-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Denis Dyack in 1up yours. NeoGAF is "hurting society," justifies having it shut down
- Thread starter Rlan
- Start date
- Status
Kabuki Waq
Member
Holy shit Denis is Batshit Insane. Wtf does Shane see in the man?
OK, I've just finished listening through the whole thing.. and I can't believe I'm doing this, but:
On groupthink:
Groupthink didn't begin with NeoGaf, Denis. Before we had message boards, we had our peer groups, and peer pressure, and schoolyard chat etc., with leaders and followers, influencing people's purchasing decisions and opinions about games. It's part of the human condition, get over it.
On privacy:
First of all, Denis laments how people post under pseudonyms, and thus how there's a lack of personal responsibility for what people post, but then goes on to defend Jeff Bell who himself was posting under a pseudonym, and criticising the management for the privacy leak there in exposing who he was. I found a slight bit of contradiction in that. But beyond that, he goes on to point to the announcement about privacy made recently and how GAF isn't playing by its own rules, as illustrated by the Bell incident. a) A moderator was banned for doing that, and that was clear to everyone following the story (contrary to Denis's claim that 'no one knew'), and b) the announcement re. privacy came only recently, a long time after the Jeff Bell incident. So you can't claim management was ignoring its own rules.
(Oh, and by the way, I guess Too Human online multiplayer will force everyone to reveal their real names, and talk directly to one another, and so forth..? Get off your high horse Denis.)
Denis goes on about there being no rules, no penalties. There are, ultimately you can be kicked off the forum, and moderation here is quite tight in that regard IMO.
He goes on about tags being GAF currency. No they're not. They're a small small thing, and they're meant in jest. Currency on GAF is credibility, and that has little or nothing to do with tags.
The Kittonwy incident..Kittonwy, as he himself says, did not go off and sulk for months. No one except Denis seems to have thought that was a big issue.
Judging games without playing them - discussion on GAF about games before their released is typically based on screenshots, movies and previews. No one is fooling themselves into thinking they KNOW what a game plays like if they haven't played. But we CAN comment on how a game looks. We CAN comment on animation quality from videos. We CAN comment on the apparent quality of, say, the realisation of a universe in the game, its backstory, its mythology, whatever. We CAN get a sense of whether a game is likely to be good or bad based on a consensus from previews. None of that is an absolute judgment. The alternative is not to talk about games at all prior to release. And something tells me Denis wouldn't care so much if the pre-release discussion about his game was positive rather than negative - yet at the end, it's the same principle of 'judging' a game before playing it.
On press influence re. Neogaf, the press playing to Neogaf, previews pandering to GAF mentality - that is not neogaf's problem. That's the press's problem, if it exists at all (I really think he's giving GAF way to much credit). Something tells me Denis is just looking for a new scapegoat if critical reception to his game is not to his liking. That's the bottom line in all this, I think. I think this was really some kind of pre-emptive damage control for his game.
The only point he made that I found had any real substance was the point about moderators changing topic titles, and perhaps how that can influence posting. Maybe he has a point there. But other points in the same vein, e.g. about mods asking someone if "you are stupid" for saying he liked a certain game or something..I mean..FFS, if I like a game, and a mod asks me if I'm stupid, I'll give back as good as I get. When it comes to discussion on that level, I don't think anyone on GAF is cowered into agreeing with a mod. I see plenty of debate between posters and mods with a lot of disagreement.
.. I could go on on some other points, but the whole thing was a jumble of sometimes semi-coherent points. I was glad to see Garnett, at least, seemingly absolutely flabbergasted by the whole thing.
edit - oh, and the authors of the books he references are probably thoroughly embarrassed if this is some people's first introduction to them.
On groupthink:
Groupthink didn't begin with NeoGaf, Denis. Before we had message boards, we had our peer groups, and peer pressure, and schoolyard chat etc., with leaders and followers, influencing people's purchasing decisions and opinions about games. It's part of the human condition, get over it.
On privacy:
First of all, Denis laments how people post under pseudonyms, and thus how there's a lack of personal responsibility for what people post, but then goes on to defend Jeff Bell who himself was posting under a pseudonym, and criticising the management for the privacy leak there in exposing who he was. I found a slight bit of contradiction in that. But beyond that, he goes on to point to the announcement about privacy made recently and how GAF isn't playing by its own rules, as illustrated by the Bell incident. a) A moderator was banned for doing that, and that was clear to everyone following the story (contrary to Denis's claim that 'no one knew'), and b) the announcement re. privacy came only recently, a long time after the Jeff Bell incident. So you can't claim management was ignoring its own rules.
