I don't get what people like about The Verge design. For me it's an incomprehensible, messy and inscrutable clusterf* of images and links...
I don't get what people like about The Verge design. For me it's an incomprehensible, messy and inscrutable clusterf* of images and links...
A Valley Without Wind. And so did The Sea Will Claim Everything. And so did Dark Scavenger. And so did Da New Guys: Day of the Jackass, and well, that's as much research I'm bothered doing but I think point's been made. Search through the 'Wot I Think's on the site, see which ones are indie, see what they say.
There're a million indie titles out there. RPS doesn't cover them all. They can't, and most of 'em aren't worth it anyway. RPS cover a scattered few that most interest them or that maybe have the most potential to do well. That's great, and anytime I see one mentioned I know my curiosity won't be wasted. But you, you just see those few excited (and why not excited) previews and think "Typical, indies getting all this undeserved attention".
And then months later the review comes out. And it's critical. But you don't read it, so you don't know that. Instead you've filed it away as "Not worth reading, gushing over indie crap anyway". And not only that! But instead of saying "I know nothing about that market/genre/whatever the hell it is anyway", then you go off and perpetuate a false notion that indie games get special treatment and it's an emperor's new clothes market and none of it's worth looking at anyway.
Free speech don't mean unchallengeable speech.
Kad, you don't have to give a flying monkey toss "what I believe" because we're not talking about my beliefs here. Look, read what Keep wrote and actually look at the Wot I Thinks and read them. They're critical of indie games in the same way they're critical of AAA games here. Which is, over and over and over, the point.
And Dear Esther...
The follow up wot I think also discussed the problems with the game wrestling control from the player at the finale, describing it as "weaker" for doing so. No free pass. There's entire chunks of the WIT dedicated to the control problems with the last Avernum, Gratuitous Tank Battles hardly comes off scott free described as "For all the titular promise, this is a game that fails to capitalize on, or even communicate much of what makes caterpillared death tractors so colourful and compelling.".Which does rather leave the first act as somewhat problematic. By not establishing its own nature early on, Dear Esther becomes about accepting limitations, rather than enjoying its structure. It never gets any less frustrating that you can’t walk up a gentle slope, or step past a pebble, because – well – games have taught us for too long that we can, and if that rule gets broken, the fourth wall is broken, and the fifth, sixth and seventh walls start boxing us in.
Every single Wot I Think I've hit on discusses the problems with games in the same way, indie or not. It's all there in writing, quickly searchable and there's a few handy links to start you off. The problem here clearly isn't with everyone treating the indie community in a special way, it's that you're not even reading the stuff you're talking about because if you were, you'd know it's not true. Look at the glowing WIT that Pineapple Smash Crew got. Amazing special treatment for indies there.The consequence of this is that while Warp is an entertaining experience, it does fail to hit the high notes required of this sort of thing. It won’t be memorable in the way that other great one-trick games have been, and I suspect it might be the kind of game you pick up in a sale, get a few hours of fun from, and then forget about as bigger, bolder games capture your imagination.
So yes Kad, it's entirely demonstrable, you just have to stop rejecting it and pretending it's not there because it is. It *is* a fact as much as "the earth revolves around the sun". It is not my belief, it is based on stone cold observable and demonstrable facts.
And as for "my credentials", I'm hardly elusive, man. I'm just not going to write out my entire CV on a forum because that'd be ridiculous and to be honest, entirely pointless too given you'd probably only want something else to help distract from the point. It's not about me, no matter how many times you try and make it so. It's about a claim that is absolutely false.
Last edited by RobF; 03-06-2012 at 01:41 PM.
I don't comment very often for two reasons: a) I have little to offer or someone has already said what I was going to say (usually better than I would have said it, you annoyingly eloquent gits), or b) I couldn't be arsed logging in (sorry).
