-
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
Jinko said:
It has everything to do with it. You think he'd care how "childish" everyone is if he was universally praised? No, this is about him refusing to take accountability for his own failures... something he has a track record for that's a mile long. He threw respect and courtesy out the window about 3 whiny rants ago.
Oh, and here's a thought: if he didn't like the way he was treated he could... not post here! Wow! But wait, ignoring your detractors? That's not a good way to attention whore and divert blame!
Iaido Sword
Banned
Nah, I have no problem with that.Piper Az said:
The users were already onto him revealing enough evidence that it was Jeff Bell anyways.
You go out and make a post like that knowing full well your information is being recorded, you get what you deserve.
Piper Az said:
I don't think anyone exposed him. He sent a PM to a member saying "and your contribution to society is what?" after that member slated him. The member posted a thread about it as he thought it was Jeff Bell and one of the mods said that it was Jeff Bell.
And on topic. Dyack has gone insane. Since when did he become a psychologist? I hope Too Human bombs so it'll give him a kick in the arse which is what he deserves.
My take on what Denis said:
A lot of Gaf, or the Gaf as Denis would call it, is supposed to be entertaining. Like late night shows (Conan, Jay, ect). Sure, there is some intended intellectual discussion, but most of it is supposed to be taken in jest. The way I see it, a society with a stick up it's ass would be incredibly boring. Suggesting that this place will one day be taken down due to what amounts to little more then petty bullshit is simply laughable. I suppose that someone should shut down Conan, Jay, and co. due to their treatment of high profile celebrities as well.
A lot of Gaf, or the Gaf as Denis would call it, is supposed to be entertaining. Like late night shows (Conan, Jay, ect). Sure, there is some intended intellectual discussion, but most of it is supposed to be taken in jest. The way I see it, a society with a stick up it's ass would be incredibly boring. Suggesting that this place will one day be taken down due to what amounts to little more then petty bullshit is simply laughable. I suppose that someone should shut down Conan, Jay, and co. due to their treatment of high profile celebrities as well.
VeritasVierge
Member
Visit a sports forum like say a Nascar board. See how the members of the forum treat each other, the drivers they claim to respect and even how the "objective" mods partake in discussions. See how optimistic your remain. This isn't just a "GAF" thing like Dyack is making it out to be. Of course, his last thread was no better and why many didn't fall for it by not choosing a side. The internet being a "mean place" is not limited to specific demographics. I've seen message boards filled women get downright nasty about which is the best breed of domestic cats. On the other hand I've been targeted on other boards just for being a female with an opinion. Yeah this happens here in GAF's OT to me as well but it's nothing new to the internet. I've had trolls PM/email me directly just to gloat they do what they do because they can get away with it. Even taking advantages of the bias a particular mod online has.EternalGamer said:
I don't get why this is all suddenly a revelation just because Mr. Dyack can't handle negative criticism. He's not bringing anything profound to the surface. He's just trying to cover his ass.
EDIT: I have been visiting message boards online since 1997. Ranging from varied sports to even AOL's gaming forums from a decade ago. I'm not seeing anything new.
change4no1 said:
I'm pretty sure most, if not everyone here listened to the actual podcast. How could you not?
If Dyack's complaint is that GAF has some sort of relevance in the media and we are socially responsible for the information and opinions presented on those media outlets, he's wrong. We do not post under a payroll(not most of us anyway), we aren't held responsible for the information that comes out of GAF. If Dyack has a complaint that TH is viewed negatively at a media outlet for whatever reason, his fight is with them, not us.
If Dyack's complaint is that he doesn't like the moderators of the forum. Why in the hell would he create a thread intended to troll and then go on a popular podcast to try to further his agenda against a group of fucking moderators. I mean, what kind of person would do something like that, it's just a fucking internet forum. If I'm ever on a forum with a group of moderators I don't like, I don't try to find a podcast to get on and convince people that those moderators are tools in the decay of society.
I really don't get what the great point he was trying to get across, maybe somebody wants to fill me in here?
DeadyFernGarden
Member
I thought the "Dyack theory" was very interesting. He had obviously put a bit of thought into what he was going to say. If you take gaf out of the equation you could apply it to any large internet forum so perhaps he has a point. Pity he has ruined his chances of being taken seriously by 90% of this board.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
SapientWolf said:
But this is a thoughtful and interesting discussion about internet culture and gaming. And it has been started by Dennis Dyack. Regardless of which side of the 'blogs and gamesites have too much influence / its just words on teh internets LAWLS at people taking it seriously. internetsseriousbusiness.gif' divide you choose to stand.
He also never used the words "stupid" or "obnoxious" when describing the GAF-collective, and even went so far as to say that he knows its not representative.
Let me bold the quote, which is right after the HIVEMINDOUTRAGEASSEMBLEANDDEFEND sentence that is what most people are focussing on with laser like tunnel vision:
His opinion was defended, and he justified his post. If you don't agree with his sentiments, fine, that's your prerogative, but it's pretty fucking low to start then attacking him for shit he never even said because he - OMG! - thought Dyack made some valid points in his
GitarooMan
Member
I agree with that to an extent, but on the whole there is way more mean-spirited and outright insulting posts here that seem to take on a personal component. But as many have said everywhere on the internet that exists, its certainly not unique to here.Madman said:
Although Dennis is reaching in some areas, he does make some very valid points.
If what he was mentioning about the mods changing tags and ripping into other members for their comments are true (I had no idea), that's pretty fucking sad.
I can't help but feel like his approach to this whole situation - that he's created - is completely wrong. He continued to reference literature in the interview, which is fine; but then he tries to apply those theories by justifying his last thread here. That I don't understand. He's trying to take the high road in the interview, but he's already pulled him self down through the gutter by challengingly the doubters on this board.
I respect his opinion and even agree with a lot of what he said on the show, but this entire situation could have been avoided.
Maybe instead of making threads on the internet and going on podcasts to vent he should write a book and put all of this down on paper. He would be able to reach the people who are actually going to understand what exactly it is he's trying to say and expose the asshats who can't think for them selfs.
If what he was mentioning about the mods changing tags and ripping into other members for their comments are true (I had no idea), that's pretty fucking sad.
I can't help but feel like his approach to this whole situation - that he's created - is completely wrong. He continued to reference literature in the interview, which is fine; but then he tries to apply those theories by justifying his last thread here. That I don't understand. He's trying to take the high road in the interview, but he's already pulled him self down through the gutter by challengingly the doubters on this board.
I respect his opinion and even agree with a lot of what he said on the show, but this entire situation could have been avoided.
Maybe instead of making threads on the internet and going on podcasts to vent he should write a book and put all of this down on paper. He would be able to reach the people who are actually going to understand what exactly it is he's trying to say and expose the asshats who can't think for them selfs.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
bhlaab said:
Out of interest, how many of the people aggressively, openly and repeatedly hating on Too Human have actually played it?
Because I'm pretty fucking sure that was the entire point of his 'put up or shut up' thread.
GitarooMan
Member
There is no game on GAF that people will not rip no matter how goodbhlaab said:
except Metal Gear Solid 1, 3, and 4
I used the late night analogy for exactly that. Anyone who has watched Jay Leno would know that he has ripped into various people in a way that would get people banned here. So while I see what you are saying and think that the "dirty" posts are often uncreative and unnecessary, it isn't the end of the world.GitarooMan said:
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Maybe Eternal used enough weasel words to cover himself, but I'm not going to let Dyack get a pass. There is a thoughtful and interesting discussion here because there are people making interesting and thoughtful posts. Dyack isn't leading it any more than a clown leads a circus. Neogaf has this same discussion every time some industry figure puts the spotlight on the forum.MrNyarlathotep said:
TheDarkKnight774
Member
MrNyarlathotep said:
since he's provided no means to play it (where's that demo) not many. And the same can be said of the people looking forward to it (like all games)
If that's his point, its pretty fucking weak
MrNyarlathotep said:
That's absolute true. But as a person that is in the lime light he has to be the bigger man. He can't go challenging "kids" on the web just because he doesn't think it's fair that they are basing opinions on his game on third party information.
If he's so against previews turning into reviews and worried about judgment from the press, then he doesn't have to give out preview builds. Is SK really getting treated any differently than any other developer?
I just had to type this one out and I don't think I'll delete it after I'm done. I listened to the entire Dyack segment and nearly fell alseep.
Dyack's ramblings made no sense whatsoever but make his point much less interesting to me. It's great that he feels he's very intelligent, reads high concept material and thinks above the clouds, but he needs to sit back and come back down to Earth. No amount of textbook knowledge is going to change the world. You don't have it figured out, and you never will. By "it," I mean it all, life, society, and why your game is getting bad press; it's not some derivative of a function you can just calculate and say, aha, Eureka!
Under all the sassy cover up, it's clear as day you're just upset over negative opinions. It's not hard to get your game celebrated on GAF. At least if you're not on the forum trolling, and then on a podcast complaining about the world and technology.
I have no intention of buying Too Human because I don't own a 360. I haven't read a single preview and all I've really done is seen screenshots and watched a few trailers. I have not been impressed at all hence I stay away from Too Human topics. You can't win em' all and if enough of your 'potential audience' is ripping you on artwork and presentation in a trailer, then there is reason enough to question the quality of the game. If you feel that your game is better than we give it credit for, then the truth will be revealed on its own. LTTP threads, impressions, review threads, little by little the good will be known once enough real people under real circumstances tell us directly what's the real deal.
We've done it, time and time again. For example, I, myself, thought Resistance: Fall of Man was a piece of crap because the first few levels felt like cut and paste Call of Duty with really lame aliens. The graphics were OK, but the 'art' and 'presentation' was severely making me keep a straight face and not :O. As I progressed I found real reasons to stick with it and it became a really great experience I was glad to enjoy. Can your game do this? If it can, let it... don't push it down our throats. We get angry when outsiders tell us what to do. We get it, we know we have to play games before we give true opinions, but we also have to pay good money to play. If we're not absolutely sure we're getting our money's worth, you're going to have a bit of trouble with us at first.
The forum is working fine, it's just that you think the forum has to work in your favor all the time. We're not your best friends, we're potential customers. We're always right, so make us feel better and change our opinion with tact and courtesy. The more you learn from us, the more you can sway our minds. All it takes is practice and you'll have threads in anticipation for official threads about your game's trailer! If you'd leave your little 'greater than thou' igloo and let your game share with the community it will someday flourish with, you'd be amazed what you can do, both artistically and commercially. Not every great creative achievement in life needs to be utterly and completely born of your head. The world does not revolve around you, and no matter how much thought you put into things, or how many different angles or personalities you try to imagine viewing a certain scene or playing a level in, you can't do it all. You need us, just as much as you need previews, reviews, and the whole enchilada.
The sky is blue and infinitely high. It's time to step outside your barriers and take in the fresh air... with all of us.
Dyack's ramblings made no sense whatsoever but make his point much less interesting to me. It's great that he feels he's very intelligent, reads high concept material and thinks above the clouds, but he needs to sit back and come back down to Earth. No amount of textbook knowledge is going to change the world. You don't have it figured out, and you never will. By "it," I mean it all, life, society, and why your game is getting bad press; it's not some derivative of a function you can just calculate and say, aha, Eureka!
Under all the sassy cover up, it's clear as day you're just upset over negative opinions. It's not hard to get your game celebrated on GAF. At least if you're not on the forum trolling, and then on a podcast complaining about the world and technology.
I have no intention of buying Too Human because I don't own a 360. I haven't read a single preview and all I've really done is seen screenshots and watched a few trailers. I have not been impressed at all hence I stay away from Too Human topics. You can't win em' all and if enough of your 'potential audience' is ripping you on artwork and presentation in a trailer, then there is reason enough to question the quality of the game. If you feel that your game is better than we give it credit for, then the truth will be revealed on its own. LTTP threads, impressions, review threads, little by little the good will be known once enough real people under real circumstances tell us directly what's the real deal.
We've done it, time and time again. For example, I, myself, thought Resistance: Fall of Man was a piece of crap because the first few levels felt like cut and paste Call of Duty with really lame aliens. The graphics were OK, but the 'art' and 'presentation' was severely making me keep a straight face and not :O. As I progressed I found real reasons to stick with it and it became a really great experience I was glad to enjoy. Can your game do this? If it can, let it... don't push it down our throats. We get angry when outsiders tell us what to do. We get it, we know we have to play games before we give true opinions, but we also have to pay good money to play. If we're not absolutely sure we're getting our money's worth, you're going to have a bit of trouble with us at first.
The forum is working fine, it's just that you think the forum has to work in your favor all the time. We're not your best friends, we're potential customers. We're always right, so make us feel better and change our opinion with tact and courtesy. The more you learn from us, the more you can sway our minds. All it takes is practice and you'll have threads in anticipation for official threads about your game's trailer! If you'd leave your little 'greater than thou' igloo and let your game share with the community it will someday flourish with, you'd be amazed what you can do, both artistically and commercially. Not every great creative achievement in life needs to be utterly and completely born of your head. The world does not revolve around you, and no matter how much thought you put into things, or how many different angles or personalities you try to imagine viewing a certain scene or playing a level in, you can't do it all. You need us, just as much as you need previews, reviews, and the whole enchilada.
The sky is blue and infinitely high. It's time to step outside your barriers and take in the fresh air... with all of us.
gofreak said:
To clear something up here. The whole GAF detective was only ban enforced after one guy posting about relationship issues in the OT had a bunch of people posting the thread link on her myspace and trying to fuck up his life despite the fact that he never posted any personal information. This was a while after the whole Bell thing and is really only enforced to protect the people that make threads and don't want their life ruined as a result.
As the size of this thread continues to explode exponentially, let me first state that I have only had the time to make it through the first and last few pages of content here. That is by no means a knock on presumably quality content hidden away in the in-between pages, Im just pointing out that if its been covered, I repeat out of ignorance not a sense of self-importance.
Before making any comment about Too Human pre-review-controversy-e-drama-forum influence- libel -GAF-gate I just want to comment on the substance of his higher thought treatise as presented on 1Up Yours.
I am familiar with a majority of the authors Denis brings up and I fully admit that while I havent read the literature in question, the substance of a good deal of my education through university puts me in a position to understand the points he is attempting to make and the concepts he wants to bring together. Take that as you will, this is the internet after all.
To get it over with quickly, bandage-like, in my opinion Denis hodgepodge of scholarly references, personal insight and inference have, in this case, served to severely undermine the central core of his argument - for which there is merit in discussion.
If he planned to drop this massive bomb of social theory and forum criticism he would have been well served to have written down a majority of his argument beforehand. Garnettes cries for clarity and (I think to some extent the entire 1Up crews) reaction of dumbfounded silence are evidence enough of the fact that too much time was spent attempting to sift through what was at times an unstructured and incoherent argument. No one can follow your ideas if they have to create their own logical structure just to keep up.
If Denis wants to talk about the sociological implications of internet anonymity in promoting a culture lacking mores or losing its ability to act civilly and rationally do to a lack of social sanctions, thats fantastic. I encourage him to continue to study these subjects and hopefully develop an insightful theory.
However, there is no reason to simply appear on a podcast armed with new ideas and personal experience and proceed to educate the rest of us about how the internet works. The things he cites are known to any message board denizen: the internet is, in fact, serious business, anonymity does breed a sense of entitlement and invincibility, and in a world without consequences, people will do what they can to express those feelings held in check by societal norms (see: his quip about forum driven suicide).
Most people may not be intellectually aware of this, but they are at the very least instinctually aware, and when others try to make these points as breaking news, they are trolled viscously for this very reason (see: the cry of lol internet sociologist).
His attempt to open up a discussion about the effects of forum posters on gaming and games journalism; about the need for structure in the way in which any writer (forum poster or magazine editor) addresses their community and submits their content, and conversely, the seeming lack of rationality that continues to expand, is a welcome one.
We should all be taking the time to reflect on our own contributions, or lack thereof, and begin to separate ourselves from the internet that is our place of play where trolling and popcorn.gif amuse and the internet where we work. (I only reference work as a way to concisely reference contributing something meaningful, not an association with professionalism).
However, opening this discussion on the back of his put up or shut up thread, which in turn rides the reactionary back of NeoGAF in general and poor handling of the E3 Too Human preview, Denis shoots himself in the foot.
First, he removes credibility in the idea that this is part of some grand social experiment born out of his recent literary exploration keeping this to himself and writing about it post-release would have made a much stronger point.
Second, he invalidates the very idea of objective discourse about the role of the internet on the games industry and, more specifically, games journalism by focusing repeatedly on NeoGAF. This forums infamy and (supposed) importance are not enough to warrant citing evidence solely from here. 1UP boards, Destructoid forums and blogs, Evil Avatar, 4chan all of these are sources of equal parts insight and vitriol. Coming back to GAF again and again simply reinforces the point that this was a targeted message to a community at odds (deservedly so or not) with him as a developer, with his game and his company the three pillars of his professional (and most likely some of his personal) persona.
So again, there was no reason for Denis to simply appear on a podcast in order to address his latest development in continuing a controversy.
That he attempted to wrap his personal dispute with NeoGAF, and one assumes vitriolic critics of Too Human everywhere, in a sheen of legitimacy claiming a need for discourse and investigation is unacceptable. That Denis is only asking for reasoned discourse now at the end is unfortunate (and not entirely his fault). That he is attempting to use the scientific pursuit of social understanding to, presumably, promote change only because he himself has been wounded is pathetic.
The more cynical minds (and of course here I point to the internet hate machine) would point out that this is merely a case of Denis attempting to obfuscate his weak grasp on disparate materials. In fact, an argument could be made that all the name dropping, lengthy explanations of content and the erratic method in which he bounced from social interaction on the internet (forums) as a whole and NeoGAF in particular are all evidence of his lacking a firm understanding of the material in question. At the same time, the nature of the forum in question (a podcast) and an actual lack of preparation, leading to more of a stream of consciousness from Denis can just as easily explain this.
Im choosing very specifically not to make a judgment here, first because Im not 100% sure one way or the other myself and secondly because I cant tell the man he doesnt know what hes talking about when I havent read the work myself. He could be a victim of poor choice in sources or a million other possibilities.
I will say this finally, since Ive gone on way too long; I have avoided a definite conclusion to all this for a reason. Discourse. (Hopefully) Or, being flamed. (Either way).
Also, the next time *any* developer/writer/whatever wants to come onto 1UP Yours and talk about big stuff, make sure you get an outline beforehand. When left unstructured and unchallenged, this kind of thing undermines what is otherwise an unbeatable podcast.
Before making any comment about Too Human pre-review-controversy-e-drama-forum influence- libel -GAF-gate I just want to comment on the substance of his higher thought treatise as presented on 1Up Yours.
I am familiar with a majority of the authors Denis brings up and I fully admit that while I havent read the literature in question, the substance of a good deal of my education through university puts me in a position to understand the points he is attempting to make and the concepts he wants to bring together. Take that as you will, this is the internet after all.
To get it over with quickly, bandage-like, in my opinion Denis hodgepodge of scholarly references, personal insight and inference have, in this case, served to severely undermine the central core of his argument - for which there is merit in discussion.
If he planned to drop this massive bomb of social theory and forum criticism he would have been well served to have written down a majority of his argument beforehand. Garnettes cries for clarity and (I think to some extent the entire 1Up crews) reaction of dumbfounded silence are evidence enough of the fact that too much time was spent attempting to sift through what was at times an unstructured and incoherent argument. No one can follow your ideas if they have to create their own logical structure just to keep up.
If Denis wants to talk about the sociological implications of internet anonymity in promoting a culture lacking mores or losing its ability to act civilly and rationally do to a lack of social sanctions, thats fantastic. I encourage him to continue to study these subjects and hopefully develop an insightful theory.
However, there is no reason to simply appear on a podcast armed with new ideas and personal experience and proceed to educate the rest of us about how the internet works. The things he cites are known to any message board denizen: the internet is, in fact, serious business, anonymity does breed a sense of entitlement and invincibility, and in a world without consequences, people will do what they can to express those feelings held in check by societal norms (see: his quip about forum driven suicide).
Most people may not be intellectually aware of this, but they are at the very least instinctually aware, and when others try to make these points as breaking news, they are trolled viscously for this very reason (see: the cry of lol internet sociologist).
His attempt to open up a discussion about the effects of forum posters on gaming and games journalism; about the need for structure in the way in which any writer (forum poster or magazine editor) addresses their community and submits their content, and conversely, the seeming lack of rationality that continues to expand, is a welcome one.
We should all be taking the time to reflect on our own contributions, or lack thereof, and begin to separate ourselves from the internet that is our place of play where trolling and popcorn.gif amuse and the internet where we work. (I only reference work as a way to concisely reference contributing something meaningful, not an association with professionalism).
However, opening this discussion on the back of his put up or shut up thread, which in turn rides the reactionary back of NeoGAF in general and poor handling of the E3 Too Human preview, Denis shoots himself in the foot.
First, he removes credibility in the idea that this is part of some grand social experiment born out of his recent literary exploration keeping this to himself and writing about it post-release would have made a much stronger point.
Second, he invalidates the very idea of objective discourse about the role of the internet on the games industry and, more specifically, games journalism by focusing repeatedly on NeoGAF. This forums infamy and (supposed) importance are not enough to warrant citing evidence solely from here. 1UP boards, Destructoid forums and blogs, Evil Avatar, 4chan all of these are sources of equal parts insight and vitriol. Coming back to GAF again and again simply reinforces the point that this was a targeted message to a community at odds (deservedly so or not) with him as a developer, with his game and his company the three pillars of his professional (and most likely some of his personal) persona.
So again, there was no reason for Denis to simply appear on a podcast in order to address his latest development in continuing a controversy.
That he attempted to wrap his personal dispute with NeoGAF, and one assumes vitriolic critics of Too Human everywhere, in a sheen of legitimacy claiming a need for discourse and investigation is unacceptable. That Denis is only asking for reasoned discourse now at the end is unfortunate (and not entirely his fault). That he is attempting to use the scientific pursuit of social understanding to, presumably, promote change only because he himself has been wounded is pathetic.
The more cynical minds (and of course here I point to the internet hate machine) would point out that this is merely a case of Denis attempting to obfuscate his weak grasp on disparate materials. In fact, an argument could be made that all the name dropping, lengthy explanations of content and the erratic method in which he bounced from social interaction on the internet (forums) as a whole and NeoGAF in particular are all evidence of his lacking a firm understanding of the material in question. At the same time, the nature of the forum in question (a podcast) and an actual lack of preparation, leading to more of a stream of consciousness from Denis can just as easily explain this.
Im choosing very specifically not to make a judgment here, first because Im not 100% sure one way or the other myself and secondly because I cant tell the man he doesnt know what hes talking about when I havent read the work myself. He could be a victim of poor choice in sources or a million other possibilities.
I will say this finally, since Ive gone on way too long; I have avoided a definite conclusion to all this for a reason. Discourse. (Hopefully) Or, being flamed. (Either way).
Also, the next time *any* developer/writer/whatever wants to come onto 1UP Yours and talk about big stuff, make sure you get an outline beforehand. When left unstructured and unchallenged, this kind of thing undermines what is otherwise an unbeatable podcast.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
SapientWolf said:
An excellent point. Maybe think of him as the Fool in medieval throne rooms, allowed to satirize and insult and get away with it in front of the royalty (cuz if a regular joe member had posted those curt, dismissive taunts, an insulting tag would've been the BEST case scenario).
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
bhlaab said:
Ah, I see.
You let other people make your own mind up for you. Way to totally prove Dyack wrong!
SapientWolf said:
Indeed, but there seems to be a particular level of venom towards DD that other outspoken developers who make utterly retarded public statements don't get here on GAF.
One can only assume because he has actively 'called out' GAF where Rein / Newell / Jaffe haven't.
gketter said:
It is pretty weak tbh, he should rely on the game to speak for itself instead of trying to 'own' random messageboard users. The fact he thinks he needs to 'defend' his work against random messageboard users is pretty silly, all in all.
I mean it's not like anyone takes a website they post on so seriously that they would try and boycott sales of a product just because he spoke against it...
Pimpbaa said:
...oh.
GQman2121 said:
Well I'm pretty sure TH's disastrous E3 showing was publisher driven not developer driven, and was an attempt to tentpole a somewhat lacklustre lineup at that E3, that massively backfired due to being rushed out to public consumption way too early, but that's not their fault and it certainly isn't GAFs...
jaundicejuice
Member
I couldn't listen to the whole diatribe last night but I'm listening to it now. Just got to the part where he likens this message board to a science fiction novel and he states:
*puts on the brakes*
Wow. Winning at posting on a message board?
I believe someone stated earlier that there's an uber-thread on one of the IGN-Insider boards where you can post anything you want, unless it's negative--be it trolling, a contrary opinion, whatever I don't know--in which case it will be deleted, and Denis will repsond. So maybe he's just too used to living in a vacuum of opinion? I agree that the personal attacks on him go too far, but those individuals get dealt with. When it comes to his ludicrous statements about games, the half-baked philosophy and such, that's open season.
I find it kind of amusing that Mr. Dyack only seems to lash out and think things are in need of reform when he recieves criticism, be it constructive or not.
He received a negative preview from EGM at E3 a while back and suddenly the system was broken. Now previews alright because he's received what he construes to be fair ones? That whole E3/previews rant he had a while back always seemed like sour grapes. It's as though Dyack played the hype game and was only upset with it when he didn't get what he wanted from it. That's how it struck me.
All of this lashing out at against previews, E3, suing Epic, metacritic and now a message board just looks bad. It looks like he's trying to find scapegoats so when Too Human comes out and perhaps isn't all that well received it will somehow be everyone else's fault.
Stating that that whole For or Against debacle was some sort of grand social experiement that's supposed to change the way people think about message boards, technology and the like...it's just ridiculous. I don't even want to pay this any more mind, I think I'll just start watching the latest 1up Show instead. I'll just say my bit and be done with it, besides, what I'm saying has probably already been stated ad nauseum.
I used to be a fan of Silicon Knights. I liked Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain and Eternal Darkness, even beat it all three times to get the True Ending. Twin Snakes, well, I'll just say I prefer the original and leave it at that. It's been years since Silicon Knights have put out a game I liked, years. Hence stating I'm a fan in he past tense. Too Human has been in and out of developement for a decade and what little I've seen and read hasn't sold me on the game. I'd like to play a demo before coming to any sort of concrete conclusion but as it stands Too Human looks kinda wanky to me.
Dear Mr. Dyack:
You've lost it. You've gone clean off your nutter. You need to stop taking a message board so seriously, you need to stop coming up with bizarre, circuitous arguements to explain away opinions--be they well founded or not--you don't like. You need to stop talking about Too Human, your bizarre theories, yourself and Silicon Knights. What you should do, if your game is so great, is to put Too Human out and let the product do the talking for you. It should say all that needs to be said.
Denis Dyack said:
*puts on the brakes*
Wow. Winning at posting on a message board?
I believe someone stated earlier that there's an uber-thread on one of the IGN-Insider boards where you can post anything you want, unless it's negative--be it trolling, a contrary opinion, whatever I don't know--in which case it will be deleted, and Denis will repsond. So maybe he's just too used to living in a vacuum of opinion? I agree that the personal attacks on him go too far, but those individuals get dealt with. When it comes to his ludicrous statements about games, the half-baked philosophy and such, that's open season.
I find it kind of amusing that Mr. Dyack only seems to lash out and think things are in need of reform when he recieves criticism, be it constructive or not.
He received a negative preview from EGM at E3 a while back and suddenly the system was broken. Now previews alright because he's received what he construes to be fair ones? That whole E3/previews rant he had a while back always seemed like sour grapes. It's as though Dyack played the hype game and was only upset with it when he didn't get what he wanted from it. That's how it struck me.
All of this lashing out at against previews, E3, suing Epic, metacritic and now a message board just looks bad. It looks like he's trying to find scapegoats so when Too Human comes out and perhaps isn't all that well received it will somehow be everyone else's fault.
Stating that that whole For or Against debacle was some sort of grand social experiement that's supposed to change the way people think about message boards, technology and the like...it's just ridiculous. I don't even want to pay this any more mind, I think I'll just start watching the latest 1up Show instead. I'll just say my bit and be done with it, besides, what I'm saying has probably already been stated ad nauseum.
I used to be a fan of Silicon Knights. I liked Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain and Eternal Darkness, even beat it all three times to get the True Ending. Twin Snakes, well, I'll just say I prefer the original and leave it at that. It's been years since Silicon Knights have put out a game I liked, years. Hence stating I'm a fan in he past tense. Too Human has been in and out of developement for a decade and what little I've seen and read hasn't sold me on the game. I'd like to play a demo before coming to any sort of concrete conclusion but as it stands Too Human looks kinda wanky to me.
Dear Mr. Dyack:
You've lost it. You've gone clean off your nutter. You need to stop taking a message board so seriously, you need to stop coming up with bizarre, circuitous arguements to explain away opinions--be they well founded or not--you don't like. You need to stop talking about Too Human, your bizarre theories, yourself and Silicon Knights. What you should do, if your game is so great, is to put Too Human out and let the product do the talking for you. It should say all that needs to be said.
Visualante
Member
wrong thread
NullPointer
Member
Ca1amity said:
That really is it. I could follow along with all of his points just fine, even if he did have a pretty circuitous route to putting it all together - and they were *meaningful* points of criticism.
It made me step back for a few minutes and remember all the knee jerk vitriolic reactions I've made on the site, and how I sure as hell wouldn't react that way, even casually, if there was someone from the dev team around in the real world.
But his points, while valid, have next to nothing to do with the reaction to the 'Too Human' game footage and preview impressions themselves, and to his baiting of the people here. The game DID speak for itself, and he seems to have a problem with how that went.
The only way he'll get the discourse he wants is to shut up and put the demo out already. Short of that, all of this is just pissing into the wind.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
You're preaching to the choir when it comes to your points about Dyack, but I found these views on forums led to some interesting questions. What exactly should a poster liable for, and what criteria should determine that? Should we hold devs to higher standards here? Or should we all hold ourselves to those same high standards? And how should harsh should mods be when it comes to enforcing those standards? For example, it is illogical to speak definitively about a game that hasn't been released, and you would never see that from a reputable journalist, but should that behavior get a ban on a forum? How should you punish faulty logic or blatant stupidity that doesn't explicitly violate the forum rules?Ca1amity said:
Personally, I think a good community will find a way to police itself, and every forum community has its own culture, standards, and rules, some which are not written anywhere. Neogaf, as a community, will have to decide what they want the forum to be like because you cannot force a change without knowing the culture and working with it.
- Status