(Oh, and by the way, I guess Too Human online multiplayer will force everyone to reveal their real names, and talk directly to one another, and so forth..? Get off your high horse Denis.)
Denis goes on about there being no rules, no penalties. There are, ultimately you can be kicked off the forum, and moderation here is quite tight in that regard IMO.
He goes on about tags being GAF currency. No they're not. They're a small small thing, and they're meant in jest. Currency on GAF is credibility, and that has little or nothing to do with tags.
The Kittonwy incident..Kittonwy, as he himself says, did not go off and sulk for months. No one except Denis seems to have thought that was a big issue.
Judging games without playing them - discussion on GAF about games before their released is typically based on screenshots, movies and previews. No one is fooling themselves into thinking they KNOW what a game plays like if they haven't played. But we CAN comment on how a game looks. We CAN comment on animation quality from videos. We CAN comment on the apparent quality of, say, the realisation of a universe in the game, its backstory, its mythology, whatever. We CAN get a sense of whether a game is likely to be good or bad based on a consensus from previews. None of that is an absolute judgment. The alternative is not to talk about games at all prior to release. And something tells me Denis wouldn't care so much if the pre-release discussion about his game was positive rather than negative - yet at the end, it's the same principle of 'judging' a game before playing it.
On press influence re. Neogaf, the press playing to Neogaf, previews pandering to GAF mentality - that is not neogaf's problem. That's the press's problem, if it exists at all (I really think he's giving GAF way to much credit). Something tells me Denis is just looking for a new scapegoat if critical reception to his game is not to his liking. That's the bottom line in all this, I think. I think this was really some kind of pre-emptive damage control for his game.
The only point he made that I found had any real substance was the point about moderators changing topic titles, and perhaps how that can influence posting. Maybe he has a point there. But other points in the same vein, e.g. about mods asking someone if "you are stupid" for saying he liked a certain game or something..I mean..FFS, if I like a game, and a mod asks me if I'm stupid, I'll give back as good as I get. When it comes to discussion on that level, I don't think anyone on GAF is cowered into agreeing with a mod. I see plenty of debate between posters and mods with a lot of disagreement.
.. I could go on on some other points, but the whole thing was a jumble of sometimes semi-coherent points. I was glad to see Garnett, at least, seemingly absolutely flabbergasted by the whole thing.
edit - oh, and the authors of the books he references are probably thoroughly embarrassed if this is some people's first introduction to them.
Mash said:
The amount of collective self-importance and self-imposed gravitational rules of this board never ceases to amaze me. Neogaf is not the center of the gaming universe, and it will never be the way it's headed. But it sure does have a strong gravitational pull in the now in the form of a red giant which is spending its last reserve of energy before it implodes to further warm up Dyack's point.
tahrikmili
Member
The internet is anonymous, shitty games are shitty.
Anonymous people helping others not buy shitty games is good.
Developers crying over lost sales of shitty games is good.
This thread is good. In a very satirical way.
Anonymous people helping others not buy shitty games is good.
Developers crying over lost sales of shitty games is good.
This thread is good. In a very satirical way.
tahrikmili
Member
Just thought I'd add..
Hey Denis, I'm an anonymous poster, and I already hate your stupid game. Not because of GAF, but because of you.
Hey Denis, I'm an anonymous poster, and I already hate your stupid game. Not because of GAF, but because of you.
stuburns said:
Yeah not that I forgot about garnett but shane's interjecting just kept loosing garnet's point. So I retract that not all of them agreed. Infact I agree more with what Garnett had to say (I usually do anyway). Another thing he (dyack) tries to come across as so forgiving and benevolent with his ''you can come down to launch''. Yet at the same time he tries to demolish neogaf as a community. Yes sometimes it's chaotic here. Though you know what I would not change it for anyone. I remember so many moments on this board that made me realise that even though a lot of the people here are childish, they have the ability to be empathetic. A lot of those people that are so critical sometimes can be the same people that would turn around and help out. So thats another thing that annoys me about his experiement. He's not trying to send a message to people in the industry and gamers and society in general for the greater good. He's just making things worse by messing with people (allegedly) by submitting what people feel are his opinions and retracting. So how does that further his cause to make things better... oh yea he's ''exposing'' us, well done Dyack.
