Romer Openfield wrote:
There is complaining, and there is criticism. They are on opposite poles. Suffering the non-constructive complainers is not the way to go. They should be put in their place and ignored if they continue. Criticism can't be stated non-emotionally without guidelines and definitions by which to judge. But can you recognize the difference and deal effectively with either a complaint or a criticism?
What suffering is there? The concept of complainers being tiring is simply because people wish to stop those complaints. I can live with people speaking their mind, regardless of how they do it.
Quote:
I think the major problem is that many of us lack adequate diplomatic people-skills here, in writing, in this forum. There is little way to make your points strongly, or wield enough authority to get respect for point of view. Some try very long posts, other try large words, some try bullying, and most don't know grammar, punctuation, or spelling. Plus the Ego often gets in the way. Some of you, even the most "seasoned" and level-headed, lace your comments with slight sarcasm or elitist attitudes and self-righteousness. And most of you cop to how long you've been with this game and how much you've "seen."
This isn't a surprise. The way to deal with this (in my opinion) is not to make mechanisms and authority, but let people speak. So what if someone says "This game sucks and so do you". Are we going to reply with the equivalent of "you suck too!"? Or are we better than that? If we are truly a greater community than those of violent games (which I think we are), then let us not use their destructive methods and instead persevere. What harm will come from arguing people on their points and not their intent? I'm not suggesting that we reply to every critic with "Thank you for your concern!
". I'm suggesting we base our arguments in what can be done and not on tearing down the critic.
Quote:
You know all of this. I'm as guilty as anyone. But we have to get over ourselves and focus on the product (Ages) and develop a more professional approach to it and to cooperative efforts. This isn't like organizing a parade. You need bosses and workers, and ultimately someone to hurt feelings by deciding what lives, what dies, and what needs to be rewritten.
Yes, we ain't seen nothing yet. Wait until we start criticizing each other's amateurish Ages. Most people who create anything feel it is good and precious. This is a nightmarish situation, but it has to be dealt with honestly and frankly. Rejection is difficult to bear, especially for amateurs in an emotional game like this. Feelings will be hurt, and power struggles will erupt. Heck, we had major problems with what Cyan created! When our own efforts begin to fall under critical scrutiny, I'm hiding.
One salve to all this might be a set of simple, clear standards all new Ages must meet. Perhaps 5 key points we could all refer to when discussing the merits of new Ages up for review. The details our experienced Writers can deal with and tweak. The new creations can be judged mostly on a set of facts, not personal opinion or emotions. There are many other ways to organize healthy development without hurting feelings. Perhaps you're already aware of all this.
I guess, overall, I think this thread just states the obvious, as does my post here. But, unlike ever before, we need to prepare and plan how we will deal with the good, the bad, and the ugly. I mean, really, truly put a plan on paper, if not a Constitution of sorts. But a simple plan, with rules, leaders, perhaps a judge and jury, and with go-to people for all sorts things. We need leadership and guidance and answers we can accept from sources we respect. If we have that, I believe the game will take care of itself.
I think the solution is not more laws and structures on dealing with complaints. I think the solution lies in letting people voice their criticisms and seeing where people think the game needs improvement. Of course basic things such as a game not dependent on the player killing or the lack of sexual themes should be kept. But the vast majority of "complainers" voice other concerns such as sustainability which we need to be thinking about.
On your five guidelines. For Age review there needs to only be two considerations (in my opinion): The Terms of Service, and bugs. Therein lies the key to this. Do we go against what even the Maintainers want and introduce "quality" as a guideline to age writing? Do we spawn hurt feelings for the benefit of... what? Or do we focus on what can be? The only way you get people's feelings hurt is by judging the "quality" of their work.
Nalates wrote:
I also am not sure what he hopes to ACTUALLY accomplish with the post.
To stop people from alienating other players because they have complaints. To help the game grow and get better.
Quote:
One of my psych professors had a simple rule. If you are going to complain, only complain to the person that can do something about it. If you are going to complain to that person, provide one or more solutions to your complaint. If you cannot meet both of those concepts, keep it to yourself. Basically, suck it up or woman up (or man up as the case may be). As zander_nyrond’s example of the The Cleft vs Relto is a decent example of rational debate, preference, reason why, and what one would like to see.
And not everyone is a professor of psychology and, unless your profressor is really good, I'd be willing to bet Uru that he went against his own advice at least once. We are all only human and we all have times when we simply wish to complain. But that withstanding, with MORE if someone complains on the forums then they are complaining to someone who can do something about it (us!) and those suggestions should be argued on their merits and not on their intent. So what if someone wants to try and bring Uru down with constant disgust at what they see? You think they can do that? You think they convince over a thousand people that the game they believe in passionately is wrong and deserves to die? I don't. Because if there's one thing I know, it's that this community will never give up on this game. Oh sure our intensity will wax and wane, but it'll never go on its own. We'll be here 'till the lights go out for good. Until Cyan falls apart or the Miller brothers either move on over time or grow old and pass on. This community will never stop, and if anyone thinks they can do otherwise then let's show them they have another thing coming and make this place stronger every time.
