I mean it's off topic. This isn't the "let's discuss apex item prices" thread. Is just bringing baggage in and derailing a standard and expected aspect of era now?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Apex Legends developers spark outrage after calling gamers “dicks”, “ass-hats”and “freeloaders”
- Thread starter lush
- Start date
I mean it's off topic. This isn't the "let's discuss apex item prices" thread. Is just bringing baggage in and derailing a standard and expected aspect of era now?
Big time. The events of the past few years have had a massive cooling effect on devs' willingness to speak openly with their playerbases.
Gamers love to act as if devs abstain from community outreach out of laziness or vitriol. The truth is, even though community outreach is absolutely time-consuming, challenging work, most devs that I know (would) absolutely love to talk to their playerbases about what they're working on. Game dev has interesting problems with very cool solutions, and the iterative processes that produce those solutions are really fun to talk about, think through, and follow. It is, structurally, in abstraction, a great discipline for open conversation—for sharing approaches, for tutorializing the design and development of common gameplay elements, for tracing critical genealogies of design trends through games, etc. A priori, it has all the makings of a wonderful, vibrant, open, interesting community that produces lots of experimentation, collaboration, and curiosity.
It's because of that that most game devs I've spoken to about this (and heard from about this) truly, seriously lament their inability to be in open conversation with both their players and with other devs. You can't talk about upcoming features because gamers will accuse you of 'breaking a promise' when they get changed to make the game better; you can't show iterations of a design element without players forming some bizarre, angry narrative about why earlier iterations were better and why they shouldn't have been disposed of; you can't go into detail describing how some feature was implemented without 'consumer-rights' activists misinterpreting it as part of an ongoing story about why your game is 'broken.'
It's been made clear, over and over again, that it is in the devs' best interest to share nothing, say nothing, and show nothing. Interesting conversations that could be happening in public—that could be instrumental for hobbyists, aspiring gamedevs, or other peers—are happening behind closed doors. It is an enormous shame and it's difficult to understate the damage it's doing to the industry, both in terms of the games that are being made and the people that are making those games.
I feel like they'd have more of a leg to stand on if they weren't defending some of the worst practices. If they were attacked for changing a story a way people didn't like that's defensible. Charging $20 for skins. Like of course people are going to dunk on you when other games in your category aren't even that egregious.
Look theyre right to call out toxicity in the gaming community and want it to get better. Doing it at a time where youre under criticism for your cupidity is the wrong time to do it. Clearly a case where both sides in this look bad. The first two comments I wouldnt say are that bad but referring to your players as free loaders is entirely unnecessary and if you didn't want that then dont release a F2P game (and then to put "we love that in" after the fact to mitigate what you just said doesn't fool anyone).
I don't know why devs (like Price) feel they should be able to be unprofessional in a public way and not face any consequences. You can't do that in most industries, so why are game devs the exception? I'm sure it's cathartic to lash out and vent a bit but it's still not a good look and never will be. It's really not a good look for Respawn, in this case, because it comes right after they faced extreme backlash over a cosmetic event to the point where they had to change course.
This isn't unique to gaming. It's why PR largely exists to begin with. Managing public perception is a very real thing and Respawn isn't doing so hot at this moment. This doesn't help.
Jessica Price was tweeting on a personal twitter, and was accused of 'unprofessionalism'. That belies an expectation placed on gamedevs that is absolutely not ubiquitous among industries. You're right that game devs are the exception, but you have the rest of it backwards.
Well, I don't know who this Jessica Price is....
But Yeah. My sisters best friend is a nurse, and she constantly gets so much shit from everyone. Higher up nurses, doctors, patients - etc. If she even responded at 5% of the bullshit she got she'd be fired so fast.
Like I said, some devs (obviously not all) come from the shared population pool of these gamer types they are talking shit to.
I will leave it at this: you have it the wrong way around.
You shouldn't be afraid that psychologists are designing monetization.
You should be afraid that the games industry is designing monetization without the input of psychologists.
If you're a known face in any industry, you don't have a personal Twitter.
You can't trash clients or customers on your public twitter account and expect immunity from backlash, including from your employer. Full stop. If you disagree, you're welcome to try it and see how well it goes for you.
Do you feel monetization practices on some of the most popular games around are ethical? Simple question.