On the whole though, I think RPS is rather lovely. All of this wailing and gnashing of teeth over what is and isn't included in the content, or how biased that content is to a game/genre is utterly strange to me. RPS is composed of a diverse group who don't have to toe any particular line (that's sort of the point of the whole site, surely?). There are going to be certain things at certain times that get more coverage/praise/derision than they would at others. For me, and I would imagine a lot of other people, that sort of honesty, personal opinion and bias is a large part of the reason that the writing here is much more appealing than other sites. I'm not saying we should be falling over ourselves and kissing their feet, but blimey a lot of the complaints seem to be that RPS doesn't share your exact tastes or your exact levels of excitement/distaste for a particular game/genre. I would much rather that the hivemind were writing things like the several posts on A Valley Without Wind (I couldn't personally understand the interest in it, nor the ability of someone to look at it for more than 5 minutes without their eyeballs melting) than slavishly sticking to a set number of posts across a balanced spectrum of game genres/levels.
As for the look/design of the site, I'd prefer it didn't have too much of a change at all. The increase in content has made things a bit unwieldy. A day's worth of stories being spread over a few pages is a bit daunting now, in a way. RPS is essentially the only gaming site I bother going to, so I get the majority of my gaming news here (and thanks for bothering to make press realease/trailer announcements interesting and funny, by the way), but I wouldn't mind having those short news/announcement posts separated into a different tab (or something similar) from the more meaty posts. I don't see how it would need any more than that really, unless the number of posts increased significantly from where it's at now.
A mobile version of the site would be very, very lovely though.
Seconding the request for a mobile skin of sorts. It's a fumble-o-thon at the moment.
RobF has demonstrated remarkable restraint in putting up with this (very typical) bullshit from Kadayi and Nalano, but I'm sure even he has his limits. The question for Mr. Rossignol is how many decent posters he is willing to see crushed beneath the wheels of their egos before acting.
A prescient post from page four:
Last edited by Rii; 03-06-2012 at 02:25 PM.
I think you'll both find the conversation moved off the subject of how RPS specifically handle 'indie' games around page 5 post 89 and moved into a broader discussion of 'indie' as cultural phenomena (that's certainly the one I'm involved in). I don't have a problem with the coverage here, 'indie', triple A or otherwise (though I do find the term 'indie' pretty redundant). If a game is innovative rather than derivative colour me interested. I do believe though with the frequency of posts and larger audience that the blog format has been outgrown and subsequently articles are disappearing into the 'older posts' ether far faster than they need to and some reformation is in order (as stated in earlier posts). Feel free to continue to tilt at windmills though.
Last edited by Kadayi; 03-06-2012 at 03:53 PM.
It's not about indie as a cultural phenomena at all, it's about how your idea (and Soldant's) of what happens and how utterly divorced from reality it is. On RPS and elsewhere on the wider internet. It was only a page ago you claimed KG's comments on Limbo were the exception, I've pulled up links on RPS that disprove this. I could do it elsewhere too but what's the fucking point? It's not like you even care or want to listen.
The post you're referring back to is just another angle on the "they get off light" or "they have it easy" thing. Just instead of focusing on RPS, it throws the net wider to include the internet as a whole. Nothing to back it up, no evidence of it...
Even your example of DAII vs Dear Esther falls over at the slightest click and google for reviews and there's little to no point of anyone going any further because you're just going to come back with another "well, I think..." or whatever. Or another piss poor attempt at discrediting the person not the argument. Or wahey, I've put the jumpers over here now, this is our new goalpost. Because what you think is obviously how things are even if it isn't.
People criticise indie games all the time, on RPS and elsewhere. There are sites dedicated to indie games that give them a savaging seemingly just for existing sometimes and often with well considered and thought out reason. But there is no dearth of criticism of and towards indie games. If you do manage to find anything so much as a special advantage, it's still going to be massively outweighed by everything else that goes on. As I stated way back, you might get the odd mad one in the comments section saying "oh no, it's like 1 guy man, how could you" but they're a tiny, tiny minority of people.
