Jim Sterling Plays Terrible Game, Angry Dev Reposts Video With Response UPDATE 2
- Thread starter Nosirrah
- Start date
Legitimate complaints and accusations of corruption are one thing, but accusing a game journalist of corruption just because they didn't like your game is another and doesn't help the cause of anyone who is legitimately trying to root out corruption in the industry and games journalism.AuronFtw said:
Oh please let Jim end his from now on with "I'm Jim Fucking Sterling son! So thank god for me!" Jim's response video was one of the funniest things I've seen in quite a while. Too bad I missed the dev's response videos.
Damn it, the third video's gone. Oh well I'm pretty sure this debacle is far from over.
OT: Is it really hard for some people to learn mistakes albeit theirs and others before them? I mean we have Guise of the Wolf, Day One: Garry's Incident and Island Light(who also involved Jim "I'm Jim Fucking Sterling son!" Sterling) as examples, and yet shit like this still happen. Is this dev really that immature?
OT: Is it really hard for some people to learn mistakes albeit theirs and others before them? I mean we have Guise of the Wolf, Day One: Garry's Incident and Island Light(who also involved Jim "I'm Jim Fucking Sterling son!" Sterling) as examples, and yet shit like this still happen. Is this dev really that immature?
Haha, that reminds me of when "The Nostalgia Critic" reviewed "The Room" and called it the worst movie ever.Nosirrah said:
Like seriously why would a developer mock someone, especially someone they know has a fair bit of a following. That's the kind of thing a 12 year old does.
There's a difference between "Oh I'm playing some indie thing off steam, and it doesn't work well, it's 9.99 on steam" vs "I'm genuinely reviewing this game, it's awful, don't buy it, nothing the developer could do could ever salvage it, I want my 10$ back."
Like one of the critical problems with PC games is that GOOD games get bought, and are then pirated or youtube'd. BAD games get neither bought or pirated, but still end up on youtube. It's that footage of the game being BAD that will sit at the top of searches for your game. Don't make it worse by drawing further negative attention to it. Steam Early Access only makes it so much easier to sink interest in a BAD game, because those early testers/players will not recommend something that isn't fun.
You know who broke the Gerstmann story? Who then confirmed it? Kotaku - the main group that GG targets.AuronFtw said:
When Warner Brothers tried to buy off YouTube coverage with the review code - GG didn't give a shit.
With ethics you can't say "It doesn't matter, it was a good game anyway".
In fact my overall opinion on GG is that not only is it not about ethics, it is actually opposed to ethics.
Consider the talking point around negative reviews based on "agendas".
Corruption in game's journalism is much, much more likely to occur with positive reviews. Threats to independence are always pushing for positive coverage.
For example WB wanted reviewers to not mention the bugs and to highlight what they saw as the big ticket items in their game. Okay the code was relatively clean and those items were going to end up in reviews anyway - but it was still an attempt to make the coverage more positive then it really deserved.
when Konami banned Jim Sterling from getting review code, it was because they wanted to pressure him into giving them more positive coverage than they actually deserved. Sterling is also a target of Gamergate.
Even the issue GG feels most passionately about, friendships between indie devs and reviewers is in fact one in which pressure is applied to make the reviews more forgiving.
And realize reviewers have to constantly guard against this, so when a bunch of people start whinging that they're being too negative in a title based on an "SJW" agenda - it is more corruption.
With any form of corruption, there is always some form of benefit flowing away from the consumer.
Review does boost a game's sales, but sales isn't the point to it.
The point to a review is to tell people about the game, and express an opinion on whether it is any good.
Gamergate are mostly not asking for the consumer to be protected, but rather for the developer to be protected from pertinent criticism.
Normally on the basis that Metacritic influence sales and bonuses from publishers. See how the money flows? See how they want to game the system such that only the agendas they approve of are reflected in those scores? Part of the point to Metacritic is that it averages such agendas out.
Now the consumer may disagree with the criticism any given critic gives, but at least they are informed of it under the current standard.
The same goes with social issues within actual games journalism - you cannot have forbidden topics of discussion, particularly when those topics are uncomfortable for a highly vocal segment of the community. If there is a sexual or violent harassment problem within gaming there is a social need to give the reader the information they require to protect themselves and affect change.
The press isn't there to provide comfort, it is there to provide information. It is unethical when that information is untrue, or when it is presented in a way that is deceptive.
Balance journalism is at the moment largely considered unethical because it leads to deception.
Climate change is the ultimate example of this - the scientific consensus is very much that is happening, and that is being caused by human actions.
