Support NeoGAF

[crowphoenix]

After watching the 1up show, I really can't say that I was impressed. The animations just look clunky and stilted. Every thing just looked bad. You can really see how the game has aged from being in development for so long. That being said, from the little bit we got to see, I wasn't able to gleam how fun the game was. So, I'm still hoping that it shines there. I've been waiting for this game for a long time, so I'll still pick it up, even if it is just to see how bad it is.

 

[fse]

This is in reply to EviLore's long post. http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11827869&postcount=1021

Originally Posted by Denis Dyack:
We decided a long time ago that Too Human would be a game that speaks for itself.

Is it, really? If Too Human spoke for itself there would be no controversy.

How many users here have played it? Not many I'd say. They are making a big fuss from just watching videos. Another part of it is the herd mentality of users here trying to fit in.

Originally Posted by Denis Dyack:
If they broke their own rules as a site, should they shut their own site down?

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.

The moderator (Jim) is now unbanned. Lets clear that up. It is nice you made a post telling users that their account info is safe.

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.

Was there a ban in this case?

Originally Posted by Denis Dyack:
It's pretty clear that people are trying to judge something without playing it and I think that's ridiculous. And on the NeoGAF there's no penalty.

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?

Constructive criticism would be fine, if users where able to freely say what they want on any game without feeling a threat of being banned. This is not the case on other game threads where you have people being banned for simply posting their opinion

Originally Posted by Denis Dyack:
The idea of a...moderation is to keep things civil. You have a social responsibility to the forums so people feel free to say what they want, and these moderators are changing forum topics.

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 would be nice if the mods around here did enforce the rules of the forum, and not pick and choose at times. Banning users for shitting on other games, etc but trolling a game which they have not played, or really care for is okay?

Just my .02 cents here.

 

[Karma Kramer]

This game when its focus was an action cinematic game with a great story, was really exciting to me. Early videos showed really creative exciting camera angles... with an interesting style.

Something happened to this games engine that I think made them have to scale the action back and make it more of a collecting/level based game.

Disappointing.

 

[rollingstart]

How many users here have played it? Not many I'd say. They are making a big fuss from just watching videos. Another part of it is the herd mentality of users here trying to fit in.

Not many played it, but go back and read the things people were hating on. No one can really judge the gameplay until the demo is released. The things being hated on were the cutscenes, bad animation, and other aspects that can be judged from a video since these aspects won't change weather you are watching it on your PC or playing it on the 360.

I mean, the Too Human supporters out there think it is good because of the gameplay? probably not, since they didn't player it just as the haters didn't. They are judging it on the same info the haters have, they just have a different outlook. Someone could just as easily point fingers and claim some sort of arbitrary reason for them liking the game.

Constructive criticism would be fine, if users where able to freely say what they want on any game without feeling a threat of being banned. This is not the case on other game threads where you have people being banned for simply posting their opinion

wait, people get banned for posting opinions on games? I don't think I have ever seen that case unless it was baseless crap like "HALO SUCKZ!" or other trolling. Go read the MGS4 thread, there is tons and tons of critism of the game in there by users who lived on the edge to post those impressions.

 

[Momar]

Constructive criticism would be fine, if users where able to freely say what they want on any game without feeling a threat of being banned. This is not the case on other game threads where you have people being banned for simply posting their opinion

I'm not calling you out as a liar, but I'm definitely going to have to call you out for some evidence here.

 

[Rolf NB]

I finally managed to stay awake through the whole thing last night and gear dod does it get worse.

Does the "scientism" term fit to how Denis Dyack steps completely out of the boundaries of his own place and justifies it by attaching himself to books he presents as smart and relevant, or would that be improper use?
That sense of being entitled to all kinds of things makes Denis so hard to take serious. I'm all for ethics in our society, but it doesn't work through these crude methods. Ethics makes sense anyway most of the time when you think about long-term strategies. Unethical behaviour is almost always the result of short-term goals getting too much of a priority. Most smart people can figure that out for themselves.

