Wadjet Eye Unavowed - Dave Gilbert's RPG-inspired urban fantasy game

[MRY]

I think we're just talking past each other, then. I just think excitement or despair at the stage where a game consists of an elevator pitch is silly. Like I said, let the game speak for itself when it can. More fun to criticize or praise it then, anyway.

 

[<3sRichardSimmons]

Oh Jesus Christ.

Fuck you guys.

I don't normally allow myself to get riled up by the Codex, but Adventure Gaming is probably the genre of games closest to my heart, and this sub-forum is one of my favorite hidey-holes on the Codex (thanks mainly in part to the presence of a small but regular group of quality posters, and the general lack of shitposters).
So: to all you GD shitposters (don't worry, I'm sure you're in total self-denial about who you are) invading this thread and antagonizing one of THE ONLY developers/publishers who ACTIVELY fought the decline through the long years of the decline, you guys can eat shit and piss off.

I don't know Jennifer Hepler's work. I think the only game I've played that she had a part in was DA:O, which I played at launch, and thought was totally banal shit boring. I don't remember Orzammar, and the soundbites I've heard of her thoughts on game design make me think I would strongly disagree with her general approach to design, but shit like:

She's not even hot that her comments on rpgs could be excused as the musings of a silly put pretty women.

Bad move hiring her.

is a really rude thing to say to not only:
A) Jennifer Hepler (although all things considered she's probably gotta some pretty thick skin these days)
B) Dave Gilbert (I don't think anyone likes it when other people talk shit about their friends to them)
but also:
C) This community.
I'll elaborate.
Many of us really enjoy the fact that the Adventure Game sub-forum here is one of the only places on the 'Dex where devs (for example: Dave Gilbert, Stephen Alexander, MRY) still post and engage with the community in a very informal way. The only real result that I can see from the sort of antagonizing trololbait shitposting exhibited above (and elsewhere in this thread since) is that these devs, who still clearly want to engage with this community, decide that this community doesn't want to engage with them, and that's a case of the vocal minority doing a huge disservice to this community.

It doesn't fucking matter who is writing this game. This is not a case of a AAA publisher force-feeding CoDBLOPXZOMBIEPIRATES IV to a public that doesn't know any better; this is a niche genre. This game is never going to make anyone involved a millionaire. It's never going to redefine the face of the industry, or even the genre, so if there's something you dislike about this game (even if it's as trite as a byline in the credits) then you have a very obvious solution: don't buy it.

But coming on to these boards and intentionally trying to start flame wars with a dev is a really fucking dickish thing to do, and it only hurts the Codex.

TL;DR: I'm kind of drunk, but you guys need to take your shitposting back to GD. Keep on rockin' on Dave. Hope this game is better than Blackwell Epiphany.

 

[Lyric Suite]

Well, if she does a good job maybe she can redeem herself in the eyes of the Codex. We Codexers like to bark a lot, but we are a lot more measured and rational than we may appear to be. I'd even go so far as suggesting Jennifer Hepler was just regurgitating things she picked up from the environment she was in and didn't even realize the incendiary nature of her comments. At the end of the day, all we care about is whether something is good or not.

 

[Kem0sabe]

Oh Jesus Christ.

Fuck you guys.

I don't normally allow myself to get riled up by the Codex, but Adventure Gaming is probably the genre of games closest to my heart, and this sub-forum is one of my favorite hidey-holes on the Codex (thanks mainly in part to the presence of a small but regular group of quality posters, and the general lack of shitposters).
So: to all you GD shitposters (don't worry, I'm sure you're in total self-denial about who you are) invading this thread and antagonizing one of THE ONLY developers/publishers who ACTIVELY fought the decline through the long years of the decline, you guys can eat shit and piss off.