But frankly, after Soldant came out with the wonderful "perception is more important" speech, it's getting more and more like a Flat Earth Society Meeting every second in here. Believe away! Be happy in your belief. Gather with like minded believers! Have fun. You're still being wrong about this.
Last edited by RobF; 03-06-2012 at 06:11 PM.
For my part: I dont like RobF. Hes an absolutist. Please go away.
Yes RPS, please stay the way you are. I love you. cheers.
Counteracting a falsehood doesn't make one an absolutist, man. But thanks for sharing your opinion of me anyway.
Again I'm not talking about reviews (I'd of said reviewers not people), I'm talking about gamer mindset. I enjoyed Dear Esther, but Christ it's hard to justify the price tag on it for what you get Vs other titles.A triple A title like say DAII which hundreds of people worked on will get hauled over the coals for a couple of frankly minor issues (wah repeat maps!!) despite several hours of game play, and begrudged by everyone (the ever constant 'not worth paying for' brigade), yet people will lose their shit about a linear hour long indie art game like Dear Esther which costs a 6th of the price and was made by a handful of people. Sure lovely use of the source engine, and poignant but still. Where's the balance?
Yes others opinions are invalid, yours is the only truth RobF.And frankly, after Soldant came out with the wonderful "perception is more important" speech, it's getting more and more like a Flat Earth Society Meeting every second in here. Believe away! Be happy in your belief. Gather with like minded believers! Have fun. You're still being wrong.
This is not because indie games get an easier ride, it's because tastes differ and some tastes do not align with yours. I am not arguing against your opinon on any game titles at all, I'm arguing with your assertion that there's an easy ride for games, that they can't be criticised and aren't criticised. That is entirely different. They are things that conflict with the reality of things, they are not subjective. Unlike what Dragon Age or Dear Esther is worth to a person. They're opinions.
We've told you where the balance is. The balance is that games are treated equally. It's the opinions of the games that differ not the treatment. And that's ok. See previous comedy video posting.
Fuck me, you just shat off my irony-o-meter into space.Yes others opinions are invalid, yours is the only truth RobF.
Last edited by RobF; 03-06-2012 at 07:11 PM.
And welcome back Rob! Great to have you back, hopefully you don't get scared off by this thread.
Do you actually read what people write? Or do you just make it up as you go along? Again here's what I wrote: -I'm arguing with your assertion that there's an easy ride for games, that they can't be criticised and aren't criticised.
John was asking about why people weren't commenting on his articles and I was outlining why I personally don't tend to post in indie articles any more. Generally in my experience saying anything less that upbeat is just a recipe for fanboy indignation (like slagging of steam), and generally I'm not one for empty platitudes, so I just don't bother these days. Clear?You can't really slate an 'indie' game, without being made to feel like your being overly harsh because 'hey there's only two of them, and they made it living off tips for two years'. It's up there with booing the kid for fluffing his lines at the nativity play. Without criticism what are you left with but faint praise?
Last edited by Kadayi; 04-06-2012 at 12:14 AM.
Last edited by Rii; 04-06-2012 at 03:10 AM.
And the rest of it, man. Come on, stop being disingenuous.
From just prior to the quote you've chopped out:I feel that 'Indie' status seems to be a passport to instant approval ('well done for making a game. Have a gold star') and that for me just doesn't sit right.
LATER ON...I kind of feel that 'indie' is used as a shield against criticism.
So you can quit that "I never said a thing, you're being mad" act. I'm responding to things both you (and Soldant) have said in this thread and given people don't even have to go back more than a page most of the time, I don't know why you keep pretending that something wasn't said. It just makes you look like a mental and I'd like to hope you're better than that.Kieron giving Limbo (a game which had already made its money beforehand) a slating is the exception rather than the rule when it comes to how indie titles are handled.
Sorry, what? Come again? What exactly does that mean?Opinions only have merit if they have some critical value to them.
