Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Our indie interview

John Yossarian

Magister
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
1,000
Location
Pianosa
FWIW, I think the Codex would suffer more from the currently less intersting interview than from VD interviewing himself, even without the disclaimer.
 

Koby

Scholar
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
356
Vault Dweller said:
Then I'm glad I deleted it.
"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' ".

It's easy to be brave when someone else/something else (in this case the Codex) pays the price - reputation, integrity, etc.
There isn’t a symbiotic 1:1 relationship between you and teh codex, you are just the most well known representative of it.

If the codex as a whole can't take any hits and survive, 'it' should go find a rock to live under because shit like this WILL happen again. Shit happens! It is how the shit is dealt with which testify about integrity, which in turn leads to reputation.

I can and will stand by my opinions and will never retract them to please critics.
Then please do so.
Your attitude shouldn’t change because the critics come from within.

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.
Then issue a disclaimer.

I didn’t judge the inhabitant of gamespot.com forums nor their stuff as a whole after reading a bad review there, only the reviewers, despising that site as a whole took years of bad reviews and trying to pass shameless pimping and hyping games as previews to accomplish.

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. 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. It is like they swept their mistakes under the carpet and pretending it didn’t happen.
 

Koby

Scholar
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
356
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.

If a casual codexer, i.e. one how only come here for the latest news on indie projects, which is not so hard to believe since this IS hands down the best place to get this type of information, comes and read the article and then decides to read some more on the matter by going into the forums and all of a sudden see that VD retracted his own answer to his questions 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.

And from there on out, this casual codexer will take any other interviews that VD makes with some grain of salt because he didn’t see original article, so without any information all he can do is speculate and that never turns out good.

This is far worse then downgrading the quality of the article or providing less content in the article.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Koby said:
It's easy to be brave when someone else/something else (in this case the Codex) pays the price - reputation, integrity, etc.
There isn’t a symbiotic 1:1 relationship between you and teh codex, you are just the most well known representative of it.
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.

Your attitude shouldn’t change because the critics come from within.
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?

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.
That's bullshit. Want to take responsibility? Fix the mistake. Don't just acknowledge it.

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.
Too fucking bad, but that's your call. I've made mine.

It is like they swept their mistakes under the carpet and pretending it didn’t happen.
I would have deleted this thread, if that was the case.

...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.
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.
 

aries202

Erudite
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
1,066
Location
Denmark, Europe
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.

It just look like a bunch of guys, indie developers, talking to each other about the things they d everyday, just like people would do in 'normal' conversation. And everyone at the Codex (or at some other sites) probably know that VD and mr. Weller is the same person (and if they didn't before, thanks to this interview, now they do ;) ).
 

Claw

Erudite
Patron
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
3,777
Location
The center of my world.
Project: Eternity Divinity: Original Sin 2
Well, this fucking sucks. I didn't finish the article yesterday because I had to get up early, and now I find Vince D. Weller's answers are gone.

Now I'll read this stupid thread and find out what the fuck is going on. I want it to be known however that I am displeased.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
452
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?

I guess there is a market for radio controlled VDs, after all.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
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.
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.

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?
Welcome to the wonderful world of internet forums.
 

chaedwards

Liturgist
Joined
Jun 10, 2004
Messages
352
Location
London
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

Thumbs up from me. I really enjoyed the article - it was nice to read something intelligent and honest rather than watching another piece of PR drivel being torn apart.
 

made

Arcane
Joined
Dec 18, 2006
Messages
5,130
Location
Germany
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.
Lies! VD is the Codex and the Codex is VD!

Anyway, for what it's worth, I think the interview is worse off without the AoD bits. I was lucky enough to read it in its original form, and it did a good job at showcasing the present indie scene in an interesting an unusual format. Cutting 25% of the content didn't really help anyone.
 

Calis

Pensionado
Joined
Jun 15, 2002
Messages
1,834
Vault Dweller said:
That's bullshit. Want to take responsibility? Fix the mistake. Don't just acknowledge it.
Fuck that. Deleting and covering up is far worse than anything anyone could've accused you of beforehand.
 

Higher Game

Arcane
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
13,662
Location
Female Vagina
I agree with Vault Dweller: pimping your own stuff in what should be a discussion of alternative, less well known independent titles is cheesy and unprofessional, especially in the context it was done. By itself, it would have been somewhat acceptable, but throwing it in with legitimate interviews was uncalled for. I think whatever was said could be (and should be, since I'm curious now) posted in the Age of Decadence forum here, but not with the other guys' words.
 

mister lamat

Scholar
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
570
just put it in it's own newspost and call it 'the other thing i do with myself when i'm alone'. :)
 

The_Pope

Scholar
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
844
Vault Dweller said:
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).
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.