I don't know Jennifer Hepler's work. I think the only game I've played that she had a part in was DA:O, which I played at launch, and thought was totally banal shit boring. I don't remember Orzammar, and the soundbites I've heard of her thoughts on game design make me think I would strongly disagree with her general approach to design, but shit like:


is a really rude thing to say to not only:
A) Jennifer Hepler (although all things considered she's probably gotta some pretty thick skin these days)
B) Dave Gilbert (I don't think anyone likes it when other people talk shit about their friends to them)
but also:
C) This community.
I'll elaborate.
Many of us really enjoy the fact that the Adventure Game sub-forum here is one of the only places on the 'Dex where devs (for example: Dave Gilbert, Stephen Alexander, MRY) still post and engage with the community in a very informal way. The only real result that I can see from the sort of antagonizing trololbait shitposting exhibited above (and elsewhere in this thread since) is that these devs, who still clearly want to engage with this community, decide that this community doesn't want to engage with them, and that's a case of the vocal minority doing a huge disservice to this community.

It doesn't fucking matter who is writing this game. This is not a case of a AAA publisher force-feeding CoDBLOPXZOMBIEPIRATES IV to a public that doesn't know any better; this is a niche genre. This game is never going to make anyone involved a millionaire. It's never going to redefine the face of the industry, or even the genre, so if there's something you dislike about this game (even if it's as trite as a byline in the credits) then you have a very obvious solution: don't buy it.

But coming on to these boards and intentionally trying to start flame wars with a dev is a really fucking dickish thing to do, and it only hurts the Codex.

TL;DR: I'm kind of drunk, but you guys need to take your shitposting back to GD. Keep on rockin' on Dave. Hope this game is better than Blackwell Epiphany.

Oh get over yourself....developers don't post here and in other parts of the codex because we are this wonderful accepting non toxic safe community.

Those that stay have thick skin, unlike those that don't, like Gaider.

This being an rpg focused site, a lot of people got riled up be the comments made by this silly developer, and this being the codex, people will hold that up against her for an unnatural and unjustified amount of time.

 

[Desktop Commander]

HULK SMASH!

I do not think anybody is invading anything here and Lyric Suite's posts seemed sensible insofar as he clearly elaborated on his disdain for Hepler and how it influenced his preliminary, negative view on the project.

You need to get rid of this sentiment that "shitposters" are antagonizing people and "ruining" fora or whatever. What really ruins discussions are calls for unnecessary moderation and exclusion such as yours, as they only hinder free discussion, which is one of the defining traits of the Codex and one of the reasons you can have good and fruitful discussions here - provided you are able to actually hold a discussion in a sensible manner. Part of that is being able to look past tone and focus on meaning. Those who are able to do that (Davis, Vincke, Gilbert, and countless others) can take a lot from discussing with people here, whether they agree with them or not.

If you start to chase away people because their views (be they uninformed or not) offend your precious sensibilities, then you will achieve nothing but temporary emotional satisfaction at the cost of free exchange of ideas. A very bad bargain, and a rather selfish one at that.

Personally, I see no reason in calling for others to shut up, go away, or a third party to moderate, as that only serves to inhibit further discussion and progress - which is very, very important, if the actual discussion is of any importance to you - unless I can simply push the discussion forward or not engage with those whose contributions I consider not helpful. Discussion needs dissent more than consent. Discussion 101, really, but it seems to have become more and more of an arcane and ancient art as of late.

 

[MRY]

My own strong preference is for robust free speech, and I think it's for the best that the Codex isn't more heavily moderated. It would be a bad idea to let developers come here and then dictate the terms of what you guys discuss or how you discuss it. Also, most of us do have thick skins, and it isn't so hard to distinguish between memes/jokes/hyperbole and plain meanspiritedness. (I myself have a very thin skin, but also am a glutton for punishment.)

