly annoying derail, meant to start more petty bullshit. In fact, several of the people involved in various slap fights are in this very thread, condemning Pitchford. Hell, I don't think I've read a single post in support of him(Ok, maybe one, and it didn't mention GG). So could you please not?

I always find it's very helpful to read the posts I'm replying to; it helps me avoid mistakes like you just made, thinking I'm a "GG'er" when I'm not. Thanks you for skimming what I said and then responding though, and also for assuming the worst of me.

You probably shouldn't be derailing the thread with GG stuff.

OT: Oh Randy, you so silly. Come talk again when you make a good game that isn't Borderlands.

I wasn't even a fan of the series. I thought the concept had merit but was poorly executed. The writing was ok. Warframe does it better as a shoot things, collect shit, role-based shooter.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

The other irony here is that GG doesn't really seem to target big companies like Gearbox anyway. You hear orders of magnitude more every day about "Wu" or "Quinn" than you've heard in the lifetime of GG about Gearbox.

Could you not? I mean seriously, could you GGers not do this? It's an incredibly annoying derail, meant to start more petty bullshit. In fact, several of the people involved in various slap fights are in this very thread, condemning Pitchford. Hell, I don't think I've read a single post in support of him(Ok, maybe one, and it didn't mention GG). So could you please not?

I always find it's very helpful to read the posts I'm replying to; it helps me avoid mistakes like you just made, thinking I'm a "GG'er" when I'm not. Thanks you for skimming what I said and then responding though, and also for assuming the worst of me.

You probably shouldn't be derailing the thread with GG stuff.

OT: Oh Randy, you so silly. Come talk again when you make a good game that isn't Borderlands.

I wasn't even a fan of the series. I thought the concept had merit but was poorly executed. The writing was ok. Warframe does it better as a shoot things, collect shit, role-based shooter.

I liked the style it had and the fact it didn't take itself very seriously.

 

[ScaredIndie]

I've never understood the approach they took with CM. If you lie about your product you will almost always be called on it. It is unbelievable that no one in their entire company who had any control over this project understood that.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Yes, Randy. And some people are masochists. Like anybody who bought Duke Nukem Forever or Colonial Marines.

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

Yeah I prefer to think of Colonial Marines not as a beautiful sand castle but more of a washed up jellyfish that stung anyone who got too close.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

I could start a winery with all Pitchford's sour grapes.

 

[SweetJackal]

You know what, he is never going to admit that Gearbox lied about the content of Aliens: Colonial Marines on a massive scale. Even though that the Better Business Bureau performed their own investigation and found that Colonial Marines was purposely misrepresented in it preview coverage and in it's advertising.

He will always claim that such games are of a really high quality and they did nothing wrong ever, that they are proud of these games even though the only reason they won the court case levied against them by consumers over Colonial Marines was because they claimed they outsourced the entire thing and were not involved in it's creation.

In his own mind, it is only the sales that matter and not less tangible things like Brand Presence. In his own mind, the sales justified the means. In his own mind, 3 Card Monte is entertainment and those victims that lose their money should be happy for the experience given.

Yet the industry continues to lament over used game sales on consoles, yet the title has to be returned to the retailer in order for that retailer to sell it used. That is a number that isn't reflected in sales figures posted by publishers and Steam didn't really allow refunds or returns of purchases when Colonial Marines was released.

It is very fitting that he points to a scam as a form of entertainment in his own defense. It is very amusing that he continues to hold up Aliens Colonial Marines as an honest product despite the outrage from reviewers, the very same people that played the game at their preview event and how that game was universally trashed by said critics.

Let's see how well the next game that gets their Colonial Marines treatment gets in a post Steam-Refunds world. It will be amusing to see their echo chamber collapse into a singularity from it when their precious sales are refunded for things like quality or misrepresentation that they cannot understand.

 

[Neverhoodian]

Based on past experiences as a cashier, I'll be the first to state that some people are straight-up psychopaths. That said, there's a difference between being an asshole for shits and giggles and legitimate complaints and criticisms. Treating the latter as the former is not only bad business, but disrespectful to boot.

You can't just handwave mountains of critical and popular panning as a harrassment ploy. And no, deliberately misleading and disappointing legions of fans is not something to be admired.

"I read it in this way: we moved those people, we touched them - even the person who hates [your game] so much, you've affected them. That's why we fight, we're creating emotion and experience - and some people thrive on that type of feeling, some people are sadists."

Why am I reminded of this:

 

[Strazdas]

Gamers on Gearbox: Some people are incompetent.