Quote:
Gondar wants to complain without providing suggestions. He has a right to in free countries. He wants there to be a GOOD reason for the complaint. But I don’t see the point if there is no solution. Nor do I think people have any idea of what a GOOD reason might be. Why complain about the moon being made of rock and not cheese or the sky being blue? I like cheese and I think that is a good enough reason. But what will a complaint get me?
That would be true if what was being discussed were as fixed as the substance of the moon or the color of the sky, but it's not. Not usually. When was the last time you saw someone suggest something really impossible (well, ignoring my idea
)? When have you seen anyone ask where the weapons are? People know who we are, they know what we stand for and they respect that (the majority, at least). Look at the people who doubt MORE can succeed now. They say they loved Myst and Riven and the universes Cyan made. They say they're so happy that we've gotten another chance, but they don't think it'll work. They're fine people who (I think) will be proven wrong. And if that day comes, I don't doubt that most will come in and see what we've been up to and be amazed.
Quote:
We have a choice to support free choice and personal responsibility or attempt to preempt and control. I prefer the former and believe the latter is a sure path to frustration and dictatorship or fascism. So, can we stop people from complaining in inappropriate and non-productive ways? In my world that is a solid no. Attempting to do so is an assault of personal freedom. So, I will live with it happening for the sake of freedom and I can decide how I wish to respond or not.
Agreed. I hope no one is thinking of some way to stop complaints deemed irrelevant. That way is far beyond what I'm talking about.
Quote:
Whilyam’s recognizing those with perpetually negative comments and ‘demanding’ some positive contribution from them is completely reasonable. I vote for all of us adopting some measure of a similar philosophy. While ‘demanding’ would not fit with my world view, I have no trouble challenging their consistent negativity. However, in practical reality it is never easy and never without conflict, which seems to be the natural state of humans. I take it that Whilyam is attempting to head off that conflict.
I'm demanding nothing. If you want to come in and rant then that should be your right. I'm only asking that we focus on the positives of what we can do. What is at the core of their anger and how can we resolve it? Can we resolve it? Most of the time it is and only needs work done on it. Work that has been quelled and stifled for years. What you see of the community is only a fraction of what is possible if we truly open up.
Quote:
On the side of those pointing out obvious problems, mistakes, blind spots, etc… sometimes we have to decide if responders are reacting emotionally to having their beliefs or desires challenged or if we are seeing their comments through our biased and prejudicial perspectives and moving into an emotional rather than thoughtful response. Our responses often say much more about us than the target of our comments. Who we hang with and whose viewpoints we adopt says something about both parties…
When zander_nyrond says, ‘I am not a moron, my glasses are not rose-colored and my reactions are not knee-jerk’, I have to concede that from time to time I do stupid, my world view gets colored by desire, and I occasionally mean person/people a knee.

I hate it when that happens. I do it and it is part of life and I believe we all do it to some measure from time to time. I believe we have to decide EACH TIME if our ego is insisting our glasses are clear, when the rest of the world can see they are not… Knowing which is which and when is the trick. So, I try to cut everyone ample slack.
And keep in mind I am not saying anyone is bad for not being some perfect angel and being nice and smiling at all times. No one does that. The only people who smile broadly 24/7 are in insane asylums. I only hope people will keep these thoughts in mind and let it help them truly stay positive. Because the greater form of "positiveness" is not just being positive about Uru, but also reflecting positively on other people. And that does so much more.
Quote:
With Gondar I concede he has the right to complain without solutions or suggestions.

I disagree that it may serve any useful purpose for the community and take zander_nyrond’s points (a) and (b). And while Joey Zoonishii sounds a bit elitist on ‘properly reasoned discourse’ I can’t knock his point. But I love crunching the eggshells of which he writes. However, I believe ‘reasoned argument’ and passionate beliefs (emotionally vibrant) are NOT mutually exclusive. Passion and enthusiasm are a measure of sincerity and core belief. When the emotions cut off reason, the argument is lost (think name callers).
I believe solutions and suggestions can come out of criticisms like that. It doesn't matter if a critic doesn't have the answer, someone else may. But if the only response is "this isn't the game for you" "go play WoW' then those solutions are never voiced and it remains without them. I believe that you can be passionate about something and still think reasonably but I also think that it's a balance.
Quote:
When Whilyam says, ‘Make this game better and don't alienate people’ I agree with better. But avoiding alienating people… if Whilyam means by our behavior, yes. Even a very BIG YES.
Yes, that's what I am talking about. But it's very important because our behavior is what helps mold our opinion of what someone is and that can lead to a rush to judgment and a stifling.