 

[farnham]

dennis has good points about the problems of this forums

but the thing that he does not see is that the hardcore gaming forum does not effect the video game industry as a whole

sure there are thousands on these forums but the video games that are successful have to sell in the hundred thousands... that goes to the stuff that dennis said about the false information that goes from forum to blog to major game outlet too...

Its not like the bloggers or the major game sites dont edit the stuff they post.. if they dont then its a problem of their gaming "journalism" not that of the free speech of the forum members..

Also there are counter examples..

New York Times quoted that site that should not be named as an established game sales researched site.. That means that the forum members often know more then professionals..

Id say that he does have some points.. but I had the impression that GAF was more tolerant on games then most of the other communities.. For example games like Excite Truck that got really bad reviews from every major game review site does have many fans here..

 

[jett]

:lol I had forgotten about all the bullshit spewed in last year's EGM Podcast.

 

[Lost Fragment]

Only takes 3 words to disprove Dyack's assumption here:

Kane and Lynch.




That is all.

 

[jax (old)]

:lol I had forgotten about all the bullshit spewed in last year's EGM Podcast.

I sort of remembered it but it definitely made really dislike denis dyack and that just stuck. He's just so full of shit. This new podcast is more of the same - skip actually posted that 1up invited him onto 1upshow and he thought he was doing 1upyours so he brought along this shitfest/manifesto to "talk" about.

Definite victim complex. FOR/AGAINST was his doing. E3 thing was his doing. The hypocrisy of the fellow is amazing. Best thing that could happen now is TH bombing so bad that dyack goes on another diatribe and we all get a good laugh out of it.

 

[Darkpen]

wait, people get banned for posting opinions on games? I don't think I have ever seen that case unless it was baseless crap like "HALO SUCKZ!" or other trolling. Go read the MGS4 thread, there is tons and tons of critism of the game in there by users who lived on the edge to post those impressions.

Not to derail, but I've seen it happen. People getting banned for stating their opinion, and bam, banhammer strikes.

 

[jax (old)]

Not to derail, but I've seen it happen. People getting banned for stating their opinion, and bam, banhammer strikes.

I would say that doesn't happen as much as you'd think. Either the posters have a track record for deliberate trolling, and its evident from continued posts + post history, I don't think it happens. I've said very negative things about games I've played and no problems here. Its kind of apparent when people have an axe to grind.

 

[heliosRAzi]

This game when its focus was an action cinematic game with a great story, was really exciting to me. Early videos showed really creative exciting camera angles... with an interesting style.

Something happened to this games engine that I think made them have to scale the action back and make it more of a collecting/level based game.

Disappointing.

This is how I feel. When he was making it for the Gamecube, he was saying how it would be a hearty RPG where your character would change based on how you play it. Then it became a 10 hour hack & slash game about collecting loot.

 

[SaggyMonkey]

Wow, 43 pages of this? Maybe Denis had a point now. :-(

 

[Opus Angelorum]

Maybe Denis had a point now.

When he attacks the place a lot of people would call their e-home, this reaction is all but expected.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Denis has no point. Online message boards don't mean shit in the grand scheme of things. Michael Bay gets shitted on all over the internet, doesn't stop Transformers from making a ton of money and Bay doesn't run around whining about the internet or getting into arguments with anonymous forum posters. Dyack is just trying to deflect attention and make excuses.

 

[aeolist]

Wow, just listened to the podcast last night. I haven't read any of the material he talked about but the way he was talking just smacked of a teenage mentality. "OMG I JUST READ THE MOST AMAZING SHIT NOW EVERYONE LISTEN TO ME CAUSE I AM GOING TO CHANGE HUMAN SOCIETY FOREVER"

Also Shane was banana riding harder than I've ever seen before. It was frankly embarrassing.

 

[Woo-Fu]

I wonder what Derek Smart thinks about this?

 

[aeolist]

I wonder what Derek Smart thinks about this?

