I recently had a very surprising, unpleasant, and unique (for me) experience on this platform. I shared a critique of a particular game's approach to open ongoing development, something I have some expertise in after 10+ years of it (not saying we have done it perfectly!), as a way to inform/suggest how new devs might avoid the risks of losing community momentum post-launch. The game's publisher took umbrage with my characterization, and turned it into an anti-corporate screed that somehow positioned me (?!) as a greedy corporate looking to milk what's good out of a developer. Anyone who knows me knows I'm about the most pro-dev developer around. The whole thing is absurd! This might all have been a misunderstanding, but my attempts to correct the misrepresentation of my words were stymied as the publisher deleted all my comments, leaving me unable to explain my POV, while they happily fuelled the flame sparked by their twisting of my position. Was my mistake to pick a specific game? Perhaps. I write about a lot of specific games on here -- mostly complimentary, but in this case I had some critiques to offer that I thought might be helpful to other devs who might find themselves in a similar position. I wasn't trying to hurt anyone's feelings. I take no issue with the disagreement, but the deletion of my comments stole my ability to participate in the discussion in good faith, and instead the publisher's POV was "weaponized" against me in what feels like a very calculated PR stunt. One of the things I've always appreciated about the games business is the sharing of info between devs. I'm fortunate to have a small group of fellow game founders and CEOs willing to share knowledge and info in a supportive, non-competitive manner. I think this is one of the best things about making games, and I try to likewise also share knowledge back with the dev community wherever I can. It was a super disappointing interaction that left a really bad taste in my mouth, and I lost all respect for this publisher. The only reason I'm sharing this here is because I don't think being pro-dev means we shouldn't also share our thoughts about how things might have been done differently, or better, in some cases. I feel I'm left with no choice but to try to proactively reclaim the narrative a bit, because of how I was mis-represented and subsequently "muzzled". To be clear: I am pro-dev, anti-crunch, and constantly strive to take care of my people as well as our players. I would never advocate for crunch or pressure tactics applied to small (or large) teams. I always put team health above release cadence. My work has not been perfect, but I don't think that means I shouldn't question things I feel could have been done better. Also, context collapse is real, and it would be nice if people would READ your words vs. conveniently presenting an interpretation of those words that benefits them. It's dishonest, and I expect better.
Eren Kumru
2w
Posts was two different (maybe opposite) sides about the specific topic. But the comments under the posts are explanatory enough to find out how each side has approached it. Especially the comments under the publishers post was just sad to read as most of them had such shallow opinion about what and whom they are talking about. Most of them does not even know about who you are or Hinterland but still accusing you. Sad to see that people can just say things without knowledge, not even a glimpse of it.
Ted Brown
2w
That's tough. I saw your post first, and thought it was reasonable. Not my take, but reasonable. But then Hooded Horse decided to send up a PR signal by burning a bridge? Honestly, that was just weird. A little bit zero-sum, IMHO. Here's hoping you two will break bread at some point to make the peace. (and that you will get an apology!)
Quinn Duffy
2w
This has been a very interesting, perfectly encapsulated case study for a book I'm reading by Tom Nichols called The Death of Expertise. Context collapse is real (and frequently intentional), ascribing binary positions (you're pro this which means you are anti that) and the unweighting of opinion are all disappointingly common. It happens an academia, it happens online, it happens in politics, it happens in the office.
Many many people have a hard time with critiques. They take it personally and let their ego get in the way. If that can be set aside, it can absolutely be a gift- this is where growth and improvement can happen. AND- feedback can absolutely be ignored. I ignore at least 25% of yours Raph and look- we're still friends. 🙃
Brian Hicks
2w
Yeah… saw that via an RPS article that was sent to me this morning. I was surprised RPS would mine LinkedIn for content, and even more surprised that said individual clearly did not know you well, if at all. I’m really sorry that happened, but having read your post: I saw nothing wrong with it, and your points absolutely were on the money. At least from the perspective of someone with intimate knowledge of success within Early Access.
Ryan Bourret
2w
It's a shame they didn't take the critique. I thought it was balanced post from you. It's a wonderful game, but an unprofessional move by the Publisher sadly.
I understand the intention of your post - but also the reaction it caused. It's a big topic in the current context of our industry and it's hard to take it out of the equation when posting opinions into the open public. My initial reaction reading your post was also... why does every game have to come with a heavy content/live ops plan, especially from a small studio? This was obvious from the beginning and I really liked the very open communication and expectations management for ML - knowing it will take a while to mature. But I've been missing from your post more actual insights - it's not that easy to do what you're suggesting without its drawbacks and how to balance out the pros/cons of the chosen publishing path vs. your suggested approach. While the advice is generally sound - ofc it's great to have an EA launch and a packed roadmap ready to go - it's very one-sided and reads easily like "don't make this newbie mistake". Everything comes at a trade-off - yours with delaying the launch, potentially missing the best window to convert hype into sales, etc. We all learn from each other and it's great to be able to have open conversations about our work, challenges and struggles - but it's rarely easy :)
I hope this critique finds you well, This is an interesting take coming from the fellow that if you make a comment or critique on the X platform or any other that he disagrees with, he blocks you. Don’t get me wrong I love the game for better or worse. Some of the choices you made are questionable. I have an unbelievable amount of hours invested in the game so I can’t complain too much about the product because I do love it. However, when I do have some sort of suggestion I don’t expect to be met with fire and brimstone. In this case you should have just stood there and politely waved from your glass house. There are times you go radio silent, when a quick 2 paragraph update would get us through any delays, instead of just silence. How much time has been wasted on this non-sense that doesn’t involve you? Could you be half way done creating a new region with existing assets for the hardcore community that I’d be happy to pay more for? Priorities man. Take a step back from the keyboard.
Hardy LeBel
1w
You thought your critiques would be helpful? How, exactly? You said (paraphrasing) “This game launched with not enough content, they are losing plsyers, I’m going to stop playing, and I’m not coming back.” If there was any “advice” in there, it might have been the bit that you tacked on at the end advising other teams to handle their launch content differently. I’m having a hard time seeing how your initial comments were anything other than dunking on what I presume is your competition in the market.
Principal Environment Artist at Highwire Games
2wIt is kinda funny you went on all this long LONG rant, yet you didnt address the core issue Why can't a game be enjoyed for a short/mid while (8:30 hour average playthrough), be pretty successful for its dev and publisher and just take it as is and enjoy while it lasts? Who cares if it's not a 200hour timesink.. Not every game needs to be GaaS and this is the main reason the industry is in hellhole it is right now. This is doubly troubling because you keep trying to say "I am the voice for game devs" and "not a corporate shill", but your main critism of the game is what every big publisher is pushing any game to be