Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
  

The time now is Mon Nov 18, 2024 8:10 pm
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)		 View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Meta » General META Discussion
[META] The perception of unfiction
Moderators: imbri, ndemeter
View previous topicView next topic
Page 1 of 3 [41 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2, 3 Next
Author Message
rose
...and then Magic happens


Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Posts: 4117

 		[META] The perception of unfiction
If you were at ARGfest you may have heard some discussion about our creating a conference for advertising and media executives as a possible way to raise revenue to sustain unfiction and ARGFest. I've been doing some very preliminary background work for this conference.

As part of this background work I've been very surprised, to put it mildly, at the extent of the perception of unfiction as a negative place. The overall general feeling is that unfiction is unduly critical of games, particularly new games.

My understanding is that the "official" unfiction position, to the extent there is one, is that unfiction is a player resource with a neutral position on games. We are a sort of Switzerland where anyone can join in and play a game. Unfortunately, the outside perception is that we aren't neutral. Speaking again generally, the perception is that the overall tone can be too negative, judgmental and harsh.

A part of the basis for this perception are the negative comments made before a game has launched, or while it is just starting, and the comments made by people who haven't even played or attempted to play the game. Players may say things like "this isn't an ARG so I'm not playing it" or "I played [insert name of company here]'s games before and I didn't like them, so I'm not playing this one", etc. (These are just made-up examples.) Similar comments continue while the game is playing, and, again are often made by people who aren't playing the game or are basing their criticisms on false assumptions.

I don't think anyone expects only positive comments from players. But I think the feeling is, in part, that new games aren't even given a chance to get started here.

I, personally, as a player, disagree with the assessment of unfiction as negative. I see this community as filled with helpful and supportive people whom I admire, respect and care a great deal about. But, I've never looked at the community from the outside as a marketer or an advertiser.

What I can say is that, rightly or wrongly, this overall general perception of unfiction as unfairly negative is out there. My feeling is that this perception isn't to our benefit. So, we might want to think about what we want to do about it.

I decided the first step was to let the community know this perception exists. I don't think we should ignore it, I do have some more ideas I am thinking through, and I am very interested to know what other players think. I think the reasons behind this perception need further discussion as well.

So, thoughts?
_________________
I love this site for being free, in every sense of the word~Spacebass

Mankind was my business, the common good was my business.~ Dickens

PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 6:13 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
xnbomb
Unfettered


Joined: 13 Oct 2003
Posts: 660
Location: J302B S8JDC

 		Re: [META] The perception of unfiction
rose wrote:
If you were at ARGfest you may have heard some discussion about our creating a conference for advertising and media executives as a possible way to raise revenue to sustain unfiction and ARGFest. I've been doing some very preliminary background work for this conference.

As part of this background work I've been very surprised, to put it mildly, at the extent of the perception of unfiction as a negative place. The overall general feeling is that unfiction is unduly critical of games, particularly new games.


It is difficult to address someone's concerns when it's not clear who that someone may be. This matters when it comes to understanding their point of view, and how their perception is shaped by that point of view. I can surmise from your first paragraph that you're talking about advertising and media executives, so I'll proceed on that basis.

I might start by guessing at why this perception this exists, or how widespread it is, but I'm going to leave that alone for the moment. Let me key in on a particular word used above, namely unduly. What, in the mind of the advertising and media executives in question, represents undue criticism? Does criticism and opinion have to possess certain characteristics before it is undue? Or is it any criticism that, from my presumed advertising and media executives' points of view, hurts the chances of their work being well received?

rose wrote:
My understanding is that the "official" unfiction position, to the extent there is one, is that unfiction is a player resource with a neutral position on games. We are a sort of Switzerland where anyone can join in and play a game. Unfortunately, the outside perception is that we aren't neutral. Speaking again generally, the perception is that the overall tone can be too negative, judgmental and harsh.


I think the reality is much better and much worse than that. Beyond the stuff spelled out in the Terms of Service, my understanding is that there isn't much of an "official" unfiction position on anything. That includes not telling posters what they can or cannot write (again, provided that it doesn't violate the TOS). The forums are a context where free speech is at its finest and worst, spanning the entire spectrum from richly deserved, glowing praise to totally unjustified, close-minded critique.

rose wrote:
A part of the basis for this perception are the negative comments made before a game has launched, or while it is just starting, and the comments made by people who haven't even played or attempted to play the game. Players may say things like "this isn't an ARG so I'm not playing it" or "I played [insert name of company here]'s games before and I didn't like them, so I'm not playing this one", etc. (These are just made-up examples.) Similar comments continue while the game is playing, and, again are often made by people who aren't playing the game or are basing their criticisms on false assumptions.


