-
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
Where was the joke? I said that Valve are unethical. You asked me how they're ethical. I told you again that I said they're unethical.
Well, I post here because Iurking on Gaf is what inspired me to get into the industry a decade ago. I'm just hoping that someone can read the informed bits (among the snark and salt that make up my other posts) and get some inkling of what the industry is actually about 🤷
You're telling me that saying, "I'm glad this guy died" about someone who wasn't evil is acceptable in other industries?
I can see why people are drawing parallels to the Jessica Price situation, however I think that's a little different
She attacked a fan for no reason because she read into something that wasn't there. I don't think she should have been fired, as an apology should have been enough. I'm sure she got a ton of hate before that incident because we live in a depressing world where women get shit for being involved in games, but that doesn't give her the freedom to attack people for no reason
These devs are being attacked and are attacking the community back, which is one discussion. The other discussion is why they're being attacked, and that's down to the awful predatory MXT that are in the game
These are two different issues. The former I can emphasize with, because the devs are being directly attacked, but even so, it's not professional nor is it likely to calm things down
Whatever the devs say, the MXT model was awful and deserves criticism, but that doesn't mean they deserve harassment or abuse
In an ideal world, the devs wouldn't get shit for things they're not responsible for, and those irked by the shite MXTs would be able to express their issues in an respectful and articulate manner
But because this is the internet people will make it a black and white issue where it's either the devs who are in the wrong or the players, and refuse to look into the issue any deeper than that
Which has happened a lot in this thread already
She attacked a fan for no reason because she read into something that wasn't there. I don't think she should have been fired, as an apology should have been enough. I'm sure she got a ton of hate before that incident because we live in a depressing world where women get shit for being involved in games, but that doesn't give her the freedom to attack people for no reason
These devs are being attacked and are attacking the community back, which is one discussion. The other discussion is why they're being attacked, and that's down to the awful predatory MXT that are in the game
These are two different issues. The former I can emphasize with, because the devs are being directly attacked, but even so, it's not professional nor is it likely to calm things down
Whatever the devs say, the MXT model was awful and deserves criticism, but that doesn't mean they deserve harassment or abuse
In an ideal world, the devs wouldn't get shit for things they're not responsible for, and those irked by the shite MXTs would be able to express their issues in an respectful and articulate manner
But because this is the internet people will make it a black and white issue where it's either the devs who are in the wrong or the players, and refuse to look into the issue any deeper than that
Which has happened a lot in this thread already
The Devs come across way better than the players in those posts, and the "freeloaders" comment in particular sounds like the Dev is genuinely happy a ton of people get to play their game without spending money.
And lol at that "doesn't give you the right to charge $20 for a skin" guy. It sounds like the dude hates the free market but I'd bet that dude is conservative in quite a few other ways.
And lol at that "doesn't give you the right to charge $20 for a skin" guy. It sounds like the dude hates the free market but I'd bet that dude is conservative in quite a few other ways.
What is your experience? on which games?
And you're telling me you just wing it based on trial and error and don't use any research, despite the fact Activision has filed a patent on how to incentivize players to spend and even the Apex devs themselves cite their own research as to how people spend on MTX when answering feedback cited in the OP of this very thread.
are we playing a semantics game here? What are you playing at exactly?
Freeloader always has a negative connotation and pretending otherwise is silly.
i wish i had the confidence to tell someone who works in the area i'm criticizing that i know more about their job than they do
You replied with a tongue. Dude your clearly not serious with any part of this. The mere face you can't admit you made a joke while having an emoji end you response is just really embarrassing for you. I'm sorry I'm done.
I think "about someone who wasn't evil" is tipping your hand a bit, but yes, I do not think there is a general expectation that sharing that on a personal twitter would be a fireable offense in an otherwise-similar context.
Exactly. You can rely on the processes and standardized in-house or in-conglomerate feedback procedures but it requires a certain kind of motivation to go and actually be good at community management IMO. You'll have your community managers, those are good sometimes, but you need to show that you're actually interested in engaging with your player base's values and experiences with the game you put out to them beyond some pre-written corporate messaging or monetization goal, or that's when the tide turns and players start to feel like they're just there to be dicked around.
