YES THAT WAS ME!!!

WHAT A SMALL WORLD HOLY SH** THAT IS ME!!

I WAS WATCHING THE STREAM AND FREAKING OUT!!

Yeah, pretty good stream. Nice to see the mini finally get a decent update.

Crazy to think I was in some freezer a month and in a half into the millennium. Crazy shit. Yet here I am talking

Let gamers in on the Bungie Culture, tell them fabled stories of fun times in development, let gamers and developers geek out TOGETHER!, tell them about events that happen, empowering fans and humanizing game developers is SO important!!!

You know, I don't know if it is.

It's important for us. We die hards are always a small segment of the population, and there's no doubt that things like pentathlon reporting and Mig's Bungie Sightings allowed us to be hardcore geeks and follow the developers, but with Facebook and Twitter and Xbox Live, it isn't needed anymore.

Unfortunately, due to the largely individualized nature of that stuff, that means that the superfans don't get to congregate as much, and when they do, there is no big hub.

I would argue that it's not needed, though. Many games and gaming companies have absolute butt tier communities and are very successful. Just as many have had major problems due to dummy developers and spokesmen shooting their mouths off. So, yes, I continue to buy Bungie games based on community, but how many can they count on for that? Maybe a few thousand. Those are good numbers, but how many would they lose from internet outrage merchants over on Reddit or the moron gaming writers talking about how far up their own ass they are by reporting on such a thing as the Pentathlon? Probably more than a few thousand, as the hearsay will get around and people will be hesitant to try their games.

They're running damage control all the time now, and, while that hurts us, the die hards, it probably serves their company well in the long run.

As deeJ said, times are changing. The game doesn't need a Frogblast (or indeed a Rockslider) trying to figure out new ways to break it. It doesn't need a core group of superfans always playing and extolling its virtues.

The game is designed to be infinitely playable. It has rewards. It is online only. It's necessarily limited. Few of the things that kept us coming back to Halo are in Destiny, and Destiny very much has new and unfathomably more effective methods of player retention than a core group of big fans.

In other words, they don't need us: they have the grind.

But was that “other game” the game they wanted to make? Just because many developers are [explitives] regarding their development and the exploitation of the customer base does not mean that all mobile games and developers do so. A lot of mobile monetization models are questionable. But that doesn’t mean the platform isn’t viable for more major experiences.

Not to get too socio-political, but a lot of it is related to thr gender and “social standing” of people who were able to play video games. The entitlement in communities is usually directly related to the toxicity toward people who aren’t the core entitled demographic. Even if women make up about half of all game players there is still toxicity because they are not that core entitled group.

Usually the entitled group is made up of “that guys” and are self professed fans of things. This walks hand-in-hand with gatekeeping because if you are not like them you must not be a real fan. So the moment you make an accessible product not catering to their desires then you done goofed and the vitriol will spill. You get that in movies and comics and tabletop communities a lot, too. It is all bad.

This is the exact kind of explanation that you get when you begin with an ideological presupposition, then work backwards to fit everything into it. Is "entitlement" part of the issue? Absolutely, in some cases, to varying degrees. But there are a load of things going on here.

First and foremost, we're dealing with the internet, and the negative effects that anonymity has on social interactions. Largely speaking, most people are jerks on the internet some of the time, regardless of who they are or who they are talking to. This is a HUGE part of the equation, and more often than not, interactions that get labeled as "sexist" or "racist" or any "ist" are fundamentally just people who want to be mean because they feel they can get away with it. They jump to the most obvious avenue of attack that presents itself to them. If I'm a woman, they'll say something degrading to women. If I'm gay, they'll say something homophobic. If I'm of a specific race, they'll insult my race, or my height, or weight, or age... it's not that they are ideologically against any 1 group, it's that they'll attack any and every group because they are trying to be mean.

This behavior is obviously bad and toxic and destructive. And it often presents itself on face-value as sexist or racist or homophobic, language etc. But going after it as such is usually missing the root cause.

The next big issue is that when people like something, they're generally against having the thing that they like changed. A lot of the supposed "entitlement" drama that I see around nerd culture just comes down to nerds being nerds, combined with the "people on the internet are jerks" rule I mentioned above.

Remember when Hugh Jackman was first cast as Wolverine? X-Men fans flipped out, because Jackman is 6'2" and Wolverine is supposed to be 5'3". To those fans, casting Jackman was a sign that the filmmakers weren't familiar enough with the characters to be trusted to get anything right. Now, those fans were clearly wrong, but not for any of the malicious or discriminatory reasons that get thrown around today. I would be the first person to point out that Hugh Jackman's height isn't intrinsically critical to his ability to portray the character. Just as I would also point out that someone with dark skin can do a fantastic job portraying Hermione Granger in the Harry Potter play. But, I'm not going to jump to the knee-jerk assumption that everyone who does protest is doing so because they are racist, just as I wouldn't assume that X-men fans complaining about Jackman's height really just hate tall people. I would assume that the vast majority of them just have a picture in their head of what a character looks like, and that picture is 1 part of the puzzle that makes up the thing that they love, and they worry when those pieces get changed. The argument to make in the face of that attitude is "think harder about the specific piece that you're worried about, and whether or not it actually matters".

Ultimately, I think the issue of "change" is where the majority of the tension comes from in these situations. The majority of fans of any game/book/movie love to have new fans join them in celebrating the thing that they love together. What they don't want is to have the thing that they love changed in order to attract new fans. And this trend is often misdiagnosed, then made worse by the fact that a significant portion of the people expressing their concerns do so poorly, or rudely, or aggressively, because they're being jerks on the internet. And that is precisely where the "gatekeeping" phenomenon comes in. Marvel comics over the past several years is a great example. Marvel looked at their readership and thought "it sure would be great if more women bought our comics... let's do something about that." Totally valid observation, and a great goal. But rather than creating new content to achieve that goal, they took a bunch of their existing franchises and characters and changed them (swapping sex or race or both). Fans complained because their favorite characters and books were suddenly being transformed, and then the whole argument between the self-described "real fans" and everyone else takes off. This is utterly predictable and understandable, and not due to widespread discrimination among comic-book fans. That's just what happens when you take something that people love and change it.

Bob Dylan fans got angry at him when he started playing electric guitar. Buffy fans complained about Season 4 because they weren't meeting in the Library anymore. Dr Who fans flip out every time a new Dr Who appears. And Blizzard fans freak out when Blizzard announces a game that doesn't fit the mold of what fans expect and love from Blizzard. Is it good behavior? Absolutely not. But to try and address the problem by splitting people along the lines of gender or "social standing" is utterly missing the point, and usually just makes things worse. The whole world is collectively learning how to handle online communication. Places like Twitter are suddenly being treated as the place to gauge the pulse of public opinion and morality. I hope that as time moves forward, more and more people will grow up learning to conduct themselves with as much care in their online interactions as they do with their personal interactions. Or perhaps more people will begin to realize that life is better without Twitter or facebook, and then their won't be anyone left to feed the trolls :)

Today is my tenth Facebook anniversary. It's been a mostly negative experience, sad to say. I miss knowing people in three (and more) dimensions.

- No text -

Ultimately, I think the issue of "change" is where the majority of the tension comes from in these situations. The majority of fans of any game/book/movie love to have new fans join them in celebrating the thing that they love together. What they don't want is to have the thing that they love changed in order to attract new fans. And this trend is often misdiagnosed, then made worse by the fact that a significant portion of the people expressing their concerns do so poorly, or rudely, or aggressively, because they're being jerks on the internet. And that is precisely where the "gatekeeping" phenomenon comes in. Marvel comics over the past several years is a great example. Marvel looked at their readership and thought "it sure would be great if more women bought our comics... let's do something about that." Totally valid observation, and a great goal. But rather than creating new content to achieve that goal, they took a bunch of their existing franchises and characters and changed them (swapping sex or race or both). Fans complained because their favorite characters and books were suddenly being transformed, and then the whole argument between the self-described "real fans" and everyone else takes off. This is utterly predictable and understandable, and not due to widespread discrimination among comic-book fans. That's just what happens when you take something that people love and change it.

Whoa man, #ComicsGate is not just "Fans complained", it's been targeted harassment and campaigns to get people fired when they defend themselves against said bigoted harassment.

You're really minimizing some insidious behavior here.

I’m not on the internet screaming about it though, attacking Blizzard, sending death threats, or saying Blizzard ruined the franchise. I thought “Huh, that looks bad. Bummer!” and then I moved on with my life.

There is no justification for the shit-fit those idiots are throwing.

There is some justification in that it can help shift poor trends back. Without being vocal, I believe developers and publishers would not know which aspects players object to. If you are quiet and don't buy it, there's no feedback there.

I’m not advocating for silence. I’m advocating for not being a petulant asshole.