Outtrigger888
Member
:lol <<<thats me laughing at how serious your comment is
I hope Too Human ends up being a pretty good game and sells well. I could give a fuck about dyack and what he says I just wanna play good games.
so let's see:
blamed the media. check
blamed his tools. check.
blamed the internet. check.
what's next? blame MS and then try and sue them?
what's good is that he's proved that E3 isn't worthless. they showed the god-awful intro there, everyone got negative vibes from it and it's held true to today.
and boo at most of the 1UP staff being to pussy to offer up any counterpoints. a 12 year old could have ripped his arguments to shreds but you didn't want any Dyack blog postings about how 1UP is in decline.
blamed the media. check
blamed his tools. check.
blamed the internet. check.
what's next? blame MS and then try and sue them?
Future said:
what's good is that he's proved that E3 isn't worthless. they showed the god-awful intro there, everyone got negative vibes from it and it's held true to today.
and boo at most of the 1UP staff being to pussy to offer up any counterpoints. a 12 year old could have ripped his arguments to shreds but you didn't want any Dyack blog postings about how 1UP is in decline.
Finished listening to the podcast. Back to square one -- bewilderment, amusement, pity -- but I'll try to address the Dyack's points. Since I've taken my time listening to the third segment many of my clarifications and rebuttals have already been stated by other posts in the thread, but I'll go forward anyway.
Is it, really? If Too Human spoke for itself there would be no controversy. It's not speaking for itself, you're speaking for it with grandiose hyperbole that it cannot live up to. Earlier in development gamers were more willing to take your word for it and dismiss what they saw as incomplete, early, and to be improved upon later, but we're beyond that point currently. Without your PR presence people would still be critical of the rougher aspects of the preview footage (as they should be), but attention with regards to actually purchasing the game would be centered moreso on waiting for the demo and hands-on impressions. The backlash is purely your doing.
This is regarding the Jeff Bell scandal. Your sequence of events is broken. Reality:
1. Jeff Bell sends a private message to a user, and information Jeff put in his handle was used by members to identify him through google searching.
2. A GAF moderator later confirmed his identity via his account information, and was banned for it due to privacy concerns.
3. I made a statement to the userbase assuring that revealing the identities of industry members using their private account information would not be tolerated in the future.
Some months later:
4. Members were doing detective work (using google etc.) on personal, anonymous story threads in the OT forum, finding out and revealing personal information that caused negative repercussions for the storytellers.
5. An announcement was made to deter this sort of detective work from taking place in the future, in order to protect the userbase.
Regardless, to answer the question: on whose authority would the site be shut down? The omnipotent hand of fate that lords over internet forums, waiting for their moderation staff to commit the high treason of hypocrisy? Your great many doom and gloom quotes from this podcast are entirely ludicrous.
Should there be a penalty for having an opinion on what Too Human looks like in footage that your company has explicitly released to the public? You feel that Too Human is being unfairly criticized, but you're also doing your best to astronomically hype the game to get people to preorder it and buy it. This is a have your cake scenario; if you're out there with previews and hype-building you have to be willing to accept both the positive and negative responses. Again, there should be a penalty for having a genuine reaction to preview footage?
People should be free to say what they want? What about the penalties they should have for reacting negatively to Too Human?
Regarding moderation policy and intervening in threads, moderators here are not robots. They are not paid security guards that stand watch emotionlessly, passing judgment purely by referencing a rulebook. Moderators here are members of the community, they have opinions and personalities, and they enforce rules by taking into account context. It means that if screenshots from, say, Operation Flashpoint 2 are released, and they're clearly not real screens (unrealistic image quality with 16x AA and obviously non-realtime elements), someone will change the thread title from "OF2 Screenshots" to "OF2 Bullshots." By the same token, people may post amusing GIFs of Too Human that you find to be offensive personal attacks, but mods won't judge it that way; they'll still ban anyone who attacks your weight, though, even if you might think both cases are equally juvenile and offensive.
I gave Kittonwy the tag. He called you out very directly, you corrected him, and since you're the horse's mouth on the subject that was the end of that. That's accountability for message board posting in action.