Seriusly, last time Gearbox made something competent was their Half-life expansions over a decade ago. Is Borderlands really keeping them afloat so well?

That being said, they were not forced to extend it to every territory that Steam is in. They did that on their own, probably as a good faith gesture to their other customers.

More likely they just couldnt be arsed to program variuos checks and problems that would arise from being able to refund only in one region. imagine the amount of people falsely registering in that region just for that and the human resources needed to sort this mess out.

I.E. criticizing the construction of Colonial Marines (the sandcastle) does not make you "that jerk kid at the beach who kicks over sandcastles". Attacking Gearbox for making it however, does.

That statement is still false, because in the case of Colonial Marines Gearbox DESERVES to be attacked for intentionally lieing, deceiving its costumers.

much like when being held at knife point to take your money I don't think gear box will get too many sympathy cards for what is pretty much universally approved gamer hate towards those titles.

according to This article [http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6097] you should blame yourself for being held at a knife point.

The EU basically forced Steam to do it.

EU no doubt helped, but it was almost certainly the court case in Australia which pushed them over the edge.

Actually Steam was ordered by European Court of Justice to implement it for European users 3 years before Australian case, though it does seem like Australia was the one actually willing to go through with sanctions if they didnt while EU was just shaking its fist at the sky.

The other irony here is that GG doesn't really seem to target big companies like Gearbox anyway. You hear orders of magnitude more every day about "Wu" or "Quinn" than you've heard in the lifetime of GG about Gearbox.

GG does not target gaming companies because GG is about Journalism and not game developement. Gearbox and other such companies are outside of GG scope. To blame them for not taking on Gearbox is like blaming a train company for not giving you a bus ride because "Both are transport".

 

[talker]

As somebody who only just got into the Alien franchise and never played Colonial Marines, could somebody tell what was so awful about it?

 

[jklinders]

Wow. That is some really hardcore self delusion being practiced there.

I need me some stats.

Aliens: Colonial Marines, Metacritic score 45

Duke Nukem Forever 54

neither of these games averaged enough of a score with critics to even break into that 60-80 percentile that marks an average grade from mainstream critics. Hell, less than 50 in the mainstream critics book makes you lucky the fucking thing even loads, but then again, is having to actually play Colonial Marines luck?

This guy does not need to worry about me kicking his sandcastle down. he does the game development equivalent of dumping a truckload of sand (ie money) on the beach in a low rounded mound and calls that his sandcastle. I cannot insult, parody, tear down or belittle something that does all of these things to itself.

I sincerely hope that this level of self delusion is met in kind by his appearance that this conference under the heading "Fatally Unprofitable Hubris"

 

[Random Gamer]

Stuff.

Whatever.

This is a case where Pitchford apparently thought he could use the old "entitled gamers" trick anew. Except he just pissed off every possible group of gamers around, because even the kindest people have a tolerance level for bullshit.
He should know that when you're in a hole, you should stop digging. And try making better games, maybe?

 

[chikusho]

I.E. criticizing the construction of Colonial Marines (the sandcastle) does not make you "that jerk kid at the beach who kicks over sandcastles". Attacking Gearbox for making it however, does.

That statement is still false, because in the case of Colonial Marines Gearbox DESERVES to be attacked for intentionally lieing, deceiving its costumers.

So what you're saying is basically that criticism can never be a viable option if you really don't like something? The only thing you can do when something is, like, totally bumming you out is to attack?
Because that's what it sounds like to me. And if that's the case, you are basically making a pro-harassment argument. Which would be.. let's say.. unique!

 

[Strazdas]

I.E. criticizing the construction of Colonial Marines (the sandcastle) does not make you "that jerk kid at the beach who kicks over sandcastles". Attacking Gearbox for making it however, does.

That statement is still false, because in the case of Colonial Marines Gearbox DESERVES to be attacked for intentionally lieing, deceiving its costumers.

So what you're saying is basically that criticism can never be a viable option if you really don't like something? The only thing you can do when something is, like, totally bumming you out is to attack?
Because that's what it sounds like to me. And if that's the case, you are basically making a pro-harassment argument. Which would be.. let's say.. unique!

No, i am saying that there are situations where attack is justified form of action. I never said that you cannot criticism it either. If it sounds like that to you i suggest you read my post again. Attacking Gearbox for its lieing and deception does not make you "That jerk kid at the beach who kicks over sandcastles".

Not sure where you see harassment here either. That would require, you know, people harassing people, when we arent even talking about people but about a company.