Here are some specific characteristics of criticism that might be unduly rendered: A rush to judgment, of anything really, is perhaps unfair. A judgment based on past experience is perhaps slightly less unfair, because it is actually based less on assumptions and more on how someone feels about what they presume to be a previous, similar experience, but that reasoning presumes that the future will be like the past, which isn't always the case. A judgment that is uninformed, such as one by a poster who isn't actually playing a game, is quite unfair.

I am stating the obvious in the above paragraph. But I have done so for a reason; namely that I'd like to think that readers of these forums are intelligent, critical consumers of information who know these obvious things. When they see someone posting criticism, I'd like to think that they assess its merit when forming their own opinion. I think readers of these forums can distinguish between criticism that is unfounded (whether it is because it is premature, based on false analogy, or uninformed) and that which has some justification with which they agree.

rose wrote:
I don't think anyone expects only positive comments from players. But I think the feeling is, in part, that new games aren't even given a chance to get started here.

I, personally, as a player, disagree with the assessment of unfiction as negative. I see this community as filled with helpful and supportive people whom I admire, respect and care a great deal about. But, I've never looked at the community from the outside as a marketer or an advertiser.


Games aren't given a chance here by whom or what? One of the really interesting things about thinking about the membership of a forum (and the posts that they write) is that we can think of the unfiction forums as a unitary thing (i.e. here, in the sense you use above) and as the collection of diverse individuals who all have their own opinions and the freedom to express them as they see fit. If some people are unduly critical in their posts about games, does that make all of unfiction unduly critical?

We can individually express and agree that we do or don't think people should be hasty, unconsidered, or ill-informed when they form their opinions and express them. But, we don't really have any mechanism whatsoever for preventing people from expressing whatever it is that they want to express, and that is by design (by my reading of the TOS and how it is enforced here).

So, I can say that in theory I agree with you, and it would be wonderful if we can make this a place with which advertising and media executives can be more comfortable, by somehow ratcheting down the amount of undue criticism (taken, for example, to be criticism that is premature, based on false analogy, or uninformed). But in practice, it's important to recognize that opinions are not suppressed here. And what follows on from that is that I would like to think that if someone posts criticism that is unfounded in one of the ways listed above, that someone else would point that out.

rose wrote:
What I can say is that, rightly or wrongly, this overall general perception of unfiction as unfairly negative is out there. My feeling is that this perception isn't to our benefit. So, we might want to think about what we want to do about it.

I decided the first step was to let the community know this perception exists. I don't think we should ignore it, I do have some more ideas I am thinking through, and I am very interested to know what other players think. I think the reasons behind this perception need further discussion as well.


Here's one odd thing that leaps to my mind here: I wonder if the notion that the general perception of unfiction as unfairly negative isn't itself something we could examine as potentially being unduly critical? Or, to put it another way, can we determine that this particular criticism of unfiction is legitimate, and that posters' criticisms of games are not? We can try to apply criteria for whether or not someone can justify their perception to our satisfaction if we'd like, but our criteria are not likely to be taken as objective, and we cannot necessarily change anyone's mind.
_________________
My location is a little tricky, but sooner or later, you'll get the knack.

{J302B S8JDC, 8996N M8L4W, 92D40 Q1JX5, 4PPRN R2B97, 8DC7C NZJNV, 8CH7V Q891H}

PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 9:14 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
notgordian
Unfictologist


Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 1383
Location: Philly

 		I think partially the discomfort involves uncertainty with Gonzo Marketing--which, from the advertiser/marketer's point of view, the UF forums would be if there was sponsorship.

The inherent danger there is the relinquishment of control and the necessity of involvement. On corporate-run discussion sites, you know the people visiting it will generally be there because they like the product. Here at UF, people are interested in the medium, and might not have a forged relationship with the brand. Thus, there's more of a risk of negative comments

For gonzo marketing, it's usually customary to have employees as go-to people in the forums--not as a way of shilling--but as someone to seek out for advice in their publicly admitted specialty. And that takes a bit of a manpower commitment, unless employees are hobbyists themselves. Part of the reason we have such positive relations with some of the "big-name" ARG developers at the moment is because they are also members of the community.