At the same time, for what my two cents are worth ($.02, I guess), I think there is a distinction between, "Your game sucks and you're a clown," on the one hand, and "your friend is ugly" or race jokes, on the other. It's not so hard to shrug off (or live with) an attack on oneself; but an insult at a friend or an offensive comment puts someone in a trickier position: silence looks like tacit endorsement (at least endorsement of the idea that such comments are fair game) or cowardice; responding draws one into a silly Internet argument and forces one to behave like a scold or censor. If Ms. Hepler asks Dave, "Why would you participate on a board where people make fun of my looks, when there are other, more pleasant places on the Internet?" I cannot think of any persuasive answer he could give that is consistent with being her friend and colleague. ("Because they have a lot of interesting insights" hardly seems like a valid reason not to stand up for a friend.)

The easiest way to avoid that pickle is just to walk away from the thread or the board or the site altogether. I don't think that's a reason for top-down moderation or for people shouting each other down, but it might be a reason for self-restraint. Or it might not be. This is your clubhouse, after all, not mine.

 

[m_s0]

I think this is the point where Dave decides to not engage with stuff like that.

He managed to diffuse a shitstorm. Mission accomplished.

 

[DeepOcean]

Summary of the thread:
Dave Gilbert want to make an RPG influenced vampire game: AWESOME, WE NEED MORE VAMPIRE GAMES!
Jen "Hamburger" Helpler announced as co writer: Codex bad memories of Dragon Age 2 come back to mind, the fear, the horror causes emotional reaction, a gut feeling that something terrible is about to happen and we lose Dave Gilbert to badly written creepy romances and Mexican soap operas.
Dave Gilbert on a surprise move defend himself: Hi guys, nope, I totally don't want to make a shitty game, don't fear it.
Codex reaction: A part of the codex gets suspicious, they like Dave Gilbert's games but are afraid he is going to disappear on the Miranda's Ass zone and be lost to cheap fan pandering and creepy virtual women saying they want to fuck him after a psychology session. They hope him the best and hope sparkling emovampires that love too much aren't a thing.
GD invasion: "HEY GUYS, THIS WRITER THAT DOESN'T LIKE COMBAT IS MAKING AN ADVENTURE GAME AND SHE IS PRETTY BUTTHURT WITH OLD WRITERS THAT ARE BETTER THAN HER, THAT IS BULLSHIT!

 

[Kem0sabe]

My own strong preference is for robust free speech, and I think it's for the best that the Codex isn't more heavily moderated. It would be a bad idea to let developers come here and then dictate the terms of what you guys discuss or how you discuss it. Also, most of us do have thick skins, and it isn't so hard to distinguish between memes/jokes/hyperbole and plain meanspiritedness. (I myself have a very thin skin, but also am a glutton for punishment.)

At the same time, for what my two cents are worth ($.02, I guess), I think there is a distinction between, "Your game sucks and you're a clown," on the one hand, and "your friend is ugly" or race jokes, on the other. It's not so hard to shrug off (or live with) an attack on oneself; but an insult at a friend or an offensive comment puts someone in a trickier position: silence looks like tacit endorsement (at least endorsement of the idea that such comments are fair game) or cowardice; responding draws one into a silly Internet argument and forces one to behave like a scold or censor. If Ms. Hepler asks Dave, "Why would you participate on a board where people make fun of my looks, when there are other, more pleasant places on the Internet?" I cannot think of any persuasive answer he could give that is consistent with being her friend and colleague. ("Because they have a lot of interesting insights" hardly seems like a valid reason not to stand up for a friend.)

The easiest way to avoid that pickle is just to walk away from the thread or the board or the site altogether. I don't think that's a reason for top-down moderation or for people shouting each other down, but it might be a reason for self-restraint. Or it might not be. This is your clubhouse, after all, not mine.

This is probably about my content on her not even being hot, which only reinforces my view that you degenerate mainlanders can't detect sarcasm if it dolphin raped you.

My comment was a reference to all the sjw silliness at Bioware and their forums that spawned comments like those Hepler made.

Do you really think a fat, bald mother fucker like me has any place commenting on anyone's beauty? Or assuming more or less professional worth to someone because of their sex?