But I mean reacting to the community is harder than I can even imagine I think. It's not just about reading the room on the internet boards, you have to think about how what you do returns a profit on investment and you also have to disperse the feedback you get into tangible development goals within a team, so that whole issue: "communication" is a big task. I'm not really sure the Reddit responses from Respawn were the best move or maybe it's just their language. I think the biggest issue is simply those new lootboxes because it looks to me like they have relied on entirely cold-hard facts about maximizing profit and that says nothing about whether it maximized or mitigated player happiness with the product. If it does, color me surprised, unless it was taken from some casual mobile game, in which case, this is Apex Legends, a hardcore shooter for fans of MOBAs and Call of Duty and Overwatch. You have to be extremely considerate about what you tell your consumer-base with the way you choose to monetize their interest.
And honestly I think the most shoved-under-the-rug part of the monetization debate is the issue of even being met with game-UI that reminds you to open your wallet. A lot of this would be UX but with monetization experts involved, but basically in order to do monetization you need to create the systems of the game around it, and it usually leads to pinging the player with notifications upon booting or something, and if you're met with "Buy this lootbox combo for 200 dollars!" that's even enough sometimes... that is enough that as a player you will start to feel disgusted with the way you are spending your time even if you don't end up paying. It all depends on how it is communicated and I think too often monetization desires lead to inherent reward systems in games that ends up pulling the player in their t-shirt to remind them that they can feel really good if they spend some more money.
I will never not find this disgusting about how video games have become in AAA.
Last edited:
The other part about the "free loader comment" that I find funny is, people are complaining about the high price of a cosmetic item, not that they have to pay to get it at all. A lot of people, myself included, would be happy spending a reasonable amount of money in the game if the prices and % chances werent so fucking absurd. So dont go complaining that people are free loaders in your free to play game, who dont buy anything when you made it free to play, those players are a large driving force of the community that also incentivize other players to pay, and most importantly, set prices egregiously too high for many of them to even want to pay for. You dont get to have it both ways.
Like I said in my edit, I am not sure what the Jessica Price issue is, but from a google search it seems to be the whole GW2 fiasco (if that's the wrong one let me know). I don't agree with the company's response, but your initial comment was that she was tweeting on her "personal twitter" which lead to the whole confusion regarding game devs being the only individuals beholden to things said on their personal twitter. Which isn't true.
Again, I'm not saying I agree with their response. I absolutely agree with her statement on the matter.
I love how gamers will "defend" the community and the toxic behavior, vitriol, the harassment of the developers, the death threats, the child like tantrums, calling developers "lazy" and that they need to "work harder", etc.
This is embarrassing from both sides I think, but I understand why the devs reacted how they did. There's only so much toxicity you can take.
That was just my poorly phrased way of saying that her comment would've been fine if the target was some kind of monster.
Clearly we've had different experiences on the internet because I've seen people lose their jobs for less.
What the hell is wrong with you?
You read his post wrong and you are accusing him of something he never did, are you crazy? Go back and read his first post, he said Valve is unethical.
Often associated with 'bums' and used by the right-wing propaganda machine to dehumanize people who they claim don't contribute to society. (love you guys tho)
If the devs think of the majority of their players as freeloaders, you can see why they've internalized the pay to win mentality in this case, even though we're only just discussing skins in this case. It's not a big leap from calling people freeloaders to then make the leap that because they are freeloaders, they are far less deserving of in-game advantages afforded to the 1% or 0.1% of people pay big bucks and are effectively paying their salaries
I've always felt the schizophrenic way in which western AAA devs behave underlines this truth. They have a monetary goal, they open with the worst monetization then work backwards, exposing their staff to harassment and and radicalizing them to their own staff to their point of view of the unwashed masses as freeloaders. And yeah, I assume that's the same way AAA devs look at the people who pay $60 entry level price to play their games. Because they are not bringing in anything else after the initial purchase. (love you guys tho).
I continue to do this. As I have been. You will not find a reasonable answer to "why lootboxes exist" other than to profit farm from gambling addicts and people with impulse control problems.
The Iron Crown Event pushes the limit on an already shady business practice.
The question, to me, isn't 'whether game devs are the only individuals beholden to things on their personal twitter.' I think that there is a commonly-accepted, industry-agnostic expectation that certain views would be met with professional consequences—that, regardless of industry, if one were to post snuff films starring themselves on their Twitter, that there might be some professional blowback for that.
