John Yossarian
Magister
FWIW, I think the Codex would suffer more from the currently less intersting interview than from VD interviewing himself, even without the disclaimer.
"A fraction of a second later I thought 'this will be probably be brought up anyway, get discussed, and probably not happen again so no biggy' ".Vault Dweller said:Then I'm glad I deleted it.
There isn’t a symbiotic 1:1 relationship between you and teh codex, you are just the most well known representative of it.It's easy to be brave when someone else/something else (in this case the Codex) pays the price - reputation, integrity, etc.
Then please do so.I can and will stand by my opinions and will never retract them to please critics.
Then issue a disclaimer.This was not about opinions, this was about me answering my own questions, which some people found, well, questionable and reflecting poorly on the site.
John Yossarian said:FWIW, I think the Codex would suffer more from the currently less intersting interview than from VD interviewing himself, even without the disclaimer.
Never claimed there is. However, when I make a newspost, write a review, post an interview, I represent the Codex and any mistake I can make will be reflected on the site, not me personally.Koby said:There isn’t a symbiotic 1:1 relationship between you and teh codex, you are just the most well known representative of it.It's easy to be brave when someone else/something else (in this case the Codex) pays the price - reputation, integrity, etc.
It's not about where the criticism came from. It's about what was criticized. Needless to say that if the same critics said that they disagree with my opinion on game X, I wouldn't have even thought of changing my article. But if, for example, I try to promote my game in a review of another game, such article should be taken down immediately. See my point?Your attitude shouldn’t change because the critics come from within.
That's bullshit. Want to take responsibility? Fix the mistake. Don't just acknowledge it.However, reading an article on any site that has a disclaimer in a bold font in the beginning of the article tells me the site has acknowledged their mistakes, and that they are taking responsibility for them.
Too fucking bad, but that's your call. I've made mine.A site/writers that instead of admitting their mistakes, adding a correction / issue an apology and change their articles without stipulating so within the article itself is a site/writers I can no longer trust.
I would have deleted this thread, if that was the case.It is like they swept their mistakes under the carpet and pretending it didn’t happen.
Did I delete the entire interview? No. Did I delete the questions? No. If someone looks at the questions and still has doubts about my intentions, he/she is a moron. Not to mention that the other developers who participated in the interview aren't stupid and would have declined to participate if there was a doubt about the goal of the interview....he might think something like:
"So first he made the question then answered them along with the rest of the interviewers, and then he retracted his own answers."
"Did the fact that he (VD) made the questions himself and in the original article answered them have any affect on the choices of questions he decided on asking?"
"Did he choose the questions that help him shine the strongest light on his own project?"
This is what I would have thought if I was casual codexer.
And it only gets worse from that moment on.
That's what I thought. Anyway, overall I think it was a good concept and the guys liked it too, so I would like to turn it into regular updates where we'd discuss different aspects more indepth. This interview was kinda introductory and generic. We can easily do an entire interview dedicated to different aspects of combat systems or NPCs role and design, etc. I would like to attract more developers too. A gathering of, say, 6-8 indie developers would be lovely.aries202 said:I'm sorry, but I donøt see the difference between VD's having 3-4 four friends over for dinner, and while eating good food, they'd discuss the nature of gaming, and exchanging ideas and sharing their thoughts about the gaming market and the the things they, as indie developers, choose to do differently than mainstream developers, and the interview that VD posted.
Welcome to the wonderful world of internet forums.The Rambling Sage said:I do not want to intrude, as maybe i am just geting all this thing wrong since i do not yet fully understand the relationships among all the usual faces, but if i got this right first people was discussing about how VD should resolve the so-called "problem" and now they are discussing because he did not solve it as they wanted?
Vault Dweller said:I would like to turn it into regular updates where we'd discuss different aspects more indepth. This interview was kinda introductory and generic. We can easily do an entire interview dedicated to different aspects of combat systems or NPCs role and design, etc. I would like to attract more developers too. A gathering of, say, 6-8 indie developers would be lovely
Lies! VD is the Codex and the Codex is VD!Koby said:There isn’t a symbiotic 1:1 relationship between you and teh codex, you are just the most well known representative of it.
