site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 25, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It's to point out you don't get good at anything working on a single project for 10 years.

I'm pointing out that these game developers racked up feedback on their products at a much faster pace than game devs today who slave away on a single mediocre arena shooter for Sony for 10 years straight.

I dunno, Dwarf Fortress and UnReal World (no relation to the FPS series) suggest that forever projects can produce quality. The problem with Concord has less to do with Duke Nukem Forever Syndrome and more to do with "not reading the room" (i.e. the market: any corporation who shoved out a hero shooter with bland characters in an oversaturated market would have gotten egg on their face regardless of dev time, budget, or name branding).

And nowadays, you can slave away at a project for a good long time and get valuable feedback along the way: it's called Early Access. Even games that aren't on Steam can take advantage of this paradigm (again, see also: Itch. A good example would be the indie horror sandbox Voices of the Void, which has been worked on by a single dev and a couple of artists for a number of years, supported mainly by Patreon subscriptions).

I have such mixed feelings about early access. Or similar mechanisms of protracted public development.

On the one hand, yes, it provides that feedback I think a game developed for 10 years in private wouldn't get. On the other hand, it's just GaaS by another name, where so long as the game continues to sell the developer will keep incrementally adding onto his cash cow. I always think of that phrase "Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." Public development encourages the complete opposite of this, with more and more being piled onto an increasingly shaky gameplay frame until the whole thing teeters over under the weight of almost a decade of slapped on sub mechanics attempting to keep the game relevant on Steam's front page.