My point is that the expectation placed on game devs is substantially different from that of other fields, as exemplified in the Jessica Price thing. The threshold that is seen to justify or demand professional blowback is considerably lower for game devs than for other fields. That doesn't make game devs the only individuals who can see professional consequences for publicly expressing individual opinions, but I do think that there is a very common belief on the part of gaming audiences that game devs are, at all hours of the day, through any available outlet, regardless of the context, representatives of their employers. That, I believe, is exacerbated for game devs compared to other comparable industries.
I attribute it mostly to this article: https://www.pcgamer.com/behind-the-addictive-psychology-and-seductive-art-of-loot-boxes/
I've written extensively on Era about why I dislike the impact of this article, and I can dig that out if you'd like, but the tl;dr is that it's very easy to claim competence on something that works after the fact. There's a chicken and egg effect here because Overwatch would've made bank regardless of whether or not they did all the little bells and whistles they talk about in that article (as I've personally seen in products I've worked on and A/B tested small bells and whistles on). But Blizzard DOESN'T actually A/B test things like that (and are therefore unable to prove effectiveness), so the fact that they're even claiming competence on these decisions is proof of incompetence in the industry.
I replied with a tongue because you clearly misread the post you quoted and I didn't want to make a big deal of it. There wasn't a question to answer because you misread what I said in the first place. Again, I never claimed Valve was ethical. I said in my very first post that they are the company I'd call out as being UNETHICAL.
I'm just saying that while some people are reasonable in their criticism of whatever happens in the industry, many aren't and the vitriol aimed at gaming devs can get on some of their nerves as they lash back.
Get a grip on yourself, that tongue was just a friendly way to tell you "dude, you're actually agreeing with me". The embarrassing thing here is your crazy overreaction that doesn't make any sense.
Yeah it's a complicated affair. "Know your audience", as they say.
I mean, I've been pretty vocal about EA as an organization not really having their shit together when it comes to monetization. Been calling this out for a while now.
People earlier in the thread were asking why Fortnite doesn't get shit for their business model while Apex does, and the answer to this is pretty simple--Fortnite does a lot of regular gameplay updates, while Apex is going with the seasonal thing. When you run a MTX event without any associated gameplay, you get angry gamers.
The mobile game I personally work on has been getting shit from players precisely because of increasingly intrusive UX (and it's something we're working on), so I'm very keen on that subject. The thing is, it's very difficult as a developer when you see something work (e.g. by improving your KPIs) and then to have players ask you to dial it back. Oftentimes the most intrusive thing is what will get you the most obvious results, and it takes a lot of skill and finesse to get those same results while providing a superior experience. Unfortunately a lot of devs just don't have the expertise or time to get to that solution.
I'm always curious about this one—do you really struggle to see the distinction here?
It can be a matter of degrees. The only thing I would be wary off when I see the numbers go in pleastantly is that if people are already complaining will this success really be sustainable, even if you count on retaining new players when the old crowd gives up? The big risk of monetization is creating a "Wii" fad.
This feels like someone losing their cool.
Theres probably hundreds of people on this forum that work with customers in their jobs that they think are dicks yet they manage to keep their tongues in their mouths.
Theres probably hundreds of people on this forum that work with customers in their jobs that they think are dicks yet they manage to keep their tongues in their mouths.
Are you illiterate? You misread his original post and have spent subsequent posts shoving your foot in your mouth even deeper.
Well he didn't outright say he endorses badmouthing the individuals behind the game. I agree, it's BS and needs to be criticized and I don't mind if that will be obnoxious to read, but it's a problem if it goes from "What the hell, Respawn?" to "Hey, you developer who I just doxxed, fuck you" etc.
It's a shame too, we treat each other awful for preferences in entertainment because a is wrong to like b. Then we attack the people that make the products we supposedly enjoy consuming. We can be critical of each other and devs without resorting to hyperbole, condescension, and out right vitriol. I think they are both wrong for acting the way they did but the "gamers" aren't trying to have an honest discussion. They are just trying to yell at them and air their grievances without legitimate conversation.
There is a marked difference between this and constructive criticism.
The harassment is probably minuscule compared to what happens within the entertainment industries (gaming, movies, tv shows and so on)
So I know people who just play games but don't care enough about them to talk about them online, and yet they would use the term gamer to describe themselves because a gamer is someone who plays games. That's what it means.