Hepler is a bad writer with opinions I strongly disagree with on fantasy writing and rpg development, I think she won't be an asset for this new game.... There, all polite and stuff.

 

[MRY]

This is probably about my content on her not even being hot

Well, in part. It was obvious that the post was a joke -- no one on the Codex would think it a good idea to ruin a game merely to have a pretty team member. But the joke has embedded in it an insult about her looks. People make those jokes all the time, and I think that putdowns (even mean putdowns) are an inevitable part of people's bantering, but when you do it in front of someone's friend, you put them in a difficult position. That's all. It's not the crime of the century, or even a crime at all.

But really I wanted to make a more general point, which is that once a certain level of coarseness hits a forum thread, it becomes hard to stay in the thread without either (1) being viewed as condoning it or (2) protesting against it. A lot of people have no problem condoning the coarseness, but some people do have a problem with it, and in any event can't associate themselves with it. The result is that people walk away from the conversation. That's fine. You don't need developers posting in every thread or even on the Codex at all for this to be a fertile, important forum. You do need hands-off moderation for the Codex to retain its unique character. I just think it's worth making at least a semi-conscious decision about whether or not it's worth posting a particular piece of coarseness, given the practical consequences.

The example I often give is Darth Roxor's Let's Play of Primordia, which initially had a number of Codex Jew memes in it. I think it's the best written Let's Play of the game, and perhaps the best LP of Primordia overall, but as it stood, I couldn't really link to it from the Wormwood Studios page or pass it around to publishers and developers interested in the game, let alone to family members who have never really understood what my game-writing hobby entails. (If you can't see why that is, it's probably hopeless for me to try to explain myself.) You're welcome to think, "Who cares whether MRY can use a Codex thread for his own benefit?" Totally reasonable. But you might also think that Roxor's thread on Primordia (like his other LPs and reviews) is not unpersuasive in the arguments it makes (or simply assumes) about good game design and could help influence the making of better games, that the LP might bring more people into the Codex where they could be persuaded of the virtues of old school game design, or simply that having a developer flaunt the Codex might raise its stature and thus give it a louder megaphone to preach its message.

When I've defended the Codex to hostile developers, what I've said is that it's really two places -- a sophisticated symposium on game development and a rowdy clubhouse. Those two places occupy the same space (like Besźel and Ul Qoma) and they exist symbiotically. You can't destroy one without destroying the other. But I think there's some virtue in considering whether, in particular instances, the clubhouse mentality could be toned down -- not by top-down moderation but by a little self-restraint -- to the benefit of the symposium.

tl;dr Wah wah wah, I'm a tone-policing concern-troll SJW.

 

[Lyric Suite]

GD invasion: "HEY GUYS, THIS WRITER THAT DOESN'T LIKE COMBAT IS MAKING AN ADVENTURE GAME AND SHE IS PRETTY BUTTHURT WITH OLD WRITERS THAT ARE BETTER THAN HER, THAT IS BULLSHIT!

No, she doesn't like "old" writers because they are white and male. This is why the "GD" argument is a load of shit. We are not the instigators here. It is they, not us, who are starting with their own "GD" shit. No SJWs = No GD.

 

[<3sRichardSimmons]

Yeah MRY is making my point for me for better than I did for myself. I was never advocating an increase in Codex moderation, I was merely trying to call out a few people on being dicks and trolls, and (in keeping with my general Codex posting policies) I was slightly inebriated.

There's also the fact that Dave/MRY/Stephen Alexander are all being braver than the rest of us by not hiding behind a pseudonymous screen name (yes I know MRY and Blackthorne, but everyone knows they're Mark Yohalem and Stephen Alexander). Most of us would never consider posting our private information on the Codex because we're afraid (probably justifiably) of the Codex. So when a developer comes on the Codex and says "Hey, I've noticed some of you enjoy my games. I want to keep you in the loop about my upcoming projects and get your thoughts on the projects I've released thus far." I don't think it's unreasonable for Codex members to strive to deal with that person in a professional and respectful manner. That doesn't mean Codex members should pussy-foot around shit they dislike in or about that developer's games. It doesn't mean the Codex should avoid questioning the qualifications of a contractor with questionable references hired on to a project by that developer. It doesn't even mean that Codex members should actually even pretend to GIVE a shit about the project if it seems like a piece of shit.