But those are both things that are functions of third-party forum discussion in general rather than UF specifically. Honestly, I would assume the leeriness would be from the other end of the spectrum--the grassroots game producers--as the main negativity I see on the site is complaining about countdown clocks, GAIMs, and ARGs that are just a string of ciphers without content. People seem to get genuinely excited and spread buzz any time a corporate account like Pirates of the Carribean, CourtTV, or Microsoft Vista comes out.

The notable exception is, as Rose noted, the arguments that often occur with "is this an ARG" or "is this something else". Honestly, that's going to get discussed no matter what--maybe the solution would be to set aside a section / thread in the forums to debate those issues (and continually hone the definition of ARG) so it doesn't impose on the game being played.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 10:48 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
Rekidk
Entrenched


Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 992
Location: Indiana, USA

 		We, the players, are constantly 'reviewing' an ARG as we play it. If there is something unlikable about a game, we make it known. However, we also praise positive things.

Of course, there will always be those who make uninformed comments. However, those criticisms should not be taken seriously, just as "omg dis video sux" comments on YouTube are ignored.

As for players not wanting to play something because it's a GAME instead of an ARG, I don't think that's really true. Look at all of the participation in Save My Husband and the Pirates of the Caribbean games.

However, there has to be the expectation that if a PM puts out a poor product, the players have the right to (and will) criticize it.

Just a quick note from my POV: In the few months I've been here, it's never occurred to me that we were overly critical (except for the handful of 'omg dis sux').

Basically... I just repeated in less intelligent language what you guys already said. XD
_________________
iTube - iTweet - iNetwork

PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:26 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
catherwood
I Have 100 Cats and Smell of Wee

Joined: 25 Sep 2002
Posts: 4109
Location: Silicon Valley, CA

 		Re: [META] The perception of unfiction
(and of course i wrote a respond before reading all of the replies first -- xnb pretty much took the same approach as I started, but i'll leave my thoughts here anyway. cheers!)

rose wrote:
What I can say is that, rightly or wrongly, this overall general perception of unfiction as unfairly negative is out there.


Before I begin to comment -- and you all know how much I love a good meta discussion -- I would like clarification on whose perceptions you are pointing out to us. You're talking to marketing directors, advertising campaign managers, and that sort? I would be surprised to learn that they have any perception of Unfiction at all, because I would have thought that most of them still don't know what an ARG is, let alone the fact that there is a well-established community which seeks them out.

Case in point: CourtTV and SaveMyHusband.com -- I found a news article (linked from deep within the upper bowels of the trailhead thread) which clearly gives the impression that these are first-timer PMs, with an innocence about how people use the internet. Obviously they didn't know who we are and what we are capable of -- but they sure do now! Whether or not they like us, or even understand us, is it fair that they might have a negative opinion of us rather than being impressed with our talents? gah, major meta discussion itching to branch off from here...

Anyway, it might be helpful to give us some examples of how these negative perceptions are being communicated to you. Were these opinions formed quickly or developed over time? Are they in fact *correct* in their assessment of the situation? At the very least, I'm curious how broad of a sample has been polled to come to this conclusion. Thanks.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:30 am
 View user's profile AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
 Back to top 
imbriModerator
Entrenched


Joined: 21 Sep 2002
Posts: 1182
Location: wonderland

 		I'm sure I'll have more to add to this at some point. But I want to back Rose up here. I run into these same thoughts quite frequently - from ARG developers to potential clients. However, I don't know that if it's a negative attitude towards unfiction or the hard core audience or a combination of both. (likely a combination of both with a whole lot of other stuff thrown in).

Keep in mind, people are looking for/hoping for an audience of more than just a few hundred or a few thousand. That's especially true for ad guys. If and when unfiction hits a game, it instantly becomes that much more difficult for a broader audience to become involved. Who are you designing for - if you design for the hardcore & more active players, you risk alienating your casual players and some of the lurkers. If you ignore them, you risk losing more lurkers because the active players (and their discussions) often serve as a way to stay up to speed.