Fuck that. Deleting and covering up is far worse than anything anyone could've accused you of beforehand.Vault Dweller said:That's bullshit. Want to take responsibility? Fix the mistake. Don't just acknowledge it.
Vault Dweller said:Mount & Blade is an action game, so its success doesn't count at all here. I pay attention to reaction to AoD on the net, and I can assure you that only hardcore gamers would be interested in a game like that. Your friend is either an exception to this rule or he's more hardcore than you believe.That is pretty much bullshit. It all boils down to proper marketing. And Mount & Blade, while not being exactly a true RPG, is paving the road for you there. And you are doing quite a fine job at "hyping" the game yourself, I admit. I could give examples of non-hardcore RPG fan-friends of mine who have found and are interested in your game independently of me, but you've shown what you think of those examples (Your view is warranted, don't misunderstand me, after all, I might as well just make that up).
The_Pope said:Casual gamers aren't dumb. I've met a fair few, and they often play the games ign and the like berate as too hardcore (...)
The_Pope said:(...) hence the sims making absurd amounts of money (...)
The_Pope said:What he wrote, now seriously.
I have three interview requests from sites much larger than the Codex, but I don't have time to do them at the moment.
The_Pope said:I was using the sims as an example of games without extreme bodycounts, not of complex games.
The_Pope said:Armor makes you harder to hit
The_Pope said:Wizard memorize then forget spells
The_Pope said:Masses of hit points let pointy eared midgets survive cannonballs to the face
The_Pope said:Quite frankly I'm not surprised casual gamers won't put up with that shit.
The_Pope said:AoD seems to focus on things like dialogue. Normal people understand dialogue. Its rules seem to make sense quickly and easily. DnD only becomes comprehensible after painful struggling through clumsy rulebooks and never makes sense.
If that is the reason you edited your interview then think for a moment how will editing the interview in a large and significant way will reflect on the codex.Vault Dweller said:Never claimed there is. However, when I make a newspost, write a review, post an interview, I represent the Codex and any mistake I can make will be reflected on the site, not me personally.
It's not about where the criticism came from. It's about what was criticized. Needless to say that if the same critics said that they disagree with my opinion on game X, I wouldn't have even thought of changing my article. But if, for example, I try to promote my game in a review of another game, such article should be taken down immediately. See my point?
That's bullshit. Want to take responsibility? Fix the mistake. Don't just acknowledge it.
Nothing is set in stone. I am arguing here to try and portrait to you that your current course of action is the one that is hurting the site and its integrity the most.Too fucking bad, but that's your call. I've made mine.
You are missing the big picture here.I would have deleted this thread, if that was the case.It is like they swept their mistakes under the carpet and pretending it didn’t happen.
By deleting the controversial part only you have in effect downgraded the integrity of the interview in its entirety.Did I delete the entire interview? No. Did I delete the questions? No.
If someone looks at the questions and still has doubts about my intentions, he/she is a moron. Not to mention that the other developers who participated in the interview aren't stupid and would have declined to participate if there was a doubt about the goal of the interview.
The 3.5 rules (and the player sheets that go along with it) help to make this more sensible. In the pencil & paper game that I play with friends, we have the "touch" armor class (which is base + dexterity bonus -- basically, how evasive you are regardless of armor), and we have full armor class, which includes the bonuses from armor. The nice thing is, we can now differentiate between a miss and a hit that just doesn't do damage. If the touch AC is 12 and the full AC is 17, then we know that anything below 12 was evaded, anything above 17 is a hit that does damage, and anything in between is a hit that glances or bounces off. This makes armor make much more sense -- armor doesn't "make you harder to hit" it just makes you "more protected from strikes that connect."The Rambling Sage said:The_Pope said:Armor makes you harder to hit
Yes, it actually does that, by putting a thick layer of something hard between you and the enemy weapon. It can be seen as stupid, it can be seen as reasonable - As any abstraction, it depends on perspective.