*wide-eyed stare*
Changing someone's tag is cyberstalking, but looking up someone's personal information and discussing it on 1up Yours with this false layer of anonymity you're giving him (plainly obvious and public that you're referring to Kittonwy) is what, exactly?
It needs clarifying that Kittonwy did not in fact leave the forum for months (or at all) after you corrected him (not quoted above, but mentioned in the podcast). This is a complete fabrication.
The thread in question, which was 10-26-2006: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4678953&postcount=58
Screen cap showing the freely available search results of Kittonwy posts immediately following Kittonwy being corrected and getting tagged with "owned by Denis Dyack": http://www.abjecthubris.com/images/kittonwyposts.jpg
Kittonwy: did you cry yourself to sleep and dream of libel and internet restraining orders when I tagged you? No, because you're not batshit insane, but feel free to explain what your feelings were at the time </Dr_Phil>.
This comes off as a severe case of retconning. If we take your word for it, though, it's even worse: you're intentionally trolling and acting disingenously, and not following those forum policy rules that you're intent on citing as gospel (on my site, mind you, not yours).
I'll attribute the misrepresentation of what happened in the thread to the heat of conversation, but I must say that Shane embarrassed himself with his shilling and yes-man followups during the podcast. If I wasn't familiar with 1up I could easily imagine Shane having been Denis Dyack's PR handler, not the micless woman in the background.
(This was regarding Chris Kohler posting his Too Human completion screen in the GAF thread about his Wired article)
How is Chris in the wrong here at all, posting a completion screen to provide direct proof for his article's claim that he finished Too Human in 10 hours? It did incite negativity, but for good reason: there are few loot-based diablo-inspired action rpgs in existence that are 10 hours long or even anywhere near that short. It's a crucial point for deciding whether Too Human will be worthwhile, among many GAF members, and it's good that the information was justified with evidence.
Denis Dyack said:
Is it, really? If Too Human spoke for itself there would be no controversy. It's not speaking for itself, you're speaking for it with grandiose hyperbole that it cannot live up to. Earlier in development gamers were more willing to take your word for it and dismiss what they saw as incomplete, early, and to be improved upon later, but we're beyond that point currently. Without your PR presence people would still be critical of the rougher aspects of the preview footage (as they should be), but attention with regards to actually purchasing the game would be centered moreso on waiting for the demo and hands-on impressions. The backlash is purely your doing.
Denis Dyack said:
This is regarding the Jeff Bell scandal. Your sequence of events is broken. Reality:
1. Jeff Bell sends a private message to a user, and information Jeff put in his handle was used by members to identify him through google searching.
2. A GAF moderator later confirmed his identity via his account information, and was banned for it due to privacy concerns.
3. I made a statement to the userbase assuring that revealing the identities of industry members using their private account information would not be tolerated in the future.
Some months later:
4. Members were doing detective work (using google etc.) on personal, anonymous story threads in the OT forum, finding out and revealing personal information that caused negative repercussions for the storytellers.
5. An announcement was made to deter this sort of detective work from taking place in the future, in order to protect the userbase.
Regardless, to answer the question: on whose authority would the site be shut down? The omnipotent hand of fate that lords over internet forums, waiting for their moderation staff to commit the high treason of hypocrisy? Your great many doom and gloom quotes from this podcast are entirely ludicrous.
Denis Dyack said:
Should there be a penalty for having an opinion on what Too Human looks like in footage that your company has explicitly released to the public? You feel that Too Human is being unfairly criticized, but you're also doing your best to astronomically hype the game to get people to preorder it and buy it. This is a have your cake scenario; if you're out there with previews and hype-building you have to be willing to accept both the positive and negative responses. Again, there should be a penalty for having a genuine reaction to preview footage?
Denis Dyack said:
People should be free to say what they want? What about the penalties they should have for reacting negatively to Too Human?
Regarding moderation policy and intervening in threads, moderators here are not robots. They are not paid security guards that stand watch emotionlessly, passing judgment purely by referencing a rulebook. Moderators here are members of the community, they have opinions and personalities, and they enforce rules by taking into account context. It means that if screenshots from, say, Operation Flashpoint 2 are released, and they're clearly not real screens (unrealistic image quality with 16x AA and obviously non-realtime elements), someone will change the thread title from "OF2 Screenshots" to "OF2 Bullshots." By the same token, people may post amusing GIFs of Too Human that you find to be offensive personal attacks, but mods won't judge it that way; they'll still ban anyone who attacks your weight, though, even if you might think both cases are equally juvenile and offensive.
