The harsh dunking on Cyberpunk came both from how broken it was and how critics and game industry folks were treated when they wrote reviews about how broken the game was. It’s been a long time since I saw such a toxic launch of a game that lead to so much harassment of people who dared to criticize the game’s edgelord marketing and lackluster performance at launch. And that isn’t getting separated from the game for a long time, because CDPR courted that level of hype and investment year almost half a decade.
Feel like they were overly harsh on Cyberpunk. But coming from people who disliked Withcer 3 as a whole its not a surprise. W3 is legit one of the best games this gen and 5 years ago most of the staff Dismissed it completely and barely made Top 10.
I don't know, the game seem really thin and childish. Maybe it is fun, but it sounds underbaked.
I could not disagree more with Jeff's take on Facebook. At some point you have to ask yourself what is the price for continuing to have an account with an organization that is working fist in glove to destroy society by promoting violent fascism around the world, fomenting genocide, spreading disinformation to erode our elections, and helping militant thugs around the US harass BLM protesters and intimidate voters at the polls. That is the Facebook you are agreeing to stand with by continuing to use their retched services.
It doesn't matter that you're just one account among billions or that they'll find a way around the law to hoover up your data anyway. It's the message you send to everyone in your audience that you're a-okay with what they are and what they do. And for what? Some crappy preview coverage of a shitty VR headset when this site has zero interest in VR? Come the fuck on.
It's a pretty common "they've already won" sentiment. Kinda sucks.
It is just a problem that we can't solve without collective action, aka, the government passing laws with teeth to them.
Wasn't this same apology said not that long ago where they said they'd vet better?
Yes. But you will notice how they didn't say "We will be prefect in the future" but did say they would make mistakes in the future and try to correct them.
@ericsmith: Again, if you feel that it wasn't sufficient, I'm not the guy should should be talking to. There are plenty of ways to get in touch with the GB crew, and from experience, they do let folks know the criticism was received.
@mozzle: that has never been how the site has addressed this stuff. They speak about it like human beings, try to have a dialogue and make their intent clear. If you think that isn’t sufficient, I 100% know you can reach out to Vinny through the site and voice your concerns.
Firstly, I do appreciate how immediately the cast wanted to address the valid complaints of last week's podcast but, and I have only listened to the first 10 minutes so could be wrong, am I correct in that there was no actual apology from Abby? More a meticulous rebuttal of some of the broader points brought up in the comments of 277 and a plea to have faith in her character after the fact she fucked up. The response of her actual, personal error in platforming someone accused of abuse is wildly, vastly less passionate, less humble, and, in my read, less sincere than how she has rightly talked about social justice issues both broadly and personally when she isn't at fault.
Ultimately, the thing I find most disgusting is the swift manuevering from "I believe people" to "I'm not going to judge" when it required more introspection and humility.
You heard incorrectly. She said the podcast hurt people and she didnt want that. She admitted to failing at her goal of making an inclusive podcast. I think her intent is overwhelmingly clear and that she wished it hadn’t happened and would make it right if she could. She made a good faith effort screen the guests and didn’t find this stuff.
Also, these are not prepared remarks, so the language isn’t going to be prefect.
plan6's comments