I don't know. This seems like a problem with mutiplayer games in general. Developers of retail games are also going at it with their toxic customers. Overwatch, Destiny, Battlefield. They are definitely not immune. Each of the has had different post launch monetization methods as well. Loot boxes, expansions, new maps. No one has found a method that makes people and I don't think anyone ever will.
I'm actually more afraid that we're designing more games with monetization because some people started making succesful free-to-play mobile games. The amount of normalization that's going on, even just in these threads, for MTX is exhausting to read through.
I think a lot of developers have become blindsided and complacent to the effects of the player experience with Microtransactions and the kind of pervasive effect monetization of meaningless digital items has on everything.
They are calling them freeloaders because they would prefer if everyone paid.
They love that freeloaders are still playing the game because it helps those who do pay feel more gratification in playing such a game. Those wahles wouldn't be around if there wasn't a robust enough player base to attract them.
Quality reply. Maybe reach into the toolkit and also grab the "ur mad"
You're gonna have to be more specific about it.
On PC, absolutely yes, it's still mostly ethical. The one company that I'll call out for being absolutely 100% unethical is Valve.
On mobile, it's a very different story, especially if you veer into gacha and social casino.
![[Sigma]](/data/avatar/31551380172/27345-m.jpg){kind=avatar}
The hole in this is that Jessica Price was not by any measure an individual of 'public interest' before she was accused of unprofessionalism. The barrier for 'known face' is arbitrarily much lower in games, specifically for the purpose of justifying and legitimizing attacks against devs for 'unprofessionalism.' UX designers at design firms don't face this expectation; nor do Java enterprise programmers. In games, it's different.
If that was true, they'd have charged for the game. Fact of the matter is that they knew they were going to make more money going f2p and calling his playerbase freeloaders just makes him sound stupid.
that post is self-evidently absurd. yeah, totally, companies should hire psychologists to make their gambling more ethical so they make less money. that's going to happen for sure
Yep. This has been my experience as well. Devs want to talk about their games, they love talking about them and want to share cool and interesting tidbits and cool, weird, and even funny tricks about how they got something working. A number of them feel terrified to speak directly to gamers and communities though, because if they were to accidentally say the wrong thing it could go very horribly. It's like walking on eggshells.
So, just to make sure that we're on the same page here: My argument is that a bad thing is happening and that it should stop happening, and your counter-argument is..."if it is such a bad thing, why is it happening?"
I at least appreciate you so clearly laying the thought process out.
Then they should have charged money to play their game if they prefer everyone to pay lol
As you said those "freeloaders" do a lot to drive the game and its sales so using such a derogatory word, thats not even accurate, to describe a large part of your player base is ridiculous.
I obviously don't have any evidence of this, but I feel like game devs are much more active on social media than other software devs, for various reasons.
Last edited:
If Gamers are gonna stay as toxic as they are, I'm okay with these developers calling them out from time to time. We can't simply expect to have developers interacting with the community and sometimes not lashing out at a group of people that loves to harass and send death threats.
I agree with you, but that's one hornet's nest I'd rather not mess with.
...what industries exist in which people get to have personal public twitter accounts in which they aren't held to some standard of professionalism?
I'm genuinely curious. All my friends and family subscribe to the idea that nothing should be openly online that could negatively impact you at work—in fact my grad school program literally most of orientation was the school going over how important locking down social media and only presenting a sterilized front publicly is, especially today.
Yeah seeing some people suggest it would be a good thing for the gaming industry to work with psychologists is absurd. Theres a reason why governments are starting to come in and say they need to regulate this shit, and its because the industry has failed to do the right thing with this monetization for years.
I get where the Devs are coming from but you've got to be professional and not stoop to the same level as what is wrong with fans in the industry.
Just not acceptable in any way, shape or form.
Just not acceptable in any way, shape or form.
They aren't. Many other software devs are both more and less active on twitter than many other software devs. There is absolutely no grounds for these sorts of sweeping statements.
I earnestly don't know how to begin to answer this—it just isn't really where the burden of proof lays. Every single other industry I've worked in—editorial, publishing, art advisement, museum curation, restaurant work, voting machine repair—has been full of people with personal public twitter accounts that aren't held to some standard of professionalism. A lot of them have even been 'of public interest' within the context of their field, recognizable to people within the discipline, but if anyone tried to complain to their bosses because someone tweeted at them brusquely, they'd be laughed out of the building.
How is valve ethical? They have some of the most pervasive and expansive loot box systems, many of which are considered gambling according to what these gambling commissions state?