Denis Dyack said:
I gave Kittonwy the tag. He called you out very directly, you corrected him, and since you're the horse's mouth on the subject that was the end of that. That's accountability for message board posting in action.
Denis Dyack said:
*wide-eyed stare*
Denis Dyack said:
Changing someone's tag is cyberstalking, but looking up someone's personal information and discussing it on 1up Yours with this false layer of anonymity you're giving him (plainly obvious and public that you're referring to Kittonwy) is what, exactly?
Denis Dyack said:
It needs clarifying that Kittonwy did not in fact leave the forum for months (or at all) after you corrected him (not quoted above, but mentioned in the podcast). This is a complete fabrication.
The thread in question, which was 10-26-2006: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4678953&postcount=58
Screen cap showing the freely available search results of Kittonwy posts immediately following Kittonwy being corrected and getting tagged with "owned by Denis Dyack": http://www.abjecthubris.com/images/kittonwyposts.jpg
Kittonwy: did you cry yourself to sleep and dream of libel and internet restraining orders when I tagged you? No, because you're not batshit insane, but feel free to explain what your feelings were at the time </Dr_Phil>.
Denis Dyack said:
This comes off as a severe case of retconning. If we take your word for it, though, it's even worse: you're intentionally trolling and acting disingenously, and not following those forum policy rules that you're intent on citing as gospel (on my site, mind you, not yours).
Denis Dyack and Shane Bettenhausen said:Denis: "Before the tag [sic] got locked, they wanted to use 90% as something was was terrible. And I was like..."
Shane: "Yeah, 90 or below: complete failure, *pfft*"
Denis: "Yeah, and I'm just like, I think they're meaningless, but it just goes to show you that there's really, when you can finally figure out...[irrelevant book reference]...I knew this would never finish."
Shane: "Overall the tone [in the stand and be counted thread] was like, maybe this forum isn't a hive of scum and villainy, maybe there are people who are going to give this game a chance...(paraphrasedand then the chris kohler pre-review thread came out
I'll attribute the misrepresentation of what happened in the thread to the heat of conversation, but I must say that Shane embarrassed himself with his shilling and yes-man followups during the podcast. If I wasn't familiar with 1up I could easily imagine Shane having been Denis Dyack's PR handler, not the micless woman in the background.
Denis Dyack said:
(This was regarding Chris Kohler posting his Too Human completion screen in the GAF thread about his Wired article)
How is Chris in the wrong here at all, posting a completion screen to provide direct proof for his article's claim that he finished Too Human in 10 hours? It did incite negativity, but for good reason: there are few loot-based diablo-inspired action rpgs in existence that are 10 hours long or even anywhere near that short. It's a crucial point for deciding whether Too Human will be worthwhile, among many GAF members, and it's good that the information was justified with evidence.
PrivateRyan
Member
Reading Dyack's words don't do him justice.
I'm listening to the podcast now and he's actually mental. Actually mental.
"I was reading over NeoGAF and I just went... *sigh*... this site needs reform."
I still feel bad for the other SK guys who have their work tarnished by this ranting madman.
I'm listening to the podcast now and he's actually mental. Actually mental.
"I was reading over NeoGAF and I just went... *sigh*... this site needs reform."
I still feel bad for the other SK guys who have their work tarnished by this ranting madman.
Opus Angelorum
Member
@ Evilore
Very well said.
For all trash that is spoken about NeoGAF in general, I'm proud to be a member.
Very well said.
For all trash that is spoken about NeoGAF in general, I'm proud to be a member.
It's like he chose to ignore all of the Too Human supporters on GAF with comments like that...
Granted, his game undeniably gets more hate than love around here, but to claim that this forum is hurting society he's insulting everyone on these boards that have defended Too Human like it was their own child. They're the ones who plan on investing sixty dollars of their hard earned money to partake in an experience he spent a little over a decade creating. Not acknowledging them is a great injustice.
But, people learn from their mistakes...