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: civilization, total war series, silent hunter etc. They just don't care about the industry, or graphics, or what retarded fanboys posing as journalists say about a game. They don't know thinking is last gen. They don't know that games without EXTREME bodycounts are teh ghey (hence the sims making absurd amounts of money). If you could let these people know your game exists and won't require a new computer, I'd say it will do a lot for your sales. Of course, that might be hard to do as they don't pay attention to game websites.

Bethesdas market isn't casual gamers, it's retarded hardcore gamers. If we need a one word definition, I suggest tardcore.
 

Zomg

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
6,984
May God bless this meme, and send it out into memespace on angel's wings.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
452
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 (...)

:roll:

The_Pope said:
What he wrote, now seriously.

Now, leaving me being an ass aside, my experience with casual gamers suggest that, while they couldn't care less about gaming media and gaming trends, they can take just so much complexity before lossing interest and going back to hardcore things, like The Sims for an example.

Sorry, i couldn't help it.

I once tried to turn a couple Casual gamers i knew in more serious, hardcore gamers. I had only so much success, as they know hate idiotic things like The Sims with a passion, but can't get into things like Planescape, to give an RPG example. Yes, they may not be idiots, but they are just willing to put so much time and effort into a game before calling it a day and go fetch some other thing that looks like it could be interesting, fun, or both.

After all, that is why they are Casual gamers. They do not see Gaming as a time-consuming hobby, but as another entertaining thing, like going to the movies or reading a book. Yes, they do not like crap, but they also can only go so far into the realms of complex and time consuming before giving up. See the "casual consumer" trends on other markets to get a better idea of what i am saying.

So i do not think AoD is going to catch those fickle fancies, but then only AoD's team has enough knowledge on the topic as to really know, or make an educated guess at least, on that topic.
 

Mr Happy

Scholar
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
574
Like I said in the other thread, I would still like to do a proper response to some of the stuff in the interview (I'm glad I had a chance to read the AoD bits), but I haven't had the time. For now:

I have three interview requests from sites much larger than the Codex, but I don't have time to do them at the moment.

Just out of curiosity, which sites? Aod (and other the indie titles) certainly deserve a pimp-storm.
 

The_Pope

Scholar
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
844
I was using the sims as an example of games without extreme bodycounts, not of complex games.

As for planescape, it is a game that takes a fair bit of effort to enjoy. It has an utterly worthless game system and shitty interface. I did enjoy it after forcing myself to stick with it, but trying to get someone with no masochistic tendencies to give something as retarded as DnD a chance is difficult. Armor makes you harder to hit? Wizard memorize then forget spells? Masses of hit points let pointy eared midgets survive cannonballs to the face? Then there's the items. +1 sword. +1 what? Damage? Accuracy? Attack speed? Length? Quite frankly I'm not surprised casual gamers won't put up with that shit.

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.
 

MacBone

Scholar
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Messages
554
Location
Brutopia
Eh, the remaining 75% is still worth reading. I'm always in favor of seeing more original content around these parts.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
452
The_Pope said:
I was using the sims as an example of games without extreme bodycounts, not of complex games.

That's why i pointed, with another quote and my first real line, to the fact i was actually misrepresenting your post and just being an ass.

Now, i despise D&D myself, but many of those same Casual Players that disliked Planescape liked the BG games, for an example, when exposed to them. So i think you were misrepresenting my point, even if i do not think such was the intention. Anyway, just because, some pointers, based on my own, bigoted knowledge of how people rationalize D&D, be those people Casual or Hardcore, that may help to understand posterior points through the examples they set:

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.

The_Pope said:
Wizard memorize then forget spells

This is an uninportant thing. First, they can't relate Magick to their own reasonable and consensual paradigm, so it is just a game convention they take as it is, as with Mana, Runes, or whatever. Then, many people just see it as a simplification to "preparing" the spell, as most people are not alien to the concept of ritualistic practices in relation to Magick.

The_Pope said:
Masses of hit points let pointy eared midgets survive cannonballs to the face

Masses of hit points let anyone survive any kind of big, hulking aberration attacking them with monolitic claws, and it is a game convention, as old as games themselves. There are games where you have a life bar, games where you have many lives, and no one ever pointed and said "How stupid this is." Man, solid snake takes on a tank, a combat helicopter, and a Metal Gear and comes out with just a somewhat smaller Life Bar. And those are games everyone enjoys, casual and hardcore alike.

And most D&D players, both casual and hardcore, both CRPG and PnP, i know do not see Hit Points as the meassure of how many damage you can take, but the meassure of how many hits bypassing your defences you can somewhat evade before you break concentration/focus/anything and someone caps you. For most people out there the idea of "one hit with something lethal and you awake in intensive care" is just natural, so they always rationalize those "lifebar" system one way or another.

They rationalize it, suspend they disbelief, and go back to having fun. Casuals have that easier than us, to be sincere. They see it as "Just a game," not a hobby, not a religion, and not something to bitch about in forums.