I don't know why you're not getting this but that question mark exists FOR YOU.When it comes to the value proposition of an hour long game made by half a dozen people vs a 50+ hour game made by a few hundred then I do hold that there's a valid question mark over cost value.
It does not necessarily exist for someone else because people value things in different ways. It's a matter of taste. Any amount of Dragon Age II is worthless to me no matter how many man hours went into its creation, how many play hours it has or how many graphics are in it because it's something I have no love nor interest for. It's value to me is somewhere south of fuck all. At $0.01, I would judge it still too expensive for me. I do not want it. It is, as far as I'm concerned, a waste of bits and bytes. A shitty blight on the landscape of videogames. It needs more lasers. You're welcome to disagree with this! We could debate its merits or something or you can convince me it's worth a play, that's all cool. I won't think that AAA games have a shield or something so I can't say a word against them if you do. Promise. I'll just assume we disagree.
But at Ten Dollars, the value proposition of Dear Esther, to me, is one that I consider worthwhile because it is something that I am willing to pay for. It is something *I* value. It is something that I class as worth every penny to me. I got my moneys worth of enjoyment from it. So therefor to me, it's pitched fine pricewise. Even if I compared it to Dragon Age II, it would still come out on top because I value what Dear Esther is and what Dear Esther does more than DAII. I have no need to question the price value proposition or anything else, I am content. In the same way I was content to spend £200 on an Xbox 360 for the sole purpose of being able to play a game that cost £2.50, it's my tastes, it's how I value things. You can think this absurd, crazy and even dislike the game or ridicule me spending all the money I had at the time on a console because it's not something you'd do. That's all cool. That's the joys of opinions! I'll just assume we disagree.
So there is no question for me. There may be a question mark to you. There may be a question mark to someone else. There may be people who do not care. There may be people to whom it is tantamount to extortion. There may be people who think it is too cheap for what it is. That's *all* cool. We can even debate it! Ultimately, it'll still be TASTE OF PERSON Y vs TASTE OF PERSON X but hey, at least it'll be a lark and we can all agree or disagree on whether something is worth such and such and we'll know where each others values lie. There's value in that.
There's no right and wrong there. Do you see?
It becomes problematic when rather than just acknowledging this and acknowledging that opinions on games and their value differ, you try and ascribe different scenarios with no evidence to support it. Like indie games not getting slagged off in the press or them getting a badge of instant approval or as Soldant said, them getting an easier ride. "I don't like a game" is fine. "I don't think a game is worth this much" is fine. "I think game x is better than game y" is also cool. We can all agree to agree or agree to disagree with stuff like that! It's not the same thing as wildly claiming baseless guff about things. Stop conflating the two things as if they are the same.
When you claim something is because of something or something has something, it requires evidence to back it up or else it is nothing more than baseless guff and deserves to be called as such.
In this case, there is right and wrong. Do you see?
To reiterate, when you asked in a previous post where the balance is, it is in the treatment. The games get treated the same, they're just valued differently by different people. It's clearly the latter that's a stumbling block for you but hey, people!
Yes, because having evidence that a claim is false is something so absurd that you seek to ridicule it at every given opportunity. That's really odd. Kindly stop it and take your silly claims of absolutism with it. It does you a great injustice to resort to such dumbness.Yet I'm not the one whose insisted throughout this thread that I know the truth to things because I was in Nam
It's like, if I say "I feel women don't get many jobs because they get an easier ride" and a woman says "no, I fucking don't" and then produces even the mildest evidence and has lived a life that directly contradicts this, the onus is on me to prove my point. To show that my words aren't just ill informed but have some substance. If I can't and I resort to deflection and insults, one can only assume that I'm talking bollocks and the woman is, in fact, right. There is a weight of proof on her side, not on mine.
This is not absolutism, it's begging a rational view of the world, one based on things that are real and provable, not wild stabs in the dark and guesswork.
Last edited by RobF; 04-06-2012 at 05:41 AM.
It can't be wrong. It's science!
It's not trolling if it's meant to make you think.