Granted, his game undeniably gets more hate than love around here, but to claim that this forum is hurting society he's insulting everyone on these boards that have defended Too Human like it was their own child. They're the ones who plan on investing sixty dollars of their hard earned money to partake in an experience he spent a little over a decade creating. Not acknowledging them is a great injustice.
But, people learn from their mistakes...
Apparently, anything that criticizes Too Human needs to be radically changed and/or shut down. The preview process needs to be retooled because Mark didn't like his game at E3, Neogaf needs to be shut down because they make animated GIFs of the hilariously bad animation of Too Human's cutscenes...
How is this unfair? It's not like everyone on the internet is hating on the game just because it's Denis Dyack. I'm sure there's lots of people who do that, but this is the internet, which is filled with idiots anyway. Should we shut that down as well?
Some people, like me, just look at the cutscenes and see how ridiculously bad the animation is and draw a conclusion from there. How is that wrong? If the cutscenes are that badly done, why should I necessarily give it the benefit of the doubt and my 60 bucks? Just because the guy doing PR tells me that the combat and loot systems are very deep? Man, whatever.
Maybe you shouldn't release those videos of the cutscenes to the public if you're that concerned about what GIFs the message boards are going to produce. I honestly can't believe that everyone at Silicon Knights thought those videos were flattering. It just doesn't compute.
How is this unfair? It's not like everyone on the internet is hating on the game just because it's Denis Dyack. I'm sure there's lots of people who do that, but this is the internet, which is filled with idiots anyway. Should we shut that down as well?
Some people, like me, just look at the cutscenes and see how ridiculously bad the animation is and draw a conclusion from there. How is that wrong? If the cutscenes are that badly done, why should I necessarily give it the benefit of the doubt and my 60 bucks? Just because the guy doing PR tells me that the combat and loot systems are very deep? Man, whatever.
Maybe you shouldn't release those videos of the cutscenes to the public if you're that concerned about what GIFs the message boards are going to produce. I honestly can't believe that everyone at Silicon Knights thought those videos were flattering. It just doesn't compute.
tahrikmili
Member
We should now tag Denis's username 'Owned by EviLore'
Dyack spending his time trolling GAF is the reason why the game isn't done yet. So yeah, GAF IS guilty for the game's shortcomings, purely by existing. Or something.
Darkpen said:
Dyack spending his time trolling GAF is the reason why the game isn't done yet. So yeah, GAF IS guilty for the game's shortcomings, purely by existing. Or something.
perineumlick
Member
Evilore you should now change Dyack's tag to "owned by Evilore". I agree 100% with your post.
teruterubozu
Member
Too Sensitive.
tahrikmili
Member
dionysus said:
It's a conspiracy.. EviLore and DD actually masterminded this plan!
Can we all just agree that, at best, this guy has a difficult time of articulating his points, and at worst, may be batshit insane?
I never could figure out what the fuck he was trying to say to Mark McDonald and the crew in regards to previews.
"We need them, and I want you to do what you do, without repercussion, be honest, be critical...buuuuuuuut...don't every talk bad about my game again, you sonofabitch."
I never could figure out what the fuck he was trying to say to Mark McDonald and the crew in regards to previews.
"We need them, and I want you to do what you do, without repercussion, be honest, be critical...buuuuuuuut...don't every talk bad about my game again, you sonofabitch."
Darkpen said:
I'm aggravated by these sorts of responses. Any time a high profile dev posts here you'll see at least one person telling him to go finish the game. Now, this might hypothetically be, ahem, slightly more appropriate when discussing Dyack and the state of Too Human, but game developers have personal lives and should not badgered about discarding what little free time they have in favor of working on the game more. It's not a binary decision between working on your game and posting on GAF, so please stop.
Kabuki Waq
Member
wow Shane is Mangod no more. Manslut? Manshill?
PrivateRyan said:
If any of his comments about people in his camp saying ''Yeah denis I think it's right'' has any truth to it then I give up with SK as a whole. If everyone there seems to be sharing denis's out there ideas then the problem is bigger than I thought. If they think what he's doing is right and good then good luck for them in the future.
Dyack's on a roll, whipping out the blamethrower and burning all his bridges.
Personally, this would all have been moot if he just released a demo of the game that backed up everything he said.
It's kind of like The Dark Knight, where everyone called for Nolan's head when he cast Heath Ledger as The Joker. Instead of calling everyone and their mother out, he made the film he wanted to make and let the movie/trailers do the talking for him.