But, unfiction - especially those of us that have been around for a while - has a very specific pattern of game play and how to play an ARG. I don't have the time to hunt through and find examples of good threads, but you've all seen them pop up in various games. Jamesi had a classic one way back when...

step 1: see the site
step 2: view source
step 3: check source
(etc)

But it does go beyond this. We expect and even look for various cliches. And, if/when games don't look and feel as unfiction players expect them to, there is a resistance to them (sometimes small, sometimes unsurmountable). I don't know that there's anything wrong with this, really. You like what you like. But it might be something to keep in mind during this discussion. Not everybody likes what we like. Not everybody has the same expectations of what an ARG is and should be. That's true here on these forums and, once you step outside of unfiction, there's even more variation.

The biggest reason that I "dislike" (gasp) unfiction as a developer is that I find it is really difficult to create game-centric communities here. The process of discovering how to collaborate and work together really helps to solidify the player community and it is through much of that "downtime activity" that the culture of that community is formed. There is a solid community here and, no matter how welcoming we are, that is a barrier. As much as I hate (hate!) forum based games, it is a fairly easy way to pull much of the game play away from unfiction and provide an opportunity for a game centered community.

Also, while I'm bitching about unfiction, we've gotten lazy. Back when I was participating in the netcast, much of my time was spent digging through threads and trying to get a grasp on what was happening in various games - failing and then hunting down players and sending private messages to players in order to get more info. I don't know if I'm romanticizing the past, but it seems like maintaining guides and trails and providing clear information on what was going on was a larger priority. Not just to keep information straight for those playing the game, but also as a way to help attract and be inviting to new players. Granted, I will admit that this has changed to a degree since the fall, so kudos. But, still, it lingers.

More thoughts later maybe. I just wanted to throw out the idea that it's not all about us being too critical. I think it's more of fear and frustration that comes from having to deal with the unfiction audience and how to balance all of that with your design. And, as arteeests, why should we/they have to change our stuffs just to appeal to one website when there are so many others out there?

/random pre-coffee thoughts

PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 5:03 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
bagsbee
Unfettered


Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 417
Location: NYC

 		This is something that has been weighing on my mind for some time, I was starting to wonder when rose would start a META discussion about it Smile

I'd like to take some more time to digest what's been posted here so far, as well as clearly and articulately (I think that's a word) formulate my thoughts on the overall topic, but a few quick points:

- rose is 100% right - the perception is out there. I have heard it straight from the horse's mouth, from "UF is always so negative about everything" to "I just don't want to deal with those guys", the "horse" in this case being everyone from game developers, to ad/marketing people, to players.

- saying the perception is "unfair" isn't addressing the issue.

- I'm well aware that the overwhelming majority of UFers are smart, funny, wonderful, creative, generous & helpful people. I've been to the last 3 ARGFests, I can personally attest to that fact. But there is an undertone of....and I'll try to be diplomatic here... elitism from some of the members, which tends to manifest itself as negativity. Negativity can and does spread like wildfire, even in a more enlightened forum like UF.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:16 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
 Back to top 
rose
...and then Magic happens


Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Posts: 4117

 		I too am going to read and think about the posts here some more before I respond. I hope that we can get a good discussion started. I don't expect this to be a popular topic and I hesitated to bring it up, but I did want to see what the community has to say about this.

As for the people who have this opinion, I would say it runs the gamut of people who might want to make or fund games, but I would never claim to have made a comprehensive or exhaustive search. My purpose for talking to them at all had nothing to do with their views of unfiction - finding out about how they feel about unfiction, and imbri is right it probably includes "hard-core" players not just unfiction, was a surprising by-product.

My purpose in starting this thread was to bring awareness that perhaps what we are doing doesn't benefit us in the long run. If we create some kind of barrier or resistance to people launching new games, I think that hurts us as players and hurts the genre.

I wouldn't overestimate our importance in the gaming world, but I think it would be a mistake to say we don't have any effect or that we don't matter at all.

I also think that if we as players are co-creators of the game while it is being played, then maybe we should consider bearing some of the responsibility for building up the genre.
_________________
I love this site for being free, in every sense of the word~Spacebass

Mankind was my business, the common good was my business.~ Dickens

PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 1:44 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
vpisteve
Asshatministrator


Joined: 30 Sep 2002
Posts: 2441
Location: 1987
rose wrote:
If we create some kind of barrier or resistance to people launching new games, I think that hurts us as players and hurts the genre.


