Players: “your game doesn’t work. It’s riddled with bugs. It has serious performance issues and doesn’t run on most hardware. It lacks modding support as well as basic features that were present in the previous game”
If there’s one thing to take from this, it’s that the toxicity just needs to be directed at those actually responsible. Not the devs, but at corporate forcing the game to release early.
Listen the game isn’t perfect and did have a rough launch, but they’re actively working on fixing and improving it. I’ve had 8+ hour straight binges of gameplay on it and enjoy it plenty. Is it completely what I hoped for? Not exactly, and the game could use more optimization but I still very much enjoy it, personally. It’s more enjoyable to me so far than the first game, especially with the new tools and features they’ve added.
Toxicity is so dumb with g*mers, just refund and leave an honest review then move on with your lives people, geez.
No console launch, no mod management, and optimization issues.
Two out of three weren’t expected. Maybe all three.
That said, I like CS2 more than the original. I miss the added functions I got from some of the DLC (industries, airports), but I’m sure they won’t pass up the opportunity to do it all over again and make money doing so. That is, provided there is a large enough community to buy DLCs.
People love/loved CS. Whole TY channels grew up for just that one game. Those channels are branching out more now and that causes me concern.
I don’t blame the devs. I wish they’d waited to launch, but I can also understand the companies need money to function.
We’re in a critical time and I know the devs put a lot of heart into the game. If I was their leader, I’d be sympathetic too. Doesn’t mean I’m seeing toxicity - just not the reception the devs may have expected after all that hype.
I simply can’t believe that they released the game in this unfinished state. Early access or a public beta would be understandable, but you just don’t release a half-finished product promising to deliver the remaining stuff later.
The Minecraft way where you continually provide upgrades for your game can obviously work, but in that case, the game is cheaper and the upgrades are free. If they were going that route, CS2 should have been a free upgrade of CS1 with all the features of the previous product and nobody would’ve complained.
If you buy another full product, you expect another full product.
There’s no reason to treat the developers like shit though.
Gamers don’t need to act like entitled bitches about everything. Especially when they continue to play the game. Provide feedback, leave a review, and move on. There’s no excuse for rudeness.
You’re not familiar with the car and motorcycle industries are you?
People spend years tearing into companies over vehicles, spending hundreds or thousands of hours meticulously detailing every engineering problem, real or imagined, and shitting on anyone who disagrees.
The only difference is that car and motorcycle companies generally shield their employees from criticism to a much greater degree.
You don’t usually see the engineers names in a credit screen in your car. Those engineers aren’t generally seen shit posting on twitter about how entitled the customers are because that would get them sacked.
Is there a word for an argument that tries to justify their side by saying "it happens in this other place, so it should be okay here, too", because that's what that sounds like to me.
You can be constructive without being a dick, full stop. No justification from it happening elsewhere will actually justify that. Being a dick is not justifiable. Feeling upset and angry absolutely is, and you can express that, again, without being a dick.
I'm talking generally, I have no real knowledge or horse in this specific race. If people aren't actually being toxic here, then that's awesome and they should keep it up.
Yes, I think if a developer does that and everyone involved in delivering that marketing and the developers knew from the outset they would have to deliver those features, but wouldn't be able to, and they didn't stop the people giving the public that information if they are even able to do that, then the specific people involved in those decisions would be dicks, even then, sinking to their level is not a good look.
This is also why people should wait for release and reviews. No one forced you at gunpoint to pay for a gane that didn't deliver on its marketing. This happens so much in this industry you should almost expect it and be wary, and the main way to get that message across to the dev is to not buy it until it's satisfactory. That's what they deserve for their transgression and what will hit them where it hurts deservedly, no money.
So because it’s “industry practice” to screw over consumers it’s somehow on consumers?
I suppose we can apply the same logic to scams, victims know about scams and fall for them anyway so it’s their own fault when their life savings get stolen.
No point in blaming the scammers. Everyone knows how it works.
I wouldn't say consumers deserve that burden, but we have it because there's no governmental regulation of moral marketing practices. If we can legally move towards that somehow, then hell yeah, but I'll be honest that I'm too lazy and/or legally inept to do that myself.
I'm not saying it should be the customer's problem, but as humans that are great at learning pattern recognition it can help us avoid misery and wasting our money, and I wouldn't also say that people should do that willy nilly just because ideally you'd be able to trust marketing. You can't. It's just the only way to cope with this messed up system in its current state.
So… blame the system? The devs are the antagonists in this system and the only ones with the power to stop pushing out broken garbage and marketing based on lies.
Blaming the victims won’t change the system.
There will always be people unfamiliar with the pitfalls of the system. Always fresh victims to part from their money.
So I blame the company because the company is the system. I blame the scammers because they are the system.
Oh and regulations don’t even slow down scammers of any kind. They already know they’re breaking the rules, breaking laws is just the next logical step.
A step companies are all too willing to take because the punishments cost less than they’ll profit.
I do not blame people for being fooled… because there’s always a scam good enough to fool even me. And I’m smart.
