Wasteland The Wasteland 2 Beta Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[mindx2]

the perception (as he stated) of a conflict would be there.

The perception of a conflict is not an actual conflict, and thusly, there is no "textbook conflict of interest" here. The short of it is that unless VD and Iron Tower actually stands to - even theoretically - gain an advantage from WL2 doing poorly, then we can talk about a conflict of interest. Seeing as the claim that WL2's demise would in any way, shape or form benefit ITS is very far out, we are certainly not dealing with anything "textbook" here.

Then I should have been more clear and state it is a textbook definition of the perception of conflict of interest. Unfortunately, perception is just as strong as an actual conflict regardless of VD's intentions. I also don't see VD's reasoning (or me agreeing with him) coming from him benefiting financially by criticizing W2 but people will think he approached his review from a point of view.

 

[Decado]

What is the release date for Vault Dweller's game?

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

Thursday.

 

[Liston]

I agree with Vault Dweller. If he criticizes W2 I'm totally going to think that he is just a jelly faggot.

 

[tuluse]

The perception of a conflict is not an actual conflict, and thusly, there is no "textbook conflict of interest" here. The short of it is that unless VD and Iron Tower actually stands to - even theoretically - gain an advantage from WL2 doing poorly, then we can talk about a conflict of interest. Seeing as the claim that WL2's demise would in any way, shape or form benefit ITS is very far out, we are certainly not dealing with anything "textbook" here.

There actually is a real conflict of interest if VD used his position as a reviewer to convince anyone to buy AoD instead of WL2, even a single person, that's your conflict right there.

Secondly, journalistic code includes avoiding perceptions of bias. Not that someone reviewing for the codex needs to care about it, but perceptions do matter.

 

[Grunker]

The perception of a conflict is not an actual conflict, and thusly, there is no "textbook conflict of interest" here. The short of it is that unless VD and Iron Tower actually stands to - even theoretically - gain an advantage from WL2 doing poorly, then we can talk about a conflict of interest. Seeing as the claim that WL2's demise would in any way, shape or form benefit ITS is very far out, we are certainly not dealing with anything "textbook" here.

There actually is a real conflict of interest if VD used his position as a reviewer to convince anyone to buy AoD instead of WL2

That's like saying there's a conflict of interest when I write a review because I can use my position to make people buy my magazine instead of WL2. There is no specific reason that VD stands to gain anything from WL2 doing poorly. When the opposite argument (there is a conflict of interest because VD stands to gain a lot on WL2 doing really well because it raises awareness for that type of RPG) is just as viable, saying that there is a conflict of interests is grasping at straws. It's a blanket statement not rooted in fact, and thusly, you cannot talk about a conflict of interest.

Secondly, journalistic code includes avoiding perceptions of bias. Not that someone reviewing for the codex needs to care about it, but perceptions do matter.

If you are advocating for the Codex to hold itself to such high journalistic standards you are deluding yourself. Also, I think you are misrepresenting journalistic standards. There are plenty of jewish journalists covering Gaza in Denmark who are widely respected (we don't have as much bullshit as the US in that regard), sports people doing sports coverage and industry specialists handling stocks. In fact, it is the default journalistic method to make people who understand a subject cover that subject.

The "person X is from the industry he reports on"-bias is not a true bias, but it is one often misunderstood to be by the general public. Conflicts of interest arise when the person covering something stands to - based on evidence - gain something by doing the coverage in a certain way.

Any accusations that VD stands to gain something from covering WL2 in a certain way are just that. Baseless accusations. As such, you REALLY have some ground to cover before you arrive at "textbook conflict of interest."

 

[Zorba the Hutt]

Apart from the perceived bias issue, there's also the issue that AoD will inevitably be dragged into the discussion around the review. It seems to happen quite frequently these days when VD expresses an opinion. So you end up with the "you criticise WL2 but it's better than AoD"... "well we had different goals as a small developer" derail instead of discussing WL2.

I was about to compare it to Gaider reviewing POE but on second thoughts... better not.

 

[Tigranes]

Actually, I think we - or at least, niche noncommercial places like the Codex - should dispense with the silly idea of 'conflict of interest'. COI is not a blanket rule for every situation, it is a specific one where, for instance, you should not get someone on the board of both companies to handle negotiations for a commercial transaction. If Sawyer reviews D:OS, VD reviews WL2, MCA reviewed AOD, etc, it would be a much richer experience, for instance. Sometimes, 'conflict of interest' as a rule only serves to hold up the norm of ad hominem attacks. As VD said before, some people will say he is biased blah blah. And that probably means it's sensible for him not to do the review. Ideally, I wish he could, because it's not COI that is th eproblem, it's retards who can't think through the actual message from the person that is the problem.