But if you instead use it as license to just make personal attacks on that person or their friends, then you are not being a productive poster.

 

[<3sRichardSimmons]

When I've defended the Codex to hostile developers, what I've said is that it's really two places -- a sophisticated symposium on game development and a rowdy clubhouse. Those two places occupy the same space (like Besźel and Ul Qoma) and they exist symbiotically. You can't destroy one without destroying the other. But I think there's some virtue in considering whether, in particular instances, the clubhouse mentality could be toned down -- not by top-down moderation but by a little self-restraint -- to the benefit of the symposium.

I love this. Makes me wonder about Orciny.

 

[80Maxwell08]

So no one else is going to point out that Hepler image has at least one confirmed fake post in it? That entire thing about ME3? For whatever it's worth I don't like Hepler too much anyway but hey maybe a change in environment will work.

 

[Outlander]

I don't know Jennifer Hepler's work.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2139643.M_I_T_H_

...as I read, I found the story lacking and when two main characters pause in the middle of the impending apocalypse to make out, I almost stopped reading.

 

[Desktop Commander]

I was merely trying to call out a few people on being dicks and trolls, and (in keeping with my general Codex posting policies) I was slightly inebriated.

What purpose does that serve, though? If you find something that reeks of GD feces, then you can look past the words and focus on the argument, respond to it if one is there (which was the case for Lyric Suite's post, regardless of delivery) or engage in discussion with someone else. By going all "OMG, go back to GD!!", you are shifting focus on the unwanted element without being productive yourself.

Remember that reading past irrelevant or offtopic nonsense becomes more difficult, the more people think they absolutely have to comment on it. I would assume most people to be mature enough to just scroll past content that does not interest them, look for interesting content and then respond to that, if there is any. Why add to the clutter if it doesn't serve any purpose?

I remember when I started reading the codex that I got pretty annoyed with the "Keep this stuff in GD!" posters very quickly, since they had to clutter every thread with their complaints, which were - ironically - even less interesting than those of the GD-squad. Some people can't help but inject their beliefs or whatever into every post they make, but that doesn't mean that they are categorically wrong. With most GD posters, you can take their input from the first few lines and then ignore the rest, since you've probably read it a million times before, which is still better than a completely useless post.

But if you instead use it as license to just make personal attacks on that person or their friends, then you are not being a productive poster.

And this still rings true, even if you think your reasons are more noble than someone else's. The behaviour is just as unproductive re. the actual discussion content.

It's not so hard to shrug off (or live with) an attack on oneself; but an insult at a friend or an offensive comment puts someone in a trickier position: silence looks like tacit endorsement (at least endorsement of the idea that such comments are fair game) or cowardice; responding draws one into a silly Internet argument and forces one to behave like a scold or censor. If Ms. Hepler asks Dave, "Why would you participate on a board where people make fun of my looks, when there are other, more pleasant places on the Internet?" I cannot think of any persuasive answer he could give that is consistent with being her friend and colleague. ("Because they have a lot of interesting insights" hardly seems like a valid reason not to stand up for a friend.)

A good point, but I'm not sure everyone would see it this way, especially if you think on the individual level instead of the Codex as a single entity. I would still go to a bar that is frequented by people who insulted one of my friends, if contact to the insult slingers isn't the primary purpose of why I frequent the bar in question (which is likely the case). I would not engage with said people and would understand if my friend would not want to join me on my trip to said bar but I'd see little reason to categorically avoid the place of my own volition or expecting to be forced by my friend to do so (because the individuals might just be there doesn't seem very convincing to me).