Dyack constantly compares this industry to Hollywood and how content should be protected "until it's done," but fails to see that the film industry is constantly prepping you for the "next big opening" through trailers and screenings. Hell, excitement for DK is at a fever pitch because of genius marketing and early looks that, again, let the film's content do the talking for it and the "influencers" (ie: AICN, /film, JoBlo, NeoGAF OT), after seeing and commenting on the work, marketed the film for them.
In the game industry, I see making a demo/beta akin to the trailer/screening, letting your game do the work instead of running around, promising how awesome it is. Then you'll see boards like GAF become your best friends, becoming the game's own little marketing team, spreading word of what a great job you've done.
Personally, this would all have been moot if he just released a demo of the game that backed up everything he said.
It's kind of like The Dark Knight, where everyone called for Nolan's head when he cast Heath Ledger as The Joker. Instead of calling everyone and their mother out, he made the film he wanted to make and let the movie/trailers do the talking for him.
Dyack constantly compares this industry to Hollywood and how content should be protected "until it's done," but fails to see that the film industry is constantly prepping you for the "next big opening" through trailers and screenings. Hell, excitement for DK is at a fever pitch because of genius marketing and early looks that, again, let the film's content do the talking for it and the "influencers" (ie: AICN, /film, JoBlo, NeoGAF OT), after seeing and commenting on the work, marketed the film for them.
In the game industry, I see making a demo/beta akin to the trailer/screening, letting your game do the work instead of running around, promising how awesome it is. Then you'll see boards like GAF become your best friends, becoming the game's own little marketing team, spreading word of what a great job you've done.
tahrikmili
Member
Jocchan said:
They are.. too human?
MMaRsu
Member
Wow Denis is a moron for sure :\
Just read that thread in the archives and what the hell is this guy thinking :lol
He's proclaiming himself the new Miyamoto of gaming or what :lol
" this game is the best we have ever made"
lol ok, like SK have made great games before :lol
" one of the best games to come out this year "
uhm yeah okay if you can see into the future miss cleo denis
:lol
This guy is such a tool
( no prior hate from me, i was kind of looking forward to Too Human at some point, but seeing the new trailers and all his bullshit I'm put off by it, I'll wait for D3 thx )
Just read that thread in the archives and what the hell is this guy thinking :lol
He's proclaiming himself the new Miyamoto of gaming or what :lol
" this game is the best we have ever made"
lol ok, like SK have made great games before :lol
" one of the best games to come out this year "
uhm yeah okay if you can see into the future miss cleo denis
:lol
This guy is such a tool
( no prior hate from me, i was kind of looking forward to Too Human at some point, but seeing the new trailers and all his bullshit I'm put off by it, I'll wait for D3 thx )
He (and his pr lady) also takes things that doesn't even occur on this board to smear and further his point. He doesn't even make it clear that that incident did not occur on this board. Where is the relevance to the myspace incident where a mom posted and encouraged a girl to kill herself. He takes every single negative with the most momentum that he can find in order to make a point. He can't do it standing on his own footing and relation to his own experience (i.e too human threads etc). Whats funny is he had lots and lots of defenders in every too human thread up until lately. What happened there. He just comes across to me as bad as a religious militant. ''If you don't take accountability sa-sa-somethings going to happen that forces you to and it won't be good''. I just think if Dyack put as much energy into making great games that he does this he woulnd'nt be in this mess.
PrivateRyan said:
I am being completely serious here, but Denis is clearly mentally "not right." There's a reason large outfits generally gag "the guys in the back room" from talking directly to the public. A publicly traded company can lose millions on one poorly worded comment alone. Denis has launched a poorly thought out campaign (lucky SK is not public).
I've never seen a developer build up so much animosity and ill will toward a game since Romero with Daikatana. Denis, if you're reading this, take my advice and disappear until launch. There's nothing more that can be done here other than further hurting the brand name. Is pissing the last six years of your life's work away on a petty internet argument worth it?
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
I can see it now:
"The Official Too Human thread of Necessary Forum Reform and Ownership Proclamations."
SK will still have a special place in my heart due to Eternal Darkness.
"The Official Too Human thread of Necessary Forum Reform and Ownership Proclamations."
SK will still have a special place in my heart due to Eternal Darkness.
Make ED2 for great justice, Dyack!
- Status