I sympathize a great deal with the developers of games that are often caught in the crossfire between greedy publishers and angry fans who are often trying to just make the best out of their own situations. The developers are rarely the ones to blame when things are going wrong, but unfortunately, they're the easiest individuals to lash out against because of horrible market practices. A giant company like EA is pretty much impossible to take on as a consumer, and someone like EA tends to not particularly care if they genuinely respond to complaints or not, so I'd argue EA deserves as much credit for creating this shitty situation by building a game so entrenched in predatory practices and an incredibly poorly designed cosmetic pool. This $5-$20+ skin nonsense needs to stop on an industry wide level. And you can claim, "It's necessary for these free to play games to keep going" all you want, but it's short term profit over long term stability and we're seeing the numbers of the profitability of in game economies and microtransactions. MTX make billions of dollars for so little production cost, and most of these live services are built by overworking employees without allowing them to benefit from the massive profit margins that these companies are seeing as developers. Sure, free means people aren't paying for your game, but it also means you create the potential to target potentially an entire player base of 100 million or more people as opposed to a 10 million that may buy the game normally. Lower priced cosmetics may initially cause a drop in profits, but it will also potentially attract more people to spend in the game and incentivize people to continue participating in the game's virtual economy if they don't feel so taken advantage of. Not to mention, the profits we see show that a minor decrease is profitability will not inherently cripple the game's future development or even hurt the company all that much.
This doesn't excuse people being giant assholes to developers and how toxic the gaming community can be, but with issues like this, we also have to allow people to express their emotions and be passionate about the topic so that things do change for the better. I understand that's frustrating at times as a developer, and obviously far too many gamers go too far in their criticisms with personal attacks because the gaming community as a whole is far too slow to change... but you can't be a developer who fails to read the room like this either and you should recognize the harm to the entire industry that your product may be doing as the service model increasingly becomes the norm. You may not deserve being forced to carry such burdens and just want to promote positivity, but lashing out at people feeds the trolls who want that reaction, alienates fans who are already on the precipice, and creates more opportunities for division in an already unstable environment. He's not wrong to express frustration at fans and people talking about the game... but it's probably more antithetical to the general goal than it needs to be and unfortunately does require more tact than was displayed in these posts.
But I can't emphasize enough how much the developers themselves are often the ones the least to blame and under the most pressure in these situations, and fans need to recognize this more than ever and be more understanding in their own right. I'd imagine this is not where Respawn expected to be only 3 years after they were working on and so excited for Titanfall 2 and they're kind of stuck responding to EA's demands with Apex Legends, especially since it has become so notable and profitable so quickly.
This doesn't excuse people being giant assholes to developers and how toxic the gaming community can be, but with issues like this, we also have to allow people to express their emotions and be passionate about the topic so that things do change for the better. I understand that's frustrating at times as a developer, and obviously far too many gamers go too far in their criticisms with personal attacks because the gaming community as a whole is far too slow to change... but you can't be a developer who fails to read the room like this either and you should recognize the harm to the entire industry that your product may be doing as the service model increasingly becomes the norm. You may not deserve being forced to carry such burdens and just want to promote positivity, but lashing out at people feeds the trolls who want that reaction, alienates fans who are already on the precipice, and creates more opportunities for division in an already unstable environment. He's not wrong to express frustration at fans and people talking about the game... but it's probably more antithetical to the general goal than it needs to be and unfortunately does require more tact than was displayed in these posts.
But I can't emphasize enough how much the developers themselves are often the ones the least to blame and under the most pressure in these situations, and fans need to recognize this more than ever and be more understanding in their own right. I'd imagine this is not where Respawn expected to be only 3 years after they were working on and so excited for Titanfall 2 and they're kind of stuck responding to EA's demands with Apex Legends, especially since it has become so notable and profitable so quickly.
You mean the pretentious distinction of "I'm not one of them!"? It's literally virtue signaling, worthless. My mom has a little game on her phone, she's a gamer. See where I'm going? People just like feeling superior about how much of a gamer they aren't.
Did I miss something? Why is everyone with the dev? Since when is toxicity combated with toxicity? Also I dont play Apex but that monetization is terrible and once again EA is setting the low bar lower than before. I guess Era is fully pwning the "gamers" regardless, really showed them.