"Denis Dyack is my new god"

 

[Bizzyb]

the thing that he does not see is that the hardcore gaming forum does not effect the video game industry as a whole

sure there are thousands on these forums but the video games that are successful have to sell in the hundred thousands... that goes to the stuff that dennis said about the false information that goes from forum to blog to major game outlet too...

We have friends.....we know people

Fear GAF

:lol

 

[dollartaco]

I wonder what Derek Smart thinks about this?

I wonder what Uwe Boll thinks about this.

 

[Opus Angelorum]

I wonder what Uwe Boll thinks about this.

He is a writing a script as we speak.

 

[Busty]

Having now actually listened to the podcast the first thing that came to mind for me when I started listening was how I'd divorced Dyack the man from Dyack the NeoGAF poster.

He's right in he assumption that people posting blocks of text on a forum aren't really seen as being people with feelings in their own right. However... in saying that, there was one over riding feeling that I just couldn't shake at all during the whole podcast.....

If Dyack was loved, admired and respected by NeoGAF as a whole, would we even be having this conversation? Isn't this whole discussion simply born out of GAF's rejection of Too Human and Dyack as a person?

This crusade that he's embarked on to try and clean up the Internet's gaming message boards just feels like someone that gone to the teacher when the cool kids won't let him hang out with them. Dyack doesn't have the health and well being of any particular person or group at heart. He's begun this whole conversation, this whole debate on the nature of free speech really from a thread on this forum he originated.

There are plenty of respected name developers that post on this forum who don't reveal themselves and simply post under anonymous usernames. If Dyack chooses to post under his own name he must understand the nature of the beast.

If Dyack takes such things to heart perhaps he should step out of the public eye altogether and work quietly on his games behind the scenes.

 

[Doc Evils]

He is a writing a script as we speak.

should be on par with the game.

 

[Kittonwy]

I finally managed to stay awake through the whole thing last night and gear dod does it get worse.

Does the "scientism" term fit to how Denis Dyack steps completely out of the boundaries of his own place and justifies it by attaching himself to books he presents as smart and relevant, or would that be improper use?
That sense of being entitled to all kinds of things makes Denis so hard to take serious. I'm all for ethics in our society, but it doesn't work through these crude methods. Ethics makes sense anyway most of the time when you think about long-term strategies. Unethical behaviour is almost always the result of short-term goals getting too much of a priority. Most smart people can figure that out for themselves.

I agree.

GAF IS ethical, when some of us see footage of a game in preview build that doesn't look so good, we call it out, we tell it like it is, so people don't have to actually WASTE MONEY TO PRE-ORDER something so questionable until at least the demo comes out and we can get a clearer picture on how the game plays.

Personally when I play a game it's not that hard to tell whether it's a good game or it isn't, I don't subscribe to this whole "this is a shit game but I find it fun therefore people should buy it" bullshit, these things cost fucking $60 of my hard-earned money and if it's shit I don't want anyone else having to pay money to be subject to it, now people still have every right to pick up a shit game but at least they would have access to some player feedback before buying, and outside of a few individuals pushing a few shit games because they think some shit games are "fun", GAF as a whole tend to embrace the truly stellar games. Why the fuck should ANYONE endure shitty combat with shitty animations and collision detection just to loot grind when there are better games out there that can actually be ENJOYED? How does THAT serve society?

GAF on the whole is IN FACT, HELPING SOCIETY AND THE VIDEOGAME INDUSTRY AS A WHOLE to weed out the really shit games by calling them out, if one sees something bad and does not call it out, THEN we have a case where one is just standing by letting other people get duped into buying a bad product. It's like watching someone walking right into an open man-hole without saying anything, THAT would be hurting society and videogame industry as a whole. I mean how DARE consumer report check out a car in a test drive (yeah a test drive IS subjective in many ways) and form an opinion on it? Where's the reciprocity in THAT?

 

[bj00rn]

GAF IS ethical, when some of us see footage of a game in preview build that doesn't look so good, we call it out, we tell it like it is, so people don't have to actually WASTE MONEY TO PRE-ORDER something so questionable until at least the demo comes out and we can get a clearer picture on how the game plays.

Is there something wrong with my eyes or did you just define ethics as helping people choosing the "right" videogames...?

This place is in a worse shape than even I thought...

 

[Saint Gregory]

Not to derail, but I've seen it happen. People getting banned for stating their opinion, and bam, banhammer strikes.

It's rare for a poster to be banned based on just one post. You'll see plenty of negative criticism in generally every thread on this board. That's what we're here to do, discuss games not stroke them and tell them how pretty they are (well that does happen sometimes too but that's not the point ).

Usually when you see a poster banned for their opinion it's because they've developed a history of posting against the grain just to stir up shit. There may be posters getting away with that in TH threads but how are the mods supposed to pick them out when almost every TH thread is a trainwreck anyway?

 

[Creamium]

Is there something wrong with my eyes or did you just define ethics as helping people choosing the "right" videogames...?

yeah I'm kinda lost there too

 

[Kittonwy]

Is there something wrong with my eyes or did you just define ethics as helping people choosing the "right" videogames...?

This place is in a worse shape than even I thought...

People have every right to buy whatever they want but there's nothing wrong with giving good advice. If a particular restaurant serves a great steak, you would recommend it, wouldn't you? If a plate of stir-fry has been sitting in the kitchen for the last two days and doesn't look so edible, and someone you know is about to pick it up and eat it, would it not be ethical to say something?

 

[Particle Physicist]

Wow, 43 pages of this? Maybe Denis had a point now. :-(

what did you expect? he kinda trolled the whole forum.

i dont know why he even cares. he should just let it go.

 

[ryan13ts]

I don't think it's Dyack's disregard for accepting responsibility that disturbs me as much as it is attitude about the situation when it's brought up. Instead of just concluding the recent reactions to the game to be personal opinions, he goes out of his way to attack a core group of consumers who have been his supporters in the past, while completely deflecting any blame from himself or SK. I just find that absolutely amazingly shitty. While I had been holding off from forming a solid opinion on TH just yet, it doesn't really matter any more as I doubt I'll be playing it at all now. I find it hard to purchase a game from a developer who blames his consumers for his own shortcomings.

 

[Ramenman]

OK, so we have had 42 pages of disagreement with Dennis.

Yes, it is strange for him to say that GAF hurts society, but I want to hear some legitimate responses to the other concerns that he raises.

For example, his claim that the mods should follow there own rules. I haven't seen any response to this at all. The only few mod posts have been things like...



or

Not Really.

Go read the all-encompassing EviLore post.

 

[Guy Legend]

People have every right to buy whatever they want but there's nothing wrong with giving good advice. If a particular restaurant serves a great steak, you would recommend it, wouldn't you? If a plate of stir-fry has been sitting in the kitchen for the last two days and doesn't look so edible, and someone you know is about to pick it up and eat it, would it not be ethical to say something?

And how can you be sure your advice is good at this point (in regards to games that haven't been released yet)? One of the main points of the discussion is to play the game yourself and/or wait for reviews. You can sometimes make reasonable guesses based on video, screen shots, previews, etc., but opinions can and will differ.

People have every right to state their own opinion, but I think it's best not to go overboard and state something to be anything beyond that, at the very least until you've sufficiently played a specific game yourself.

 

[Kinitari]

OK, so we have had 42 pages of disagreement with Dennis.

Yes, it is strange for him to say that GAF hurts society, but I want to hear some legitimate responses to the other concerns that he raises.

For example, his claim that the mods should follow there own rules. I haven't seen any response to this at all. The only few mod posts have been things like...



or




I think Dyack may have made a legitimate claim here and to me it sounds like nobody wants to own up. Don't you agree that mods should follow the same rules that they enforce?

Secondly, I agree with his plea for us to first play the game before judging it. Our community looks especially childish with posts like...



I mean, seriously, is that the kind of reputation we want to have here? I think we should man up to these things and say, "Yeah, okay, it is pretty crappy that this game has been delayed for so long, and has received a lot of negative press, but I am going to wait and see for myself after I actually play the game". Isn't there a certain level of responsibility there in choosing to do that? I think so.

Last, we claim that we don't fall plague to groupthink, yet it seems that many people have made these negative assumptions about the game based on the general vibe of the community. In conclusion, yes, Dyack may be whack, but at the same time I believe he has raised some legitimate things that we should think about.

Er, not to belittle the jobs of the mods - but these aren't paid individuals. These are dudes who like the forum and contribute in anyway they can. Of course their 'modding' isn't going to be 100% accurate - they should have that luxury though, if I was like... a paying member to this website, and they promised me some sort of service? Sure! But if they want to change the title of my threads (which I can't make yet =/) or give me some silly tag - who am I to care?

And again on PLAYING the game first? Why is that my job? What is the point of releasing screens/videos/preview builds if they DON'T want us to have an impression? That's just silly - and if there's no demo, am I some how supposed to pay 60 dollars just to see if I'll like it or not if up to this point I REALLY don't think I will? Even if there was a demo, I wouldn't use that to judge it - demo's can be skewed and altered to make the game seem more fun in 15min than it would be in 10 hours - so I'm going to go off of something like metacritic, or probably just some reviews that I 'trust' - and all of a sudden that shit makes me a bad guy.

And more and more people are saying there are people that are just saying stuff like "game looks stupid lolz" - if their point isn't very intellectual, don't give it a seconds thought, but don't go around telling it's everyone's job to get offended or something by said thoughts. If they think the game looks dumb, that's how they feel!

Again, what is frustrating me the most here is Dyack (and some other people posting here) trying to imply that because everyone doesn't share their ethical values, that they need to start acting a different way - no. No they don't.

 

[Virtua Ben]

LTTP, I know..but thought I should just go ahead and say that I couldn't understand any of DD's overly analytical bullshit. He's thinking way too hard for his own good.

 

[Kinitari]

This is in reply to EviLore's long post. http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11827869&postcount=1021


How many users here have played it? Not many I'd say. They are making a big fuss from just watching videos. Another part of it is the herd mentality of users here trying to fit in.



The moderator (Jim) is now unbanned. Lets clear that up. It is nice you made a post telling users that their account info is safe.


Was there a ban in this case?



Constructive criticism would be fine, if users where able to freely say what they want on any game without feeling a threat of being banned. This is not the case on other game threads where you have people being banned for simply posting their opinion



It would be nice if the mods around here did enforce the rules of the forum, and not pick and choose at times. Banning users for shitting on other games, etc but trolling a game which they have not played, or really care for is okay?

Just my .02 cents here.

1. Am I supposed to be playing games before forming an opinion now? I guess dev's should stop making preview builds/movies/screenshots etc - and just send demo's to my house now.

2. *shrug* Just because he wasn't perma banned doesn't mean the punishment wasn't sufficient, I doubt he'd ever do that again, we can argue if it was severe enough but fuck... it's their site, their rules.

3. There were a LOT of bans in those cases.

4. I don't know personally of any times people were just banned for just forming a negative opinion of a game, for all I know it probably DID happen. If it did, that's something I genuinely can't agree with - that seems ridiculously counterproductive to the site.

My last little bit - I do NOT have to play the game to form my own opinion on it, I can say stuff like "From what I've seen, the game does not look like it would interest me one little bit, no offline co-op, 2 player online only, 10 hour (apparently) campaign that (apparently) is weak on the promised philosophical connotations, and really awkward and clunky cutscene animations" And what the fuck can anyone say to tell my opinion is "poorly founded" or anything.

 

[Kittonwy]

And how can you be sure your advice is good at this point (in regards to games that haven't been released yet)? One of the main points of the discussion is to play the game yourself and/or wait for reviews. You can sometimes make reasonable guesses based on video, screen shots, previews, etc., but opinions can and will differ.

People have every right to state their own opinion, but I think it's best not to go overboard and state something to be anything beyond that, at the very least until you've sufficiently played a specific game yourself.

I'm not telling people not to buy the game, I'm merely saying what they've shown so far doesn't look very good, now obviously the game hasn't been released yet but they're about a month from release so you have to make up your own mind about how final the build really is. I'm telling people they should try the demo so I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

Although I don't subscribe to the whole "I don't care what anyone sez Ima buy dis game day one no matter wut even if the reviews are shit" BS, other people can obviously do that but that's just not my thing, but what they're showing in terms of animations and collision detection, and that one bland underground cyber dungeon, whether it's indicative of the final product or not, looks pretty crappy so far, if one has played a lot of 3D action games over the years, it's not hard to tell what's great animations and collision detection and what's not, it's also not too hard to see a cutscene and not realize how bad it is. Do you personally spend money on a game unless it's proven irrefutably to be garbage (and the only way you can do that is by BUYING THE GAME AND PLAYING THE GAME and by that time the publisher would have gotten your money even if you end up getting a shitty product?) or does a developer have to show you a few things about the game that are really good to convince you to spend money to buy their game? I tend to be in the latter school of thought myself.

 

[Kinitari]

And how can you be sure your advice is good at this point (in regards to games that haven't been released yet)? One of the main points of the discussion is to play the game yourself and/or wait for reviews. You can sometimes make reasonable guesses based on video, screen shots, previews, etc., but opinions can and will differ.

People have every right to state their own opinion, but I think it's best not to go overboard and state something to be anything beyond that, at the very least until you've sufficiently played a specific game yourself.

I agree with what you are saying in a sense. I know anyone who is even a bit intellectual won't portray their opinion on Too Human as anything MORE than that. But the ones who DO... I mean... is that really offensive? We just ignore them, if someone says "Too human is UTTER GARBAGE, this isn't my opinion, this is FACT" I don't know ANYONE stupid enough to go "Holy SHIT, if it was just his opinion maybe I'd look into it more... but FACT? Dayumn!".

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

My last little bit - I do NOT have to play the game to form my own opinion on it, I can say stuff like "From what I've seen, the game does not look like it would interest me one little bit, no offline co-op, 2 player online only, 10 hour (apparently) campaign that (apparently) is weak on the promised philosophical connotations, and really awkward and clunky cutscene animations" And what the fuck can anyone say to tell my opinion is "poorly founded" or anything.

There's a difference between 'that game has shitty graphics and animation', 'that game has shitty cutscenes' or 'that game doesnt look like it interests me' which can be gauged based on previews, reviews, videos etc to 'thats a shitty game' (as some people are saying about Too Human) which really can't be gauged without, you know, actually playing it.

 

[Twig]

I agree.

GAF IS ethical, when some of us see footage of a game in preview build that doesn't look so good, we call it out, we tell it like it is, so people don't have to actually WASTE MONEY TO PRE-ORDER something so questionable until at least the demo comes out and we can get a clearer picture on how the game plays.

Personally when I play a game it's not that hard to tell whether it's a good game or it isn't, I don't subscribe to this whole "this is a shit game but I find it fun therefore people should buy it" bullshit, these things cost fucking $60 of my hard-earned money and if it's shit I don't want anyone else having to pay money to be subject to it, now people still have every right to pick up a shit game but at least they would have access to some player feedback before buying, and outside of a few individuals pushing a few shit games because they think some shit games are "fun", GAF as a whole tend to embrace the truly stellar games. Why the fuck should ANYONE endure shitty combat with shitty animations and collision detection just to loot grind when there are better games out there that can actually be ENJOYED? How does THAT serve society?

GAF on the whole is IN FACT, HELPING SOCIETY AND THE VIDEOGAME INDUSTRY AS A WHOLE to weed out the really shit games by calling them out, if one sees something bad and does not call it out, THEN we have a case where one is just standing by letting other people get duped into buying a bad product. It's like watching someone walking right into an open man-hole without saying anything, THAT would be hurting society and videogame industry as a whole. I mean how DARE consumer report check out a car in a test drive (yeah a test drive IS subjective in many ways) and form an opinion on it? Where's the reciprocity in THAT?

All of this and more.

There are two things that bug me about Dyack. (Well, more than two, but these are the two biggest at the moment.)

1) I actually agree with some of what he says. But why does he have to be so fucking cocky about it? Chill the fuck out. It's annoying and only serves to turn people against you.
2) In all of his GAF hate, he never once acknowledged that there is actually some good that comes out of GAF.
a) For example! I've had more fun with Team Fortress 2 than any other online multiplayer game I've ever played, thanks to the gaming community on these forums. It has significantly increased my enjoyment of the game (and other games, too)!
b) Also for example! GAF is a good place to find impressions (impressions from everyday people, not JUST the enthusiast press, etc.) on games that I would otherwise remain on the fence about forever.
c) Also also for example! GAF has opened my mind to many other genres I had thought I would never enjoy. And it's also rekindled my enthusiasm for genres I'd long grown tired of. Etrian Odyssey? Never would've touched it if not for GAF.

I don't believe in this fucking ridiculous "hive-mind" theory that many posting in this thread use to defend Dyack, either. I have a mind of my own. But it's still nice to get impressions and read other people's thoughts. Everything I've heard about Too Human (from all sources) says the game will not be fun for me. Get it the fuck away. I established this opinion long before I started reading GAF, too, but coming here only confirmed my position. This comes from reading both positive and negative things about the game.

There's a difference between 'that game has shitty graphics and animation', 'that game has shitty cutscenes' or 'that game doesnt look like it interests me' which can be gauged based on previews, reviews, videos etc to 'thats a shitty game' (as some people are saying about Too Human) which really can't be gauged without, you know, actually playing it.

And people say that about everything. I see it all over the place even on these very forums. And, no, not everyone gets banned immediately for saying so.

This is not an isolated case for Too Human or for GAF. It's human nature. You'll find it both on the internet and off.

 

[Sanjay]

Only thing from this podcast I found strange was Denis Dyack mentioning that someone was called stupid for liking Too Human by a mod, hard to believe but.... All eyes to

Spoiler

Amir0x

:lol

It would be nice if the mods around here did enforce the rules of the forum, and not pick and choose at times. Banning users for shitting on other games, etc but trolling a game which they have not played, or really care for is okay?

I think you are referring to Amir0x and his lustfull hatred towards Too Human. Trolling and having a opinion is two differnt things, one is a bannable offense and the other not. Thus they are not picking and choosing, just hard to tell sometimes of the ritual bannings.

I actually dont think "shitting on a game" is a bannable offense even if they have not pld it, end of the day its a opinion which is based on any available media.

 

[jax (old)]

did dyack call out for moderation on this forum on this forum? No he didn't. He did it on 1upyours. so whatever. There's no point debating this. He's famous enough to have probably sustained a good thread about moderation commentary - instead he did that for/against too human thread. Every instance of him going somewhere has been all about pimping his fucking game.

I seriously hope no one buys into his bullcrap and buys his game to see whether its good or not. Gamefly it or rent it. At this point, I don't have any more interest in the title but honestly, I hope no one buys into the pscyhobabble and ends up paying money for too human. The 1up crew in the 1upyours before the actual interview sounded off on the title and it sounded mediocre. That's a preview and it didn't sound good. so there.

 

[Omotesando]

"funny" gifs can make anything look like shit.

Uhm, actually I am sad to say the real opening cinematic looks way more funny than this gif....

 

[Kinitari]

There's a difference between 'that game has shitty graphics and animation', 'that game has shitty cutscenes' or 'that game doesnt look like it interests me' which can be gauged based on previews, reviews, videos etc to 'thats a shitty game' (as some people are saying about Too Human) which really can't be gauged without, you know, actually playing it.

I think this is where I can understand some peoples points - but what you're asking for is people to have a better grasp of the English language, or to just be clearer on their ideas. That's cool, something I can agree with - but what are we supposed to do about it? Or what are the mods supposed to do about it, reply to every post like that and say "Please, use your words" or something?

 

[KTallguy]

There's a difference between 'that game has shitty graphics and animation', 'that game has shitty cutscenes' or 'that game doesnt look like it interests me' which can be gauged based on previews, reviews, videos etc to 'thats a shitty game' (as some people are saying about Too Human) which really can't be gauged without, you know, actually playing it.

People will make judgments based on the information that is available at the time.

Some games are good at hiding at how shitty they play.

Too Human, unfortunately, is not good at hiding its shittyness. It just looks very poor in some critical areas. And it's being called out for it.

Everyone has a right to voice an opinion based on media that's readily available. If that opinion is not completely off base, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.

You can absolutely make an educated guess from looking at game footage. Many people have looked at Too Human footage and made an educated guess that it looks like shit.

 

[jax (old)]

There's a difference between 'that game has shitty graphics and animation', 'that game has shitty cutscenes' or 'that game doesnt look like it interests me' which can be gauged based on previews, reviews, videos etc to 'thats a shitty game' (as some people are saying about Too Human) which really can't be gauged without, you know, actually playing it.

No there isn't a difference. Why should anyone write any different from how they feel? We get the gist of things anyhow. If not, go back to English ed 101.

 

[Jacobi]

My last little bit - I do NOT have to play the game to form my own opinion on it, I can say stuff like "From what I've seen, the game does not look like it would interest me one little bit, no offline co-op, 2 player online only, 10 hour (apparently) campaign that (apparently) is weak on the promised philosophical connotations, and really awkward and clunky cutscene animations" And what the fuck can anyone say to tell my opinion is "poorly founded" or anything.

Hm do you think anyone gives a shit that you don't give a shit?

 

[RobertM]

GAF on the whole is IN FACT, HELPING SOCIETY AND THE VIDEOGAME INDUSTRY AS A WHOLE to weed out the really shit games by calling them out, if one sees something bad and does not call it out, THEN we have a case where one is just standing by letting other people get duped into buying a bad product. It's like watching someone walking right into an open man-hole without saying anything, THAT would be hurting society and videogame industry as a whole. I mean how DARE consumer report check out a car in a test drive (yeah a test drive IS subjective in many ways) and form an opinion on it? Where's the reciprocity in THAT?

GAF has literally sold God Hand for Capcom, believe! And yes I agree as much as cynical a place like GAF is, the community and the information that flows through here is unprecedented. I get more out of GAF than any other source; gaming related stuff, movies, anime, books, etc. People give a benefit of the doubt to any game at first, at least in their mind, but what comes out on the screen is not always what's going through their head. There will always be criticism independent of whether people played the game or not, whether the game got a 10 or not, whether the game is out or not. The judgment is based on how the game "looks" no matter if that judgment is justified since we never get the feel of input from videos and screenshots.

Also on the subject of influence. GAF may affect some aspects when in comes to games, but on a bigger scale GAF has little to no influence.

 

[Kinitari]

Hm do you think anyone gives a shit that you don't give a shit?

I honestly don't even understand the question.

 

[Omotesando]

People will make judgments based on the information that is available at the time.

Some games are good at hiding at how shitty they play.

Too Human, unfortunately, is not good at hiding its shittyness. It just looks very poor in some critical areas. And it's being called out for it.

Everyone has a right to voice an opinion based on media that's readily available. If that opinion is not completely off base, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.

You can absolutely make an educated guess from looking at game footage. Many people have looked at Too Human footage and made an educated guess that it looks like shit.

Yea.

Essentially this is what Neogaf or any other game related messageboard is all about isn't it? We come here to discuss games we currently play, games we played in the past and most of all games we're looking forward to play in the future. If we can't call out or discuss what is what we believe are weaknesses or strengths in a game discussion would lose its meaning? We cant saz anything, because we haven't played tha game yet...

Hmmm...