Well, you're correct on where the fault rests as long as the lies were willingly made, but in the scenario we're originally talking about the ultimate result you're ending up with is... Being an asshole. So, in this total fucked system of manipulation and marketing lies the justice you're pushing for is being an asshole on a forum. I don't really think that solves anything or justifies itself.
Don't think that I'm arguing that the company should get a free pass for any of this or that the company isn't at fault/isn't the system, the root of what I'm saying is that toxicity isn't really warranted when it's about buying a videogame that wasn't made well and didn't meet marketing expectations, and if you want to avoid being in a situation where you got burned buying a product that didn't meet your expectations, you can establish expectations closer to reality by doing smart research that is absolutely everywhere and easily obtained for free post-release. Being an asshole to a developer as a whole targets people that fundementally aren't at fault, which is what allows companies to pull the whole "people don't feel safe" card when public relations toxicity gets out of hand. A small part of that can be true, and doesn't help our case.
Some people will fall for it, yes, and awareness helps reach people that aren't going out of their way to research what they're buying, but you can raise awareness and make a scene about this stuff in a mature fashion. I'm in no way saying we shouldn't make a stink about situations like this, it's how you do it.
While I don't think that being an asshole about something is a reasonable response, I find it a very understandable response, especially about subjects like this. Regardless of how "turn the other cheek" I happen to be personally, the issues surrounding video game marketing are pretty large, and this sort of cycle of selling a product that doesn't match its marketed features and level of polish happens far more than it should.
The only thing I feel bad about when it comes to agreeing with your outlook is that there totally are developers who technically work for the parent company receiving toxicity, but had nothing to do with deciding how polished the game could be at release, what top level features the game could receive, or how the game could be marketed, but still end up receiving toxicity for the state of the game because they still are the devs, and if you go down the path of "getting out of the game" when it comes to those people, they may not have ever known it would end up that way when they took the job, or they may need that job to survive.
That grey area is the one part that gives me pause, and it's the reason I think companies at large pull that card, because you can never prove that the public isn't hurting innocents, and even though you could look at a case like this, establish that you can't see any toxicity or death threats in forums, and decide that the company is lying about toxicity existing at all, they may have deleted those posts, continuing to muddy the waters.
It's just a fucked up situation all round and there's no black and white answer to it, for me. I think being a manager at my job has hard taught me that sinking to someone's level when it comes to emotional response is absolutely never a good idea, and that's bled out to other areas of my life, but I can understand your outlook and agree to disagree on how we'd react to this situation individually.
You kinda have to think that though. You tried to argue that no other industry has the same problem, therefore this is unforgivable. So by following your own logic, it seems like because others do it as well it means it’s not unforgivable, it’s just the standard response. Very much a normal reaction to being fed shit by yet another corpo that expects you to compliment the taste.
Professional sports leagues are another example. Put a shit product on the field, you’re going to get shit back from the fans. Every now and then a young star player comes up (especially in American football) that received adulation for years at the college level and suddenly gets faced with jeers. They react like Colossal Order does here and–eventually–learn that they are picking a fight against collective emotional response that they are never going to win.
CO is learning that lesson now. While they can and should take actions against those that cross the line (death threats, etc.), there’s not much in the way of effective corrective action here. It’s all on them. They can a) put out a better product, b) hire community managers with thicker skin that can better assuage their fans, or c) withdraw from community interaction. Most that can’t handle it pick the third option.
What? You’re not hurting only the devs here (though, it still wouldn’t be okay to hurt the devs in the first place).
Let’s be honest here. Cities Skylines 2 community is so toxic it’s actually a burden even for players. The Steam forums and most online places dedicated to the game are full of entitled people who, instead of going for another game, spend their days shitting on it. Even going as far as jumping over people actually enjoying the game. That’s what toxicity means. And you can find any excuse you want, it’s not a sane behaviour.
I’m surprised they didn’t see this coming. A lot of people had high expectations because of the impact the first game had and if it wasn’t better in every way there was bound to be some negative feedback.
They’re not complaining about negative feedback, are they? They’re complaining about the internet hate machine, which we should be mature enough here to admit is a bunch of juvenile, masturbatory bullshit from people that want to feel good about themselves without doing anything to actually earn that, and so just shit mercilessly in every way on anything they don’t like, because bullying others is a quick and easy way to feel strong for a brief time.
Isn’t that just a more extreme version of negative feedback?
The post the article is talking about does mention toxicity in the community and hints at it being directed at the devs but how much of that is people debating and talking about gripes they have with the game versus crude personal attacks?
All I was saying is this game received a lot of attention and hype so I felt like this was kind of an inevitably. They were never going to please everyone.
No, things becoming more extreme versions of themselves frequently alters their overall effects. To exaggerate to make my point clear, isn’t mass murder just an extreme form of target shooting?
Trying to identify something without taking its real effects into account is rather silly.
I get it but I feel like a vast majority of the criticism they are getting doesn’t fall under the extreme category or into bullying.
Some people might be making Gmanlives-style quips in the Steam reviews that might make themselves feel good but I think a majority of it’s just general disappointment and people expressing it.