So here is what balance journalism has done with that: You will get scientists who present their findings in their climate related fields getting roped into debates with guys like Christopher Monckton.
Monckton has been repeatedly proven to be a liar - yet he still gets air time because "balance". This only serves to deceive the viewer, making it appear there is a debate when in fact there is not.
This is also a major feature in science journalism as a whole - and related to the recent return of Measles as a problem across much of the Western world.
Now with Gamergate, what do they object to? Coverage of feminists and women in gaming getting harassed. That is a thing that is actually happening.
You can't claim the press shouldn't cover it, or be balanced in its coverage, because there is no balance to be had. It either is or it isn't happening. All balance in that situation does, is give a harasser a platform with which to lie to people people in order to further the harassment.
Take the Quinspiracy as an example of this in action. It turned out that there was no positive review of Zoe Quinn's game on that website. In fact after the relationship turned towards dating, there was no coverage of her by Nathan Grayson at all.
Balance would treat this as being a debate, but the fact is the review itself does not exist.
There is no balancing a bald fact like that.
4chan doesn't delete threads unless they are incredibly dangerously illegal. They never delete piracy threads, only threads with CP in them.AuronFtw said:
The 4chan GG stuff started disappearing because they couldn't get those doing illegal things to stop, so they just shut all of GG stuff down. Same thing happened with Anita Sarkeesian threads from the TvW video Kickstarter. 4chan is the absolute last place you ever want to visit when going factfinding except maybe ED or The Onion which post total garbage made up for kids and adults with poor reading comprehension.
Anyway, It's OT for this thread.
The developers first mistake was making YET ANOTHER ZOMBIE SHOOTER GAME. Their second mistake was not releasing it with enough parts finished. Has the developer ever heard of readme's, developer notes, patch notes, etc? A patch notes list for the most popular MMORPG's are like 100 pages long. This game has what...
"Note: a DMCA takedown notice has been filed on this item."
Uh huh, that's not a good sign.
1957 comments.
From the Announcements it seems like the developers only interest in making improvements to the game is making it more graphic.
You didn't miss much, to be honest. It was about 2 minutes, black background, with just the sound of Jim's voice from his response (first 2 minutes). Here is a paraphrase of the more funny things the dev saidMatthewmagic said:
- "You are scum because YOU don't contribute anything to gaming, I DO"
- "You said I was angry? I WAS NOT ANGRY! I was disgusted"
- "I don't steal anything - I'm an indie dev - I get stuff from other indie devs. We support each other"
- "You are getting money for copyright infringement at 60 FPS" (almost exactly this was said, the wording may have been slightly different)
- "Your videos can help or hinder a game, and don't you understand you are being negative on my game which loses me sales?"
- (it ended with) "Well, you aren't really worth my time - I'm going back to work, so bye"
and thus it ended before minute 3 hit.
i got banned because on their steam forum because i linked the second video, i will forever be ashamed of my actions 
they said it was an "unauthorized link" lol
they said it was an "unauthorized link" lol
*Snipped valid points on the trend towards negative reviews and why it can be harmful to dialogue*
At least one of those graphics in the game seem to have been stolen. The person who developed that lead character model, which looks pretty good all told, CERTAINLY did not develop, nor was consulted, about those blood splatters on the HUD, nor the red gore effects. The level is fairly well designed, but the lighting is dizzying in it's contrasts, is overall way too dark, and does need more caches of ammo or at least glowing items (since the ammo and health packs are still largely symbols hovering over the floor, they might as well attract the eye visually as well, but this is just a suggestion.) The programming of the game is a bit wonky and definitely needs more polish- the counter should not go so low as -9998, and pauses and breaks should be introduced to facilitate accessing menu screens and access to the gameplay in general- when Jim started play he was ALREADY under attack. I agree with Jim's sentiment that the monsters have no rhyme nor reason, at least at this point, but would be interested if there WAS a coherent reason provided why the Mummy, Nosferatu and regular shamblers were all over the place in the same universe- Serious Sam and PainKiller both had numerous unrelated monsters tied together by a story(loose as it was in Serious Sam, I admit), so I'm not ready to dismiss this seeming lack of cohesion just yet. But I am skeptical of said explanation's existence...
In short, I wouldn't pay for this game at this point, especially if it's being sold as a final build. As an Alpha, I feel it shows some promise, and could eventually become something entertaining in the low-end price range, with a lot more work on the HUD, a coherent narrative with clear goals, balanced level design and tweaked mechanics.