Can I disagree here, for a sec? I'm going to speak from the perspective of someone who, while being one of the charter members of unfiction, also works and sees things from the game developer/marketer side of things.

First, in regards to Rose's above statement, I'm sorry but it's really not unfiction's responsibility (as individual members or a community as a whole) to help developers launch their games. That's not the issue at all. The big issue is this: Game developers should NOT be building their games just for unfiction; they should be building something for as broad a player base as possible. It's a scalability issue, and if the design is targeted at mostly unfiction, it's broken (in my opinion). Unfiction is but a fraction of many huge communities on the internet, each with their own style and personality. While true that unfiction can help jumpstart a game, to say that this one board has the power to snuff a game out of existence before it can even get going is really just an attempt to blame someone else for bad game design (and yes, to be blunt, this goes for grassroots/independent games as well as "corporate" ones).

Unfiction is what it is. Some folks are great and welcoming, while others may get a little overzealous about "the way we do things" at times. I mean geez, you can get wildly different impressions just by reading one thread as opposed to another. Now while I don't doubt that the perspective Rose is relaying exists, I honestly don't think it's something that needs to be fixed (even if it could be). Unfiction simply can't be all things to all people, nor should it try to be.

Here's the deal: While many games end up gravitating here, many just don't…and you know what? That's not a BAD thing. Just off the top of my head: Metacortechs started on countless Matrix communities, but the community center ended up here. LastCallPoker ended up here despite being launched broadly. But then look at ReGenesis, Art of the Heist, Lost Experience, Heroes360, VanishingPoint (yeah yeah, ARG?) and this Year Zero thing I've heard about. The bulk of the players played on NeoWin, in-game boards and blogs, Nine Inch Nails boards, etc. The fact is, there are a lot of communities following the same things we are, and sometimes with even larger numbers of active players, I might add. And I'll say it again: This is not a bad thing. Smile

So, from a game developer's/marketer's perspective: Unfiction shouldn't really matter in your high-level design (beyond the fact that you can rest assured that your tough Vignere will be deciphered). To talk metrics for a sec, let's say that your typical ARG audience consists of three broad categories. Just for the sake of argument, let's say Lurkers/Followers (75%), Casual Players (20%) and Core Players (5%). Guess who unfiction is, for the most part? Yep, Core Players may typically have a tendency to gravitate here, but even that's not 100% (see YearZero). Developers need to consider Unfiction A community, not THE community, and if that's the case, then Rose's assertion is really a non-issue. It's a design issue, NOT a community issue.

And lest I be accused of asserting that my beloved Unfiction is perfect, I'll say this from an unf admin perspective: For all you unfiction-ites and ARG ambassadors out there (and you know who you are), yeah, welcome people with open arms! Bake brownies for them, even! But then don't stick around and tell them about all the ingredients you used, how much experience you have baking or eating brownies, and how best to eat them. Just let them, you know, discover the wonderfulness of brownies and enjoy them in their own way!

I like mine warm with a big cold glass of milk! Wink
_________________
Making the world a better place, one less mime at a time.

PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 3:09 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
 Back to top 
Phaedra
Lurker v2.0


Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 4033
Location: Here, obviously

 		Amen.

I'll second what Imbri said about what's lost when a new community doesn't form around a game, and her combined dislike of and recognition of the usefulness of in-game forums in facilitating that, and the barriers having an established community interested in your game can create for that goal. But if developers are designing with Unfiction foremost in their minds, they're creating additional barriers to the sort of community creation and bonding that helps make an ARG magical. That sense of discovery takes new people -- when everyone playing a game already knows one another and is familiar with ARGs, it's very difficult (if it's even possible) to have that happen. It'd be a mistake not to realize that UF is out there and likely to take an interest in your game, and to keep the potential consequences of that interest in mind, but we shouldn't be the sole target audience.

But in the end, it doesn't really matter what game developers (or marketers) think of Unfiction. It doesn't really matter whether this is the central discussion forum for every ARG or ARGlike thing that comes along. What does matter -- as far as Unfiction's importance and survival is concerned -- is that this remains the preeminent general ARG forum. People may choose to play a game elsewhere, but they are still coming here in droves to check out whether a link they found is part of an ARG, to hang out with other people while they solve puzzles, to see if any interesting new games have sprung up, and so on.

Someday another community may come along that can beat UF at that sort of Ultimate ARG Generalist Status. But I don't think it's in danger of happening any