See the basic difference in perspective that, with more complex games like this one, may, or may not, become a problem?

The_Pope said:
Quite frankly I'm not surprised casual gamers won't put up with that shit.

I am not surprised with such perspective, either, as i have little love for D&D. But those same players liked the BG games and, as i said, it was just an example anyways. Another one? Arcanum. Yes, one could say the system is worthless also, but you can say that about any RPG system out there. In essence, it always become an abstraction of a reality we are at least partialy familiar with and, as they become more complex, things completely idiotic and unreasonable begin to appear.

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.

But by complexity i do not just mean "Complexity of the Game System," but "General Complexity." Books have not a game system you must cope with, but then there is a certain level of complexity most casual readers never dare to cross. The same goes with movies, music, or anything else. There is a limited wealth of attention a person will invest into "entertainment," and hardcore players, as hobbysts they are, want to invest much more on games than casual players do. A game designed with hardcore gamers in mind may have a level of general complexity requiring an attention investment higher than that a casual gamer is willing to put on it. It would be natural.

For another, different example, most casual players i met give up when they find themselves in a situation wich they can't come out victorious of in so many tries. This "max frustration level" is much lower in casual gamers than in hardcore gamers, wich in fact consider most games that do not put them at least once through one such situation a waste of time, money, and their programers a waste of air and resources.

Even in movies it is easier to appeal, up to a certain point, to both crowds, since as long the movie itself is entertaining, the casual viewer can leave satisfied even if he didn't put the required effort to understand the entire background or setting. In an game where INTERACTION with this setting and background seems to be so important, how can you manage to find a balance that will leave both crowds satisfied? And i am not saying you are commenting on adaptating the game to a casual gaming crowd, but just presenting the conflict to then invert it: How can a game with the level of general complexity the Hardcore crowd wants be also rewarding to the smaller attention and effort investment, and lower frustration levels, of a casual gamer?

As a note, i am not attacking you, your viewpoint, or your tesis in any way or shape. I am just exposing my doubts with the later two with the only kind of evidence we can use on an apparently subjective topic like this one: Theorical, and anecdotical. So i am sorry if my post seems too confrontational, as it is not the intention.
 

The_Pope

Scholar
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
844
The frustration tolerance thing is a very good way of defining casual players. Untill I've played AoD, I won't have any real idea how well it will fare in that regard. However, the game as I currently see it seems like its simple enough to be worth putting some marketing effort towards them, rather than assuming only codexers will play a game without bloom. The games stats etc. seem quite intuitive, and the turn based gameplay means people won't have to worry about learning to click super fast - when I watch casual gamers playing Total War battles, it's paused more often than not. AoD seems more about creating a character and playing through a story, an activity which is enjoyable without being difficult or confusing.

As long as the game doesn't piss people off with bugged quests or random 99 damage criticals, it should be fine for casual players.
 

Koby

Scholar
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
356
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.
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.

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?

Yes I do. However, if you thought that altering the interview in a very significant manner is the answer then you have thought wrong. If, in any moment you see a problem with one of you writing, you either remove it completely with some kind of explanation of why it was removed (in case it is really, really bad) OR you issue a some kind clarification/disclaimer within the said piece of writing.

Did it occur to you that altering the interview is such a way will hurt its (you AND the codex) integrity more then anything else?

If you want to keep the interview in its current form you HAVE to provide either your original interview, or the parts you removed in same way or another, AND you have to refer to it from within the altered article.

That's bullshit. Want to take responsibility? Fix the mistake. Don't just acknowledge it.

BS! Own you mistake first and foremost. Fixing it without a clarification or an admission of error of some sort isn’t taking responsibility; it is covering up your mistakes!

If you had added a disclaimer it, in its own right, would have addressed the issue, and from that moment on, no other action would have been needed.

Too fucking bad, but that's your call. I've made mine.
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.

It is like they swept their mistakes under the carpet and pretending it didn’t happen.
I would have deleted this thread, if that was the case.
You are missing the big picture here.


Did I delete the entire interview? No. Did I delete the questions? No.
By deleting the controversial part only you have in effect downgraded the integrity of the interview in its entirety.

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.

It doesn't work that way. You are not the one to decide which doubts are moronic and which aren't.

As long as the reader cannot form his own educated, informative opinion on the subject, as the author, you are in no position to de-legitimate his doubts.

By allowing the reader access to the controversial parts of the interview, then and only then can the reader form an educated, informative opinion.

By not allowing him to do so (read the removed parts), you don’t give the reader the opportunity to make up his own mind.

Do you really expect for the reader under the current situation to take your word that there isn’t anything under the table in the interview while the interview itself has gone under significant changes?
 

aboyd

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
843
Location
USA
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.
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."
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom