Hey everyone. I’m turning off re-shares of my future posts here. I think today’s events make me want to retreat to a more insular approach with things. In the past, it has only been our merry band of Gauntleteers, playing and laughing and (often) disagreeing. The outside world is kind of scary.
Hey everyone.
Hey everyone.
I think you need to own your part in it, Jason. You slung some pretty heavy and unnecessary shade in that post. It’s rather disingenuous to be surprised that you caught flack for it.
I think you need to own your part in it, Jason. You slung some pretty heavy and unnecessary shade in that post. It’s rather disingenuous to be surprised that you caught flack for it.
Ralph Mazza I agree with you. I didn’t post that expecting everyone to agree with me. But I think some of the conversations turned a little ugly. My personal contact info has apparently been given out for the purposes of harassment (I have received a couple of phone calls along this line already). I’m a big boy, and I know it will pass, but I will withdraw a bit, accordingly.
Ralph Mazza I agree with you. I didn’t post that expecting everyone to agree with me. But I think some of the conversations turned a little ugly. My personal contact info has apparently been given out for the purposes of harassment (I have received a couple of phone calls along this line already). I’m a big boy, and I know it will pass, but I will withdraw a bit, accordingly.
I can understand anyone wanting to avoid being a target online.
But they CALLED you? What did they even say?
I can understand anyone wanting to avoid being a target online.
But they CALLED you? What did they even say?
Uh.
I certainly hope you didn’t feel like MY call was harassment. I had a problem with something you said and instead of blasting it out over the internet, I brought it to you to resolve it between us.
For the record, I had your phone number because you were listed as a panelist for the upcoming convention and I NEVER give out contact information. That’s heinous on every level, regardless of the context and I would call you to confirm permission even if the person were claiming to be your long lost aunt.
Uh.
I certainly hope you didn’t feel like MY call was harassment. I had a problem with something you said and instead of blasting it out over the internet, I brought it to you to resolve it between us.
For the record, I had your phone number because you were listed as a panelist for the upcoming convention and I NEVER give out contact information. That’s heinous on every level, regardless of the context and I would call you to confirm permission even if the person were claiming to be your long lost aunt.
as for what I said, I said “You used a number about my convention to prove a point. While I’m in the middle of busting my butt to get the convention together. The number you used does not reflect reality and therefore it feels disingenuous to use it as you did. and that has me angry and annoyed. Please fix it.”
in essence.
It was a personal issue with a public post. I took it up personally. like adults do.
as for what I said, I said “You used a number about my convention to prove a point. While I’m in the middle of busting my butt to get the convention together. The number you used does not reflect reality and therefore it feels disingenuous to use it as you did. and that has me angry and annoyed. Please fix it.”
in essence.
It was a personal issue with a public post. I took it up personally. like adults do.
Oh dear…
Oh dear…
Avonelle Wing No, not at all! I don’t mean that phone call. I feel happy with how that was resolved. These were separate messages left at my number.
The thing is, I have no idea how they could have gotten my phone number! Daniel Lewis doesn’t even have my phone number.
Avonelle Wing No, not at all! I don’t mean that phone call. I feel happy with how that was resolved. These were separate messages left at my number.
The thing is, I have no idea how they could have gotten my phone number! Daniel Lewis doesn’t even have my phone number.
Actually, it just occurred to me how they probably got my number (for obvious reasons, I won’t say how here), so I don’t think there is any foul play going on. Jerks on the internet will always find a way; not sure why I was so surprised.
Lesson learned: no more re-shares; keep a lower profile.
Actually, it just occurred to me how they probably got my number (for obvious reasons, I won’t say how here), so I don’t think there is any foul play going on. Jerks on the internet will always find a way; not sure why I was so surprised.
Lesson learned: no more re-shares; keep a lower profile.
I value your voice, Jason Cordova, even when it’s unpolished or imperfect. I think you caught a lot of flak today that wasn’t directed at your argument, and that’s unfortunate. I hope our community does a better job in the future of disagreeing without being disagreeable.
I value your voice, Jason Cordova, even when it’s unpolished or imperfect. I think you caught a lot of flak today that wasn’t directed at your argument, and that’s unfortunate. I hope our community does a better job in the future of disagreeing without being disagreeable.
I disagree that the heat wasn’t about his argument or the followup discussion, which was pretty dismissive and had some pretty serious overtones of adjudicating what is or isn’t worthy.
being told that their game is a “vanity product” and that their efforts should be abandoned because the field is glutted is alienating. This wasn’t a theoretical conversation about a theoretical situation – the instant a very specific instance, like “people going to Metatopia with games” got cited as something wrong in “the industry” it got personal. The insinuation that one needs to meet certain criteria in order to be blessed as a designer is hurtful, and that’s what people seem to have gotten from the post.
It got disagreeable from several sides, including the “I’m just asking to start a conversation”, which felt very baity – people got heated because they were deliberately provoked.
“They are going to exist as vanity projects for a game designer to talk about on G+ or Reddit for a few days, maybe a few weeks, get some +’s, and then simply fade ” I’m not even one of the designers in question and I’m freaking provoked!
“what is the point? So you can feel like you’re part of an elite club? If so, that’s pretty fucking pathetic, and just another expression of ‘everyone gets a trophy,’ except in this case it’s ‘everyone gets to go to a convention as a game designer.’ ”
It was a crappy, mean sentiment, and I certainly hope that the small-heartedness was a misfire, not an actual heartfelt and thought out sentiment.
If my convention hadn’t been mentioned in specific and if there weren’t ALSO this line: ” ‘everyone gets to go to a convention as a game designer.’” I wouldn’t have waded in – it would have been another post on the internet where somebody was crapping on somebody else’s parade. In this case, though, I did get brought into it and I do think it was a crummy thing to post, ESPECIALLY while people are pouring mountains of energy into getting ready for showing their games at Metatopia.
Don’t creators have enough self-doubt without somebody with a platform telling them they’re wasting time while they’re vulnerable and anxious? The internet forgets that real people are out here doing real things. I think the lumps were earned, for insensitivity and thoughtlessness, if nothing else.
I disagree that the heat wasn’t about his argument or the followup discussion, which was pretty dismissive and had some pretty serious overtones of adjudicating what is or isn’t worthy.
being told that their game is a “vanity product” and that their efforts should be abandoned because the field is glutted is alienating. This wasn’t a theoretical conversation about a theoretical situation – the instant a very specific instance, like “people going to Metatopia with games” got cited as something wrong in “the industry” it got personal. The insinuation that one needs to meet certain criteria in order to be blessed as a designer is hurtful, and that’s what people seem to have gotten from the post.
It got disagreeable from several sides, including the “I’m just asking to start a conversation”, which felt very baity – people got heated because they were deliberately provoked.
“They are going to exist as vanity projects for a game designer to talk about on G+ or Reddit for a few days, maybe a few weeks, get some +’s, and then simply fade ” I’m not even one of the designers in question and I’m freaking provoked!
“what is the point? So you can feel like you’re part of an elite club? If so, that’s pretty fucking pathetic, and just another expression of ‘everyone gets a trophy,’ except in this case it’s ‘everyone gets to go to a convention as a game designer.’ ”
It was a crappy, mean sentiment, and I certainly hope that the small-heartedness was a misfire, not an actual heartfelt and thought out sentiment.
If my convention hadn’t been mentioned in specific and if there weren’t ALSO this line: ” ‘everyone gets to go to a convention as a game designer.’” I wouldn’t have waded in – it would have been another post on the internet where somebody was crapping on somebody else’s parade. In this case, though, I did get brought into it and I do think it was a crummy thing to post, ESPECIALLY while people are pouring mountains of energy into getting ready for showing their games at Metatopia.
Don’t creators have enough self-doubt without somebody with a platform telling them they’re wasting time while they’re vulnerable and anxious? The internet forgets that real people are out here doing real things. I think the lumps were earned, for insensitivity and thoughtlessness, if nothing else.
Mark Diaz Truman Thanks for saying that. It means a hell of a lot to me.
The Gauntlet have built an exceedingly modest platform where we play and discuss games. We don’t expect everyone to agree with us. We don’t necessarily even agree with each other (by way of example, almost all my cohort thinks I’m being too hard on Cartel). But we love these games. We play them and discuss them with passion. We play them and discuss them because we think people deserve to have their design efforts honored. We don’t get anything material for this effort, which amounts to countless hours of work. But we do get the satisfaction of bringing a game like, say, Cheat Your Own Adventure or Society of Dreamers to the attention of people who might not otherwise hear about them.
My post today was certainly more challenging than most but, in my defense, I had no idea anyone would pay attention outside The Gauntlet. My opinion is really not so important to warrant all this.
Mark Diaz Truman Thanks for saying that. It means a hell of a lot to me.
The Gauntlet have built an exceedingly modest platform where we play and discuss games. We don’t expect everyone to agree with us. We don’t necessarily even agree with each other (by way of example, almost all my cohort thinks I’m being too hard on Cartel). But we love these games. We play them and discuss them with passion. We play them and discuss them because we think people deserve to have their design efforts honored. We don’t get anything material for this effort, which amounts to countless hours of work. But we do get the satisfaction of bringing a game like, say, Cheat Your Own Adventure or Society of Dreamers to the attention of people who might not otherwise hear about them.
My post today was certainly more challenging than most but, in my defense, I had no idea anyone would pay attention outside The Gauntlet. My opinion is really not so important to warrant all this.
Thanks for your post – I do agree with Avonelle Wing 100%. I also wish you could have left social justice matters and academic approaches to gaming out of the firing range (like seriously you just had Emily Care Boss on your podcast, who exemplifies both of these things excellently…like the timing of your post was very poor considering you just posted your interview with her less than 2 weeks ago).
What I do take out of this is that it’s a call of action to those of us designers who are really more on the fringe is that we should talk about the games we play more often.
Another thing: In all seriousness: what’s the measurable difference, in your opinion Jason Cordova, between a vanity publisher and a non-vanity publisher? Please explain more about this.
Thanks for your post – I do agree with Avonelle Wing 100%. I also wish you could have left social justice matters and academic approaches to gaming out of the firing range (like seriously you just had Emily Care Boss on your podcast, who exemplifies both of these things excellently…like the timing of your post was very poor considering you just posted your interview with her less than 2 weeks ago).
What I do take out of this is that it’s a call of action to those of us designers who are really more on the fringe is that we should talk about the games we play more often.
Another thing: In all seriousness: what’s the measurable difference, in your opinion Jason Cordova, between a vanity publisher and a non-vanity publisher? Please explain more about this.
Gorram, that turned ugly fast.
Gorram, that turned ugly fast.
K.N. Granger I appreciate your comment. In fact, I think the intersection of social issues and gaming is very important, and I place a lot of value on the voices who raise those issues, because it’s instructive. In my post, I’m expressing how it isn’t our (meaning The Gauntlet’s) particular focus or competency, and I think that’s ok. I don’t mean to be dismissive of folks for whom it is a focus, and if that’s how it comes across, I don’t mind owning up to that and apologizing for it.
Your final question is a really interesting one. I suppose, to some degree, it’s all vanity. I myself post a game I’ve written every now and then. I have no illusions people will actually play one of these games (though I would like them to). I like knowing I did it. I like knowing someone might read one of them and give me a nod of approval. Hell, I might even get a few +’s and re-shares out of it! But at the end of the day, it’s just something that made me feel briefly special or accomplished. And so my experience tells me I did it purely for vanity’s sake. It has a certain pleasure to it, and I don’t want to take that away from anyone, least of all myself.
But does it make me a game designer? I’m not sure it does. The question then, I suppose, is what makes a game designer? I probably don’t have a precise answer for that, and you are free to reject the premise of the question entirely.
I do believe there is an imbalance between design and play. But, I don’t think there needs to be less design, just more play (as the TL:DR version of my post says).
Thanks for giving me something to think about.
K.N. Granger I appreciate your comment. In fact, I think the intersection of social issues and gaming is very important, and I place a lot of value on the voices who raise those issues, because it’s instructive. In my post, I’m expressing how it isn’t our (meaning The Gauntlet’s) particular focus or competency, and I think that’s ok. I don’t mean to be dismissive of folks for whom it is a focus, and if that’s how it comes across, I don’t mind owning up to that and apologizing for it.
Your final question is a really interesting one. I suppose, to some degree, it’s all vanity. I myself post a game I’ve written every now and then. I have no illusions people will actually play one of these games (though I would like them to). I like knowing I did it. I like knowing someone might read one of them and give me a nod of approval. Hell, I might even get a few +’s and re-shares out of it! But at the end of the day, it’s just something that made me feel briefly special or accomplished. And so my experience tells me I did it purely for vanity’s sake. It has a certain pleasure to it, and I don’t want to take that away from anyone, least of all myself.
But does it make me a game designer? I’m not sure it does. The question then, I suppose, is what makes a game designer? I probably don’t have a precise answer for that, and you are free to reject the premise of the question entirely.
I do believe there is an imbalance between design and play. But, I don’t think there needs to be less design, just more play (as the TL:DR version of my post says).
Thanks for giving me something to think about.
“if that’s how it comes across, I don’t mind owning up to that and apologizing for it.” You certainly, certainly did. Thank you for the apology.
“Your final question is a really interesting one. I suppose, to some degree, it’s all vanity” UGH I guess so, I mean going back to plato or whatever, what’s the point of doing anything, but to do it to reach for immortality? there’s something inane that socrates says akin to this: everyone is seeking immortality. wise people do it by creating shit. illiterate people do it by creating babies. That’s the gist of his point, which is terrible and I don’t endorse it.
maybe you design games for vanity. good for you. I affirm and support this. but your game design process doesn’t sound like my game design process. I write out of following a compulsion. Usually I have a germ in my brain that makes me want to create something. If I manage to pound out a rough draft before the germ gets away, then I have a rough draft. I test my games as many times as I can before the germ dies, and then I post for public consumption. My games don’t enter the world in published form until they’ve already been played by over a dozen people, on average. And that’s how I do design process. and you know what? almost all of my best work has been written on behalf of someone or something. for me, that’s how I operate. my current opus (for really my game design artistry is much more akin to music composition than anything else, I think – and yes, I call myself an artist in terms of my game design efforts, if you think I’m vain for that, whatever) is a birthday gift for my partner. I’m putting a lot of planning and thought into it, and I’m testing it the first time at Metatopia. It won’t be put out until it’s been run at least 4 times. And yes, I will self-publish, because it’s simpler and easier than trying to go through a publishing house and trying to convince them I’m worth it. Does this make me a vanity game designer? quite possibly, in your eyes. If so, all I can say is shrug.
I’m going to be a little blunt but it’s meant kindly – I think ultimately you’re feeling kind of cynical about gaming, at least re: the design end. That’s natural. Perceptions of hobbies wax and wane as we participate in them. You seem to feel underappreciated for the work you do in testing – as was evident from the tone of things you’ve posted in the past and present. That’s great. I think part of it might also be where you are located in the world – in NYC there’s a very strong community of game design and testing, and I leap at the chance to play new games in my areas of interest. Like that’s the whole point is creating art and participating in art.
case in point: I’ve written things that hve gotten me in trouble on social media and in person before, and I hear where you’re coming from, so thanks for being receptive to what others have to say on the topic.
“if that’s how it comes across, I don’t mind owning up to that and apologizing for it.” You certainly, certainly did. Thank you for the apology.
“Your final question is a really interesting one. I suppose, to some degree, it’s all vanity” UGH I guess so, I mean going back to plato or whatever, what’s the point of doing anything, but to do it to reach for immortality? there’s something inane that socrates says akin to this: everyone is seeking immortality. wise people do it by creating shit. illiterate people do it by creating babies. That’s the gist of his point, which is terrible and I don’t endorse it.
maybe you design games for vanity. good for you. I affirm and support this. but your game design process doesn’t sound like my game design process. I write out of following a compulsion. Usually I have a germ in my brain that makes me want to create something. If I manage to pound out a rough draft before the germ gets away, then I have a rough draft. I test my games as many times as I can before the germ dies, and then I post for public consumption. My games don’t enter the world in published form until they’ve already been played by over a dozen people, on average. And that’s how I do design process. and you know what? almost all of my best work has been written on behalf of someone or something. for me, that’s how I operate. my current opus (for really my game design artistry is much more akin to music composition than anything else, I think – and yes, I call myself an artist in terms of my game design efforts, if you think I’m vain for that, whatever) is a birthday gift for my partner. I’m putting a lot of planning and thought into it, and I’m testing it the first time at Metatopia. It won’t be put out until it’s been run at least 4 times. And yes, I will self-publish, because it’s simpler and easier than trying to go through a publishing house and trying to convince them I’m worth it. Does this make me a vanity game designer? quite possibly, in your eyes. If so, all I can say is shrug.
I’m going to be a little blunt but it’s meant kindly – I think ultimately you’re feeling kind of cynical about gaming, at least re: the design end. That’s natural. Perceptions of hobbies wax and wane as we participate in them. You seem to feel underappreciated for the work you do in testing – as was evident from the tone of things you’ve posted in the past and present. That’s great. I think part of it might also be where you are located in the world – in NYC there’s a very strong community of game design and testing, and I leap at the chance to play new games in my areas of interest. Like that’s the whole point is creating art and participating in art.
case in point: I’ve written things that hve gotten me in trouble on social media and in person before, and I hear where you’re coming from, so thanks for being receptive to what others have to say on the topic.
moreover, it’s perspectives like that which you posted that have been an obstacle for creating new art.
what I see you describing – people creating art and not participating in other peoples’ art – is a symptom of the growth of the hobby, if I’m not mistaken.
all creative pursuits have people like that, as observed by others. because this is part of the creative process and learning drive. you wouldn’t shame a kid for seeing monet and then deciding to try and make their own monet with their crayolas, right? and that kid would probably be super proud and want to submit it to the Met Museum of Art or whatever. and that’s not their fault for realiznig they aren’t monet. it’s because they’re proud of their efforts.
you don’t need to treat them like a special snowflake and actually send their drawing to the Met to support their growth as artists. if they decide to send it to the Met themselves, what’s the harm in that?
also sometimes people post things that aren’t well tested because they live in areas where they won’t be able to get them tested in person. I know a handful of designers like this who are really alienated from the community.
Maybe you’re not feeling fulfilled in what you do? check in yourself, maybe.
moreover, it’s perspectives like that which you posted that have been an obstacle for creating new art.
what I see you describing – people creating art and not participating in other peoples’ art – is a symptom of the growth of the hobby, if I’m not mistaken.
all creative pursuits have people like that, as observed by others. because this is part of the creative process and learning drive. you wouldn’t shame a kid for seeing monet and then deciding to try and make their own monet with their crayolas, right? and that kid would probably be super proud and want to submit it to the Met Museum of Art or whatever. and that’s not their fault for realiznig they aren’t monet. it’s because they’re proud of their efforts.
you don’t need to treat them like a special snowflake and actually send their drawing to the Met to support their growth as artists. if they decide to send it to the Met themselves, what’s the harm in that?
also sometimes people post things that aren’t well tested because they live in areas where they won’t be able to get them tested in person. I know a handful of designers like this who are really alienated from the community.
Maybe you’re not feeling fulfilled in what you do? check in yourself, maybe.
K.N. Granger I don’t set anything in stone. I love having my views challenged and my mind changed. I went to an elite law school, and before I got there, I thought I was the smartest person I knew. I was quickly disabused of that notion, but I never stopped loving how brilliant everyone else was. It was super-invigorating.
I like to litigate things. Like my professors, I love taking a position that is not popular and seeing all the issues exorcised and played with. That makes me come off like a jerk sometimes, and maybe I am a jerk, but I LOVE the thoughtful pushback I have seen of my post in other places. The nastiness from some has caused me to want to withdraw to safer territory for awhile, but I appreciate much of the conversation.
I suppose my approach is not compatible with ‘games as art.’ But surely it’s compatible with ‘games as academic concern?’ My partner, who is a professor at a university, says anyone proclaiming to be a part of the academy should be accustomed to having their views challenged. And not just challenged, but downright shat upon and dismissed. It’s a critical component of the publishing process, I’m led to believe.
I don’t think I have a cynical bone in my body! Somewhat self-involved? Sure. Occasionally awful? Definitely. But we’re all that way, right? In general, I have a lot of love for this hobby. Have you ever listened to the podcast??
K.N. Granger I don’t set anything in stone. I love having my views challenged and my mind changed. I went to an elite law school, and before I got there, I thought I was the smartest person I knew. I was quickly disabused of that notion, but I never stopped loving how brilliant everyone else was. It was super-invigorating.
I like to litigate things. Like my professors, I love taking a position that is not popular and seeing all the issues exorcised and played with. That makes me come off like a jerk sometimes, and maybe I am a jerk, but I LOVE the thoughtful pushback I have seen of my post in other places. The nastiness from some has caused me to want to withdraw to safer territory for awhile, but I appreciate much of the conversation.
I suppose my approach is not compatible with ‘games as art.’ But surely it’s compatible with ‘games as academic concern?’ My partner, who is a professor at a university, says anyone proclaiming to be a part of the academy should be accustomed to having their views challenged. And not just challenged, but downright shat upon and dismissed. It’s a critical component of the publishing process, I’m led to believe.
I don’t think I have a cynical bone in my body! Somewhat self-involved? Sure. Occasionally awful? Definitely. But we’re all that way, right? In general, I have a lot of love for this hobby. Have you ever listened to the podcast??
It makes me sad things have gone to this extreme but I understand and respect the decision you have made. I wish hot opinions had not been taken personally, then personal remarks made. But if wishes were horses yada yada
It makes me sad things have gone to this extreme but I understand and respect the decision you have made. I wish hot opinions had not been taken personally, then personal remarks made. But if wishes were horses yada yada
I feel that the post was ill-considered, but only with the twenty-twenty hindsight of knowing that it got reshared with an audience many times bigger than the original. (The Gauntlet has a few hundred members, it’s been reshared to a few thousand.) With that hindsight, it almost looks like trolling. But Jason Cordova presumably didn’t know that was going to happen, so I feel like people could give him a bit of benefit of the doubt around that.
That doesn’t mean the offence taken is entirely unjustified – but it feels a bit like people are responding as though it was a deliberate trolling of the entire indie design community. Maybe it was, but that’s not my reading of it.
I feel that the post was ill-considered, but only with the twenty-twenty hindsight of knowing that it got reshared with an audience many times bigger than the original. (The Gauntlet has a few hundred members, it’s been reshared to a few thousand.) With that hindsight, it almost looks like trolling. But Jason Cordova presumably didn’t know that was going to happen, so I feel like people could give him a bit of benefit of the doubt around that.
That doesn’t mean the offence taken is entirely unjustified – but it feels a bit like people are responding as though it was a deliberate trolling of the entire indie design community. Maybe it was, but that’s not my reading of it.
I’m going to be the one who doesn’t care about any of the deeper meaning here. I don’t care about convention-attendees and what they think. I rarely think about the larger picture of the gaming community. I have the luxury of not caring about game designers I don’t know and their feelings (justifiably or unjustifiably hurt). I unabashedly only care about you, Jason Cordova in this scenario. I am sorry that you’ve taken so much heat and that people are being shitty to you. Keep your chin up, we love you <3
I’m going to be the one who doesn’t care about any of the deeper meaning here. I don’t care about convention-attendees and what they think. I rarely think about the larger picture of the gaming community. I have the luxury of not caring about game designers I don’t know and their feelings (justifiably or unjustifiably hurt). I unabashedly only care about you, Jason Cordova in this scenario. I am sorry that you’ve taken so much heat and that people are being shitty to you. Keep your chin up, we love you <3
I’ve re-written a long rant about this about 3 times now. None of them are working how I want.
Jason Cordova you are at times provocative and bombastic. But these are traits I accept both as a flaw and a virtue of your friendship. I am sorry you have received such vitriol from cowardly thugs who chose to make personal attacks instead of either dismissing the argument or responding to it with valid points, and I am glad to see the post creating some worthwhile discussion about the issues it has brought up. You are my friend, and a part of my clan of friends and comrades. You are indeed loved and missed.
To those who responded with valid points, thank you for being responsible. Dialog and discourse are the foundations of civilization and rational thoughts, and bring richness to us all, even if we can only agree to disagree.
To all others, I am disappointed with you and suggest you seek help.
I’ve re-written a long rant about this about 3 times now. None of them are working how I want.
Jason Cordova you are at times provocative and bombastic. But these are traits I accept both as a flaw and a virtue of your friendship. I am sorry you have received such vitriol from cowardly thugs who chose to make personal attacks instead of either dismissing the argument or responding to it with valid points, and I am glad to see the post creating some worthwhile discussion about the issues it has brought up. You are my friend, and a part of my clan of friends and comrades. You are indeed loved and missed.
To those who responded with valid points, thank you for being responsible. Dialog and discourse are the foundations of civilization and rational thoughts, and bring richness to us all, even if we can only agree to disagree.
To all others, I am disappointed with you and suggest you seek help.
The notion that the original piece was somehow “beyond the pale” strikes me as absurd. Far more inflammatory things have been said before and should be OK to say again. I think it says more about the “story games / indie games community” than the critic that so much venom was spewed at this relatively mild criticism from a relatively friendly source.
The notion that the original piece was somehow “beyond the pale” strikes me as absurd. Far more inflammatory things have been said before and should be OK to say again. I think it says more about the “story games / indie games community” than the critic that so much venom was spewed at this relatively mild criticism from a relatively friendly source.
Dan, that you could say such a thing is more a reflection of how out of touch you are than anything else. Did you even bother to try to understand how personal of a gut punch this was.
It rattled me, and I wasn’t even its target
The problem with the piece put simply, is that whatever point Jason was trying to make, he painted with far too broad a brush. A brush that included a whole lot of people who shouldn’t have been targets but were and who quite rightly were pissed off at it.
Dan, that you could say such a thing is more a reflection of how out of touch you are than anything else. Did you even bother to try to understand how personal of a gut punch this was.
It rattled me, and I wasn’t even its target
The problem with the piece put simply, is that whatever point Jason was trying to make, he painted with far too broad a brush. A brush that included a whole lot of people who shouldn’t have been targets but were and who quite rightly were pissed off at it.
Ralph Mazza If the problem is my lack of understanding, please explain it to me.
Ralph Mazza If the problem is my lack of understanding, please explain it to me.
How about you go to the thread in question where the unjustly targeted and justly pissed off folks have already explained it in depth.
Or hey, try scrolling up where Avie and K.N. have nicely bullet pointed it for you.
They are upset, and right to be. They have been gracious enough to explain why. And yet their explanations continue to be ignored…and oh look now you’re asking to have a dude explain it to you instead.
#ironymuch
How about you go to the thread in question where the unjustly targeted and justly pissed off folks have already explained it in depth.
Or hey, try scrolling up where Avie and K.N. have nicely bullet pointed it for you.
They are upset, and right to be. They have been gracious enough to explain why. And yet their explanations continue to be ignored…and oh look now you’re asking to have a dude explain it to you instead.
#ironymuch
He crossed a line by shitting on people who write games with social justice / diversity as a major focus. He has since apologized.
He crossed a line by shitting on people who write games with social justice / diversity as a major focus. He has since apologized.
Hey folks, I get that people are upset, but this is spiraling into pretty unpleasant territory. Can we dial it back a bit? Thanks.
Hey folks, I get that people are upset, but this is spiraling into pretty unpleasant territory. Can we dial it back a bit? Thanks.
Jason Cordova , regardless of your intent, what was heard was “Your efforts are pitiful and worthless,” by an audience of amateur hobbyists who have invested themselves into building something they hope others will appreciate and recognize. The things that sting the most are always the ones that play into our own self doubts.
When you hurt someone and didn’t mean to, rather than justify why you did so, give a sincere apology that acknowledges why they were hurt and what you intend to change to prevent it from happening again.
YMMV, and I hope this doesn’t come across as talking down to you. I worried that you might be adopting a posture of justification rather than reconciliation. HTH.
Jason Cordova , regardless of your intent, what was heard was “Your efforts are pitiful and worthless,” by an audience of amateur hobbyists who have invested themselves into building something they hope others will appreciate and recognize. The things that sting the most are always the ones that play into our own self doubts.
When you hurt someone and didn’t mean to, rather than justify why you did so, give a sincere apology that acknowledges why they were hurt and what you intend to change to prevent it from happening again.