 

[tuluse]

Secondly, journalistic code includes avoiding perceptions of bias. Not that someone reviewing for the codex needs to care about it, but perceptions do matter.

If you are advocating for the Codex to hold itself to such high journalistic standards you are deluding yourself.

I'm not. I'm just saying such concerns are valid.

Anyways, VD not wanting to be seen as the butthurt indie developer who trashes his competition seems like a good reason to not write a review to me.

 

[Decado]

Thursday.

Point being is that the suggestion there is a real choice to be made between VD's game and Brian Fargo's game is kind of dumb (I know it wasn't your suggestion). It doesn't make any sense to prognosticate on "WHICH ONE WILL PEOPLE BUY?!?!" and therefore a review by another designer is a real COI because even if that were true -- and it isn't, I can't think of a single time in my life where I had to pick which RPG to buy, they are not materia slots, I can buy as many games as I want -- that worry is only real if those games were coming out at the same time.

Personally, I would love to see developers reviewing other games. But I understand that developers don't want to shit in each others' pools.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Apart from the perceived bias issue, there's also the issue that AoD will inevitably be dragged into the discussion around the review. It seems to happen quite frequently these days when VD expresses an opinion.

Pretty much.

The moment I criticize some feature as a gamer, it will be seen as "my game is way better" (even if the games can't be compared and have different goals) and AoD will be dragged in.

Actually, I think we - or at least, niche noncommercial places like the Codex - should dispense with the silly idea of 'conflict of interest'. COI is not a blanket rule for every situation, it is a specific one where, for instance, you should not get someone on the board of both companies to handle negotiations for a commercial transaction. If Sawyer reviews D:OS, VD reviews WL2, MCA reviewed AOD, etc, it would be a much richer experience, for instance.

100%. However, it's not the norm and until it becomes the norm, smaller developers should avoid the temptation to write reviews.

... it's not COI that is th eproblem, it's retards who can't think through the actual message from the person that is the problem.

Yep.

 

[Grunker]

Anyways, VD not wanting to be seen as the butthurt indie developer who trashes his competition seems like a good reason to not write a review to me.

I stated many times that I accept VD's disinterest in butthurt. From my first post, you will find I am only contesting the rest of the arguments.

 

[Grunker]

Actually, I think we - or at least, niche noncommercial places like the Codex - should dispense with the silly idea of 'conflict of interest'. COI is not a blanket rule for every situation, it is a specific one where, for instance, you should not get someone on the board of both companies to handle negotiations for a commercial transaction. If Sawyer reviews D:OS, VD reviews WL2, MCA reviewed AOD, etc, it would be a much richer experience, for instance. Sometimes, 'conflict of interest' as a rule only serves to hold up the norm of ad hominem attacks.

Agreed. Conflict of Interest as defined by most people in this thread is a non-existant and misunderstood concept.

 

[WalkinDude]

VD should just write the review and publish it under a pseudonym, say perhaps as "Lone Wanderer"

 

[throwaway]

Clearly the review should be published under Cleve's name.

 

[Infinitron]

Potato preview: http://www.gry-online.pl/S022.asp?ID=9890

It says the release date is September 9th, but apparently that's made up.

VD should just write the review and publish it under a pseudonym, say perhaps as "Lone Wanderer"

Surely you mean "The Courier".

 

[Jedi Master Radek]

I think it's vital to first decide on the number of reviews , then choose users for it. It will be messy if done other way around.

 

[Darkzone]

Grunker
Pushing as in tring to convince / make somebody to do something. Sometimes even against their will.

Vault Dweller
Respect for your calmness. I would say at a certain point simply with a NO and without any comment. Any chance for an answer to my question, if no i will let it go. Another Question: Why U and not O in the rank?

 

[Grunker]

Grunker
Pushing as in tring to convince / make somebody to do something. Sometimes even against their will.

Which I haven't done. Not even remotely. Hence the "wat".

 

[Vault Dweller]

Why U and not O in the rank?

It's a Codex thing which began a long time ago...

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...ller-and-the-nazification-of-the-codex.13739/

 

[Grotesque]

"Wasteland 2 - a glittering gem of mediocrity"

a review by Basement Inhabitant
--------------------------------------------------

 

[Magic User]

Is the religion and ethnicity thing in character creation purely for show or does it affect gameplay?

 

[Onholyservicebound]

show

 

[Infinitron]

Why'd you delete your post, sea?

 

[RK47]

dun dun dun