By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - (POSSIBLE SPOILERS INSIDE) The agenda and political discussion of Naughty Dog

 

Have politics damaged the quality of ND games

No 39 41.94%
 
Yes 54 58.06%
 
Total:93
EricHiggin said:
Hynad said:

It's difficult to take this out of context, considering the tweet includes examples of what human garbage are posting to both him and the actress, yet you managed to do it. Probably because, like so many, you will understand whatever you already set your mind to, regardless of what it really says.

He's not addressing the naysayers. He's addressing the morons who take the hate too far and make death threats. 

Out of context? What it really says?

"This kind of hate"?

What kind exactly? Since that's not explained by him. If he's referring to something else, then that allows for, interpretation.

Are you kidding me? 



What kind exactly? Right? What kind? I mean, seriously... The tweet clearly doesn't make it obvious. What with the examples given and all that.

So really, what kind?



......

Bad faith much?



Around the Network
EricHiggin said:
iron_megalith said:

Indirectly he does refer to TLOU2 which is HIS project. What else can he be referring to?

Certainly TLOU1 or any other past projects is not the topic here.

Him saying his work challenges conventions is quite narcissistic of him. His statement about HIS project is subjective. You let your art do the talking and let the crowd judge and decide. This is him looking like a fool by unnecessarily exalting his work.

If he had just stuck with defending people's hard work in this project(which deserves to be recognized) without self proclaiming any titles, it would have been totally fine.

It's his Twitter account as well, not ND's correct? Being one of the problems doesn't mean he's the entire problem, only a portion, large or small.

Neil also heavily implies that TLOU2 was entertaining and popular before it was even released. "Unfortunately, this is now the cost of making popular entertainment that challenges conventions".

No Neil. Unfortunately, that's not how it works. Just because you and your team thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread during development, doesn't mean that's what the players will think. It's the audience who decides whether something is entertaining, and the higher the overall positivity towards the medium, the larger the audience should grow, in which the more popular it will be said to be. 

Neil is clearly taking it quite personally, and there may be more than a few reasons for that which impact him personally, but it's not how he should be conveying his defense to the naysayers. At the very least, he should simply agree to disagree if he won't just ignore it, especially based on the position he holds.

He's not calling his project popular and entertaining he is saying that it, as a AAA video game, is part of popular entertainment. Big budget media projects don't have to be popular or entertaining as individuals projects to be part of popular entertainment. 



...

Hynad said:
EricHiggin said:

Out of context? What it really says?

"This kind of hate"?

What kind exactly? Since that's not explained by him. If he's referring to something else, then that allows for, interpretation.

Are you kidding me? 



What kind exactly? Right? What kind? I mean, seriously... The tweet clearly doesn't make it obvious. What with the examples given and all that.

So really, what kind?



......

Bad faith much?

It's almost like people need to be clear about things they say and portray and explain them well, even in just the right way, for others to understand in a manner that they may agree with. It's almost like if you don't do that, people have no choice but to interpret what you put in front of them, in which they may see things differently to some degree, and may disagree with the intended meaning.

Why some can get away with poor etiquette by being vague, while others can't however, is still a mystery...

Torillian said:
EricHiggin said:

It's his Twitter account as well, not ND's correct? Being one of the problems doesn't mean he's the entire problem, only a portion, large or small.

Neil also heavily implies that TLOU2 was entertaining and popular before it was even released. "Unfortunately, this is now the cost of making popular entertainment that challenges conventions".

No Neil. Unfortunately, that's not how it works. Just because you and your team thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread during development, doesn't mean that's what the players will think. It's the audience who decides whether something is entertaining, and the higher the overall positivity towards the medium, the larger the audience should grow, in which the more popular it will be said to be. 

Neil is clearly taking it quite personally, and there may be more than a few reasons for that which impact him personally, but it's not how he should be conveying his defense to the naysayers. At the very least, he should simply agree to disagree if he won't just ignore it, especially based on the position he holds.

He's not calling his project popular and entertaining he is saying that it, as a AAA video game, is part of popular entertainment. Big budget media projects don't have to be popular or entertaining as individuals projects to be part of popular entertainment. 

So just to be clear.

It would be like someone saying, based on the political sphere, 'As the people who would propagate this kind of hate would say, how stunning and brave! I hope these people get the mental help they so clearly need. Unfortunately this is now the cost of electing a populist entertainer that challenges conventions. Donald doesn't deserve any of this' ?

I didn't look at it that way, but now that you've explained it, maybe Neil has a point...



EricHiggin said:
Hynad said:

Are you kidding me? 



What kind exactly? Right? What kind? I mean, seriously... The tweet clearly doesn't make it obvious. What with the examples given and all that.

So really, what kind?



......

Bad faith much?

It's almost like people need to be clear about things they say and portray and explain them well, even in just the right way, for others to understand in a manner that they may agree with. It's almost like if you don't do that, people have no choice but to interpret what you put in front of them, in which they may see things differently to some degree, and may disagree with the intended meaning.

Why some can get away with poor etiquette by being vague, while others can't however, is still a mystery...

Torillian said:

He's not calling his project popular and entertaining he is saying that it, as a AAA video game, is part of popular entertainment. Big budget media projects don't have to be popular or entertaining as individuals projects to be part of popular entertainment. 

So just to be clear.

It would be like someone saying, based on the political sphere, 'As the people who would propagate this kind of hate would say, how stunning and brave! I hope these people get the mental help they so clearly need. Unfortunately this is now the cost of electing a populist entertainer that challenges conventions. Donald doesn't deserve any of this' ?

I didn't look at it that way, but now that you've explained it, maybe Neil has a point...

Are AAA video games a form of popular entertainment or not? 



...

Torillian said:
EricHiggin said:

It's almost like people need to be clear about things they say and portray and explain them well, even in just the right way, for others to understand in a manner that they may agree with. It's almost like if you don't do that, people have no choice but to interpret what you put in front of them, in which they may see things differently to some degree, and may disagree with the intended meaning.

Why some can get away with poor etiquette by being vague, while others can't however, is still a mystery...

So just to be clear.

It would be like someone saying, based on the political sphere, 'As the people who would propagate this kind of hate would say, how stunning and brave! I hope these people get the mental help they so clearly need. Unfortunately this is now the cost of electing a populist entertainer that challenges conventions. Donald doesn't deserve any of this' ?

I didn't look at it that way, but now that you've explained it, maybe Neil has a point...

Are AAA video games a form of popular entertainment or not? 

I dunno. Are exotic cars a form of popular travel or not?

It depends on what you want to compare them to.

Are Honda Civics and Minecraft also forms of popular travel and entertainment?

If so, what does that make exotic cars and AAA games?



Around the Network
EricHiggin said:
Hynad said:

Are you kidding me? 



What kind exactly? Right? What kind? I mean, seriously... The tweet clearly doesn't make it obvious. What with the examples given and all that.

So really, what kind?



......

Bad faith much?

It's almost like people need to be clear about things they say and portray and explain them well, even in just the right way, for others to understand in a manner that they may agree with. It's almost like if you don't do that, people have no choice but to interpret what you put in front of them, in which they may see things differently to some degree, and may disagree with the intended meaning.

Why some can get away with poor etiquette by being vague, while others can't however, is still a mystery...

Torillian said:

He's not calling his project popular and entertaining he is saying that it, as a AAA video game, is part of popular entertainment. Big budget media projects don't have to be popular or entertaining as individuals projects to be part of popular entertainment. 

So just to be clear.

It would be like someone saying, based on the political sphere, 'As the people who would propagate this kind of hate would say, how stunning and brave! I hope these people get the mental help they so clearly need. Unfortunately this is now the cost of electing a populist entertainer that challenges conventions. Donald doesn't deserve any of this' ?

I didn't look at it that way, but now that you've explained it, maybe Neil has a point...

Seriously... You are trying too hard. 

You want to argue for arguing’s sake, and I question your motive here.

It is quite clear for everyone other than you what Neil means by “this kind of hate”. So maybe question yourself before questioning him.



Hynad said:
EricHiggin said:

It's almost like people need to be clear about things they say and portray and explain them well, even in just the right way, for others to understand in a manner that they may agree with. It's almost like if you don't do that, people have no choice but to interpret what you put in front of them, in which they may see things differently to some degree, and may disagree with the intended meaning.

Why some can get away with poor etiquette by being vague, while others can't however, is still a mystery...

So just to be clear.

It would be like someone saying, based on the political sphere, 'As the people who would propagate this kind of hate would say, how stunning and brave! I hope these people get the mental help they so clearly need. Unfortunately this is now the cost of electing a populist entertainer that challenges conventions. Donald doesn't deserve any of this' ?

I didn't look at it that way, but now that you've explained it, maybe Neil has a point...

Seriously... You are trying too hard. 

You want to argue for arguing’s sake, and I question your motive here.

It is quite clear for everyone other than you what Neil means by “this kind of hate”. So maybe question yourself before questioning him.

You're starting to sound a lot more like Neil.



EricHiggin said:
Torillian said:

Are AAA video games a form of popular entertainment or not? 

I dunno. Are exotic cars a form of popular travel or not?

It depends on what you want to compare them to.

Are Honda Civics and Minecraft also forms of popular travel and entertainment?

If so, what does that make exotic cars and AAA games?

Not sure what you are trying to imply, but quite possibly the cost of development of a Honda Civic is similar to an exotic car, but for different reasons and perhaps individual models end up being cheaper to design because of the accumulated knowledge. Don't forget that they keep researching on how to make it cheaper to manufacture. Exotic cars are somewhat challenging conventions and most desire it but isn't popular at all. Still have no idea what you are trying to mirror with that.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

padib said:

Can I try to breathe some sense into both sides?

On one side, the opinion is that Neil tried to defend Laura Bailey and was very specific as to what kind of hate he was denouncing. Neil lifts up Laura by saying she is brave. This side promotes this kind of behaviour because it shames bad attitudes and exposes them, so they will stop. Some users believe this is the right approach because users in the future will be discouraged from posting in such a way in fear of being exposed.

The other side defends that Neil is using the wrong platform to do this, because it gives light to bad behaviours and allows such bad tweets to become a thing, which is akin to news about mass shootings which could fuel the next potential. He should be reporting these tweets to authorities, because death threats are serious. His motives of shaming are also questionable because he did so at other times when it was less laudable (like with Jason Schreier), and so his intentions of defending Laura, while praiseworthy, are tainted by his need to defend the game his name is attached to. Some mention that while the hate condemned in Neil's post is clear, it may be seen as a blank statement to vilify any kind of criticism or negativity about the game (this has already been done by him, and by many people on many platforms), and a way of portraying all those who are against the game as psychotic haters.

The takeaways are simple:
1) Laura Bailey didn't deserve this, she was doing her job.
2) Neil trying to defend her is noble, but defending her is arguably biased, and it would be wiser if he used another means to do so. (such as reporting)
3) Neil spiralled somewhat out of control on Twitter, being negative about other people, users and journalists alike.
4) We all need to be more civil and respectful towards each other, and to share an atmosphere of harmony.
5) Let's not lump all criticism of the game into one category of people (see "TLOU2 Haters Are Nut Jobs CONFIRMED" thread for more wisdom).

Valid points, and even though we can certainly claim Neil is biased we also have to accept that is natural that he is going to defend his work (doesn't matter if he considers himself a small part or the main part of the work).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

TLOU2's story would still be terrible even if all characters were straight white males, and conversely a story with nothing but lesbian women can still be good. You can say the reason for the bad writing is because they shifted priorities, propaganda over entertainment, but ultimately the fault is bad writing, so why make it about identity politics? I say just leave that to the people who wanna defend something but have no actual arguments to defend with.

I would like to know though what they were thinking when they decided to have pregnant women be soldiers. Already odd to have women fighting when humanity is on the brink of extinction, but my suspension of disbelief is completely shattered when they send pregnant women to battle despite having so many able bodies they coulda sent instead. Is this supposed to empower women, telling them they're just as capable as any man even while pregnant? Worst part is these women willingly chose to fight. Such stupid decisions and bad parenting triggered me to the point of hating this game more than any other. I guess I have to give Naughty Dog that, been a long time since something that doesn't directly affect my livelihood got me so angry.