YMMV, and I hope this doesn’t come across as talking down to you. I worried that you might be adopting a posture of justification rather than reconciliation. HTH.
Ralph Mazza I disagree that they are right to be upset, I think that requires a misreading of the original piece, although I can sort of see how that reading is possible. I disagreed with their assessments, but felt it would be unnecessary to say so explicitly or engage in point-by-point argumentation with them, I figured their comments could stand or fall on their own merits, especially since the topic was already too hot for my liking. To the extent that the original piece is insufficiently bulletproof to prevent any misreading that is an indication that it is less than perfectly virtuous, but a community that demands perfection before you speak is one that has unreasonable expectations, especially if that community wants to be welcoming to new voices.
Ralph Mazza I disagree that they are right to be upset, I think that requires a misreading of the original piece, although I can sort of see how that reading is possible. I disagreed with their assessments, but felt it would be unnecessary to say so explicitly or engage in point-by-point argumentation with them, I figured their comments could stand or fall on their own merits, especially since the topic was already too hot for my liking. To the extent that the original piece is insufficiently bulletproof to prevent any misreading that is an indication that it is less than perfectly virtuous, but a community that demands perfection before you speak is one that has unreasonable expectations, especially if that community wants to be welcoming to new voices.
If wishes were horses then what David LaFreniere? They’d be winged unicorns with rainbow tails?
Edit: I may be playing with my daughters toys too much!
If wishes were horses then what David LaFreniere? They’d be winged unicorns with rainbow tails?
Edit: I may be playing with my daughters toys too much!
…yes I think that’s how the phrase goes
…yes I think that’s how the phrase goes
Dan Maruschak I’m boggled. Are you actually asserting that the only way to be upset by “vanity project” “somethings wrong in the industry” “fucking pathetic” and “everyone gets a trophy” is to misread it? What other ways to read such phrases do you think there are?
But more importantly, why is it important to you to defend that as an appropriate way to start a dialog? How is it possible that you can only “sort of” see how calling someone’s creative efforts fucking pathetic is upsetting?
Dan Maruschak I’m boggled. Are you actually asserting that the only way to be upset by “vanity project” “somethings wrong in the industry” “fucking pathetic” and “everyone gets a trophy” is to misread it? What other ways to read such phrases do you think there are?
But more importantly, why is it important to you to defend that as an appropriate way to start a dialog? How is it possible that you can only “sort of” see how calling someone’s creative efforts fucking pathetic is upsetting?
😪
😪
I don’t think this thread’s going anywhere useful at this point. Consider this last call.
I don’t think this thread’s going anywhere useful at this point. Consider this last call.
Ralph Mazza Because in the original post the “vanity project” stuff was describing a symptom of a bad situation that Jason perceived (i.e. underplayed games) and wanted to fix. Much of the “maybe people are satisfied if their games aren’t played because they’re just vanity projects” conjecture paragraph was followed up with “but I don’t believe that, I believe most people want their games to be played”. The way to read phrases is in the context of the piece of which they are a part.
But more importantly, why is it important to you to defend that as an appropriate way to start a dialog?
Because, like I said, demanding perfection is unrealistic, and it’s hypocritical for old hand Forge people to know that they didn’t have to overcome that hurdle but have erected it after their reputations have already been established.
How is it possible that you can only “sort of” see how calling someone’s creative efforts fucking pathetic is upsetting?
Because I don’t think he did that.
Ralph Mazza Because in the original post the “vanity project” stuff was describing a symptom of a bad situation that Jason perceived (i.e. underplayed games) and wanted to fix. Much of the “maybe people are satisfied if their games aren’t played because they’re just vanity projects” conjecture paragraph was followed up with “but I don’t believe that, I believe most people want their games to be played”. The way to read phrases is in the context of the piece of which they are a part.
But more importantly, why is it important to you to defend that as an appropriate way to start a dialog?
Because, like I said, demanding perfection is unrealistic, and it’s hypocritical for old hand Forge people to know that they didn’t have to overcome that hurdle but have erected it after their reputations have already been established.
How is it possible that you can only “sort of” see how calling someone’s creative efforts fucking pathetic is upsetting?
Because I don’t think he did that.