Some of them don't care at all and never take it seriously. They stop thinking about what they have typed after they sign out of social media.
agreed. most of what he said is a fair assessment; granted, he should have chose his words more wisely. I'm also a developer and I tend to avoid the subreddit of the game I work on. Don't get me wrong, I'm incredibly proud of the game..it's just people are often toxic (and ignorant) and it can be very disheartening to read.
I'll be honest I pay so little attention to the skins - my mistake for some reason I thought you could outright buy whatever skin you want in this game but just at high prices.
I said they are unethical :P
Agree, and this is exactly why user research and community departments are so important to keep developers in touch with player needs. Unfortunately, user research is a luxury for most developers, and the effectiveness of community is highly dependent on how much the developer (or publisher) itself values that feedback.
Era tends to subscribe to certain set of myths around game development, but one particularly harmful one is that developers are extremely competent. That every decision they make is thought-out and backed by research or data, and not just something they squeeze in because they have a personal suspicion, because some team lead just has a big ego, or a really successful other game did it so we should do it too (from personal experience, this last bit has guided 90% of my design decisions). There's an incredible of amount of trial and error in the games industry, as evidenced by the sheer number of studios that make bad decisions and go under.
I'm perfectly fine with the devs remarks as shown in the OP.
Gamers entitlement getting out of line by insulting developers, harassing them and beeing overall toxic isn't acceptable by any means. If some gamers feel they can rightfully insult people then they should be able to take it as well.
You can constructively criticize something without insulting people. If you can't then I'm perfectly at ease with someone calling you a dick
Gamers entitlement getting out of line by insulting developers, harassing them and beeing overall toxic isn't acceptable by any means. If some gamers feel they can rightfully insult people then they should be able to take it as well.
You can constructively criticize something without insulting people. If you can't then I'm perfectly at ease with someone calling you a dick
I'm not trying to make an argument about respawn's action's or anything else--I'm genuinely curious as to how on earth anyone thinks having a public twitter as a somewhat public figure and voicing opinions that might be upsetting/controversial to their employers or customers is professionally responsible. I have friends who've worked in most of those industries and every single one of them has a private twitter where they complain about anything that might face backlash from any employer, actual or potential. Anything with their name on it they manage to keep sterile or locked because even if their current employer wouldn't care, there's a possibility it'll look bad to a future employer.
I'm not saying it's fair or right, but I'm blown away that it's not a commonly acknowledged requirement to being on social media as a working professional.
edit: I also have no idea what Jessica Price did that brought up the 'unprofessional' comments, this is a question in an absolute vacuum.
I also don't think this necessarily applies to things you'd feel uncomfortable with your employer having an issue with. For example, if you post on your public twitter about going to a pride parade, while this could have professional repercussions, I personally think that's worth it. I'm more just saying having a public twitter account runs the risk of this happening--that doesn't mean the victim of the harassment is to blame, but it's just...a thing? in this day and age.
Last edited:
Your clearly not taking this very serious discussion seriously. Which doesn't paint a great picture of your position or purpose here.
How am I not taking it seriously?
In what way is my position unclear?
User banned (1 week): antagonizing other users
Thanks for being the condescending person we need in this thread. The fact of the matter is, when billions are at stake nothing is left to chance of human behavior as you suggest
You and the industry frankly hasn't earned the right to be taken at your word.
Nothing you've said so far, outside of your extreme interest you've taken in this thread spinning a specific narrative, is convincing outside of the circle talk and damage control.
So Mr designer, please give us more than nonesense posts asking us to believe you.
Yeah, no idea what that guy is talking about. People get fired for saying dumb shit on twitter if they're in any way linked to their company.
I mean, I'm a game designer who works in monetization and dabbles in product management (it's all in my profile!), and I'm telling you how things are in my experience.
If that doesn't convince you, and you're still trying to tell me how my job is done, then I'm not sure what will convince you, or if you're willing to be convinced.
Do you seriously need me to answer that? Question. A serious response. Doesn't reply tons serious question with a one sentence wore joke. It's sad I have to tell you this.
To be clear, I'm not talking about, like, overt racist invective or calls to genocide. I absolutely feel that there's a common expectation for people to not express loathsome, dehumanizing views on public-facing twitters, regardless of industry.
I'm talking specifically about behavior in line with Jessica Price's. I do not believe that that would be met with an expectation of punishment in any other industry I've worked in—I don't think it would even occur to anyone to react that way.