EDIT: I also realize that I should (and will) take my own advice and not dwell on this too much in a topic about Adventure games.

 

[Desktop Commander]

Re. Hepler's employment - this might be, as someone else already said, the perfect spot for her.

She always seemed like someone who had to work on games in a genre she didn't really like and/or understand. But Adventures are a different beast and she might synergize better with them. We'll see, I guess.

 

[tuluse]

My take on this thread (I know you were all waiting with baited breath for it).

1) Jennifer Hepler isn't very good at writing or at least has no examples of good writing I'm aware of and plenty of writing I'd call bad. (all the best stuff in DA:O was ripped whole cloth from GRRM or Warhammer 40k)

2) Jennifer Hepler has very controversial opinions about game design. This applies to regular gamers, but twice so for the codex and it's culture.

3) People are are overracting anyways. If you like Dave Gilbert's games, I doubt Hepler will ruin them for you, if you didn't care for them before, you probably shouldn't care at all.

4) People went on years old rants about Hepler that are as interesting to rehash as what is an rpg?

5) Other people the last set of people to cut it out.

6) MRY tries to stay in the codex's good graces while telling us to cut it out. I'm onto to you

 

[Lyric Suite]

He will stay on the Codex's good graces if he delivers.

 

[Hobo Elf]

Regardless of Hepler writing for a genre of games that she doesn't care about it's still undeniably true that she's a horrible writer who's only passion seems to lie in writing about fuccboi romances. Face it, lady, you're never going to be Anne Rice.

 

[Morality Games]

She was also responsible for a large part of the story for the wreck that is DA2, and doesn't even like games except for storyfag reasons.

Also she's a former biowarian... brrr.

The story in DAII was good, or at least the narrative was. Act 1 was a little slow for a video game and Act 3 was a little forced, but actually it amounted to one of the better narratives in an RPG.

 

[twincast]

Eh, that it's one of the few where you don't (quite) go save the world, doesn't automatically make it good.

Also, DA2's endless waves of parachuting enemies make her statement particularly ironic.

That said, Orzammar itself was the best part of DA:O, so we'll see.

 

[Excidium II]

Hamburger helper writing urban fantasy sounds like a dream. It competes only with steampunk for legbeard heavan.

 

[Kem0sabe]

The story in DAII was good, or at least the narrative was. Act 1 was a little slow for a video game and Act 3 was a little forced, but actually it amounted to one of the better narratives in an RPG.

I'm all for diversity of opinions in the codex, lest this place turn into infinitrons board of obsidian PR erotica, but your opinion is wrong, not only wrong but aggravating.

DA2 has a shit plot, and to call it one of the better narratives in an rpg makes me want to do things to you that I woudnt even do to SCO.

 

[Morality Games]

I'm all for diversity of opinions in the codex, lest this place turn into infinitrons board of obsidian PR erotica, but your opinion is wrong, not only wrong but aggravating.

DA2 has a shit plot, and to call it one of the better narratives in an rpg makes me want to do things to you that I woudnt even do to SCO.

Just a cursory glance says that you have to be wrong. It is more plausible than other cRPGs almost right away because your character starts as someone who isn't important and stays unimportant for all of Act 1. There's some sense he is in an especially capable person, which he gradually utilizes to become one of the principal investors into an expedition to claim an ancient civilization's treasures as well as one of its leaders, but destiny is dealt with much more subtly here than it is in other Bioware games and more to the point almost all cRPGs. The primary sources of tension derive from the little microcosm the protagonist and his family and friends inhabit. The major "antagonists" (Orsino, Meredith, and the Arishok) get a whole lot of face time to explain their ideals and goals so the audience can understand the clashes and/or alliances between them and the protagonist at an ideological as well as a physical level.

Just a better written narrative at a fundamental level. I've read enough fantasy books to know.