As an aside, I tend to lose all respect for those who steal, so unless I'm mistaken, I do think that this developer needs to re-evaluate their company policy. If I were the artist, I'd demand a patch fix removing my art permanently- I'd demand a compensatory payment/percent of sales, but I suspect the former would benefit me more in the long run.
...
I did laugh when Jim was laughing in the third video, though. That dude was ANGRY.[/quote]
One of the issues (bought up solely in passing, however) is that this isn't an alpha, beta or early-access game-is being sold as completed content.
At least one of those graphics in the game seem to have been stolen. The person who developed that lead character model, which looks pretty good all told, CERTAINLY did not develop, nor was consulted, about those blood splatters on the HUD, nor the red gore effects. The level is fairly well designed, but the lighting is dizzying in it's contrasts, is overall way too dark, and does need more caches of ammo or at least glowing items (since the ammo and health packs are still largely symbols hovering over the floor, they might as well attract the eye visually as well, but this is just a suggestion.) The programming of the game is a bit wonky and definitely needs more polish- the counter should not go so low as -9998, and pauses and breaks should be introduced to facilitate accessing menu screens and access to the gameplay in general- when Jim started play he was ALREADY under attack. I agree with Jim's sentiment that the monsters have no rhyme nor reason, at least at this point, but would be interested if there WAS a coherent reason provided why the Mummy, Nosferatu and regular shamblers were all over the place in the same universe- Serious Sam and PainKiller both had numerous unrelated monsters tied together by a story(loose as it was in Serious Sam, I admit), so I'm not ready to dismiss this seeming lack of cohesion just yet. But I am skeptical of said explanation's existence...
In short, I wouldn't pay for this game at this point, especially if it's being sold as a final build. As an Alpha, I feel it shows some promise, and could eventually become something entertaining in the low-end price range, with a lot more work on the HUD, a coherent narrative with clear goals, balanced level design and tweaked mechanics.
As an aside, I tend to lose all respect for those who steal, so unless I'm mistaken, I do think that this developer needs to re-evaluate their company policy. If I were the artist, I'd demand a patch fix removing my art permanently- I'd demand a compensatory payment/percent of sales, but I suspect the former would benefit me more in the long run.
...
I did laugh when Jim was laughing in the third video, though. That dude was ANGRY.[/quote]
One of the issues (bought up solely in passing, however) is that this isn't an alpha, beta or early-access game-is being sold as completed content.
Jim himself reposted the video the dev took down. You can find it here:
(Link w/o embed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXcPiy9g4UQ)
(Link w/o embed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXcPiy9g4UQ)
Post Removed- Thanks for the link!
EDIT: In case Jim's copy of the Dev's second video is also taken down, I'd like to paraphrase the video for anybody late to the party;
The dev spends 3 minutes calling Jim a 'leech'; getting views and money off the hard work of indie devs, and that his (Jim's) videos, while "not a review", are impacting sales. He goes on to say that Jim is killing the Indie industry with his videos.
EDIT: In case Jim's copy of the Dev's second video is also taken down, I'd like to paraphrase the video for anybody late to the party;
The dev spends 3 minutes calling Jim a 'leech'; getting views and money off the hard work of indie devs, and that his (Jim's) videos, while "not a review", are impacting sales. He goes on to say that Jim is killing the Indie industry with his videos.
Amusingly, I went to have a look on steam, and the promo video was about 2 minutes of footage, 8 minutes of black screen, then the last frame of the video is clearly part of his video response to Jim that got left on the cutting room floor. Not the most professional of moves.
While I did have a tiny bit of sympathy with the dev before the terrible response, it's mostly evaporated.
While I did have a tiny bit of sympathy with the dev before the terrible response, it's mostly evaporated.
Bugga-wha? So, it's okay for an indie dev to steal stuff as long as it's from another indie dev?DoPo said:
I know that's hardly the most fucked up thing about all this, but still...
Sorry, that was my failure to convey the dev's words - he didn't say he was stealing from others but that he was collaborating with them.Ima Lemming said:Bugga-wha? So, it's okay for an indie dev to steal stuff as long as it's from another indie dev?DoPo said:
I know that's hardly the most fucked up thing about all this, but still...
Seems that Jim (Fucking Sterling son, thank God for him) has actually uploaded the dev's response...or maybe more accurate it's a response-response-response. At any rate, you can see for yourself.
uncanny474 said:
For the first twenty seconds I thought he had a point, since Game Grumps have been rushing in and then complaining about shit they should know. But since this isn't a review and they started actually DIGGING THEMSELVES DEEPER any sympathy I could possibly have had was gone by the second minute. I can't wait to watch the fourth video.