“[It’s] not only directed towards our devs but also our fellow community members - resulting in people hesitating to engage with the community,” Hallikainen explained.
Yeah I think that goes with people voicing their disappointment. It’s like with Fallout 76 a lot of the community was split on it. Even now defending it can lead to dog piling.
People are debating in the community. It might not make for a super fun place to be that’s kind of just the reality of it for now.
Fallout 76 was also an unbelievable shitshow, and had very, very few honest defenders. Does it have to go full gamergate for you think its a problematic situation or something? Try to remember there’s a distinction between reasoned debate, like what you and I are doing right now, and trolling. Which I’m sure we could both switch to if we felt like it.
Criticism, for it to be useful, does have certain delivery requirements. The critic, in order to not be shit, has a certain responsibility to their criticism.
Now, gamers are a tough bunch. If a community is losing community, I think we can make some inferences about whats going on, and it’s probably not a bunch of well-reasoned and nuanced debate.
Try to remember there’s a distinction between reasoned debate, like what you and I are doing right now, and trolling. Which I’m sure we could both switch to if we felt like it.
Criticism, for it to be useful, does have certain delivery requirements. The critic, in order to not be shit, has a certain responsibility to their criticism.
I don’t think the bar is that high or that a majority of the negative discussion falls under bullying. It’s a lot of people disappointed in a game and voicing their frustration.
Saying a game sucks and has no redeeming qualities and encouraging them to get a refund when they ask for any kind of tech support for it on Reddit is kind of unoriginal and lazy but I don’t think that classifies as bullying.
For example this is from Reddit about someone liking the game. You get good responses like this
Subjectively or objectively?
Objectively it’s far from what they’ve promised, full of bugs and hardly optimized.
It’s also a promising platform that could evolve into an objectively amazing game somewhere down the road.
If you — subjectively — enjoy it in its current state that’s great!
But you do get some less constructive comments like
I bought CS2 and it’s utter shit.
But now I feel like a sucker to open CS1 again.
End result: I gave up on Cities Skyline completely. May fall out of habit of playing it at all.
CS2 could, but not certainly, be the death of the franchise if more people act like me
And
I could name a hundred things off the top of my head that could be better in this game. I still have a hundred hours though
Even sorting by controversial on Reddit it’s really not that bad. It sounds like there are some posts being removed but a majority of it is people voicing their frustration with modding support taking so long to implement and the game feeling like it’s lacking in some department.
Does it have to go full gamergate for you think its a problematic situation or something?
I feel like were going in circles here. I already acknowledged that there are going to be people that take it to the extreme and that’s wrong but it’s a very percentage of people.
Now, gamers are a tough bunch. If a community is losing community, I think we can make some inferences about whats going on, and it’s probably not a bunch of well-reasoned and nuanced debate.
I disagree. You see communities around games slow down all the time when new games, updates, and DLC steal the spotlight. A lot of the time you just need to wait for things to shift in a different direction. In the meantime people are going to sporadically talk about how they feel about the game and debate updates that come out.
Ah, I didn’t realize you were mainly going off the subreddit, that makes more sense now. Reddit in general tends to have a milder tone compared to most internet spaces, in my experience. I imagine they’re talking about the Paradox Interactive official forums, which can have a more hardcore tone overall, pretty often I’d say. I actually tend to avoid them for that reason, despite being a pdx fan in general.
Even then can you think of some examples from their forum? Going to it myself is feeding my error messages likely due to my VPN or browser configuration
I’d really rather not dig through looking for the trolling to copy/paste. I’m not a cities skylines 2 player, so I don’t really have a horse in this race, except hating toxic internet bullshit in general.
Yeah I think expectations are too high, where people expected a perfect game like cities skylines forgetting that when it launched it was also a very rocky start.
Gamers in general are just very entitled, and very unforgiving
Nah man, that’s just entitlement. Wanting your $50 game to work well when you buy it is peak entitlement, you should be happy your game is running at 10fps with your 4080 RTX.
It wasn’t polished yes, graphics were not great and people were justified being disappointed and returning it if they felt like it was game breaking
But the vitriol is what I mean, the pure hate, the threats to developers, the anger thrown at them. That is what I’m referring to. If some graphical issues make you so mad that you need to literally threaten people then I think you shouldn’t game anymore. That’s where I say entitled and anger issues.
There’s always going to be a small group of people who take things too far once a game gets popular enough. I don’t think it’s right but I’d say it’s to be expected
I think people expected a CS2 with at least some of the cS1 dlc as standard (at least parks) instead we got a base game and then told there wouldn’t be a mod loader and we couldn’t use the steam library. That’s effectively nuked the ability for the community to “fix” the game.
The difference is that nobody was paying attention to CS1 until after a couple patches were released and the game picked up momentum as it was improved and more fleshed out.
Not all that surprising honestly. Starfield is going to be Bethesda's focus and main talking point for a few years at least. And who knows how many games are scheduled between it and ES6, whenever it comes out. Given that Bethesda generally likes a short window between reveal and release I'm wondering just how much they regret teasing a game that might not release for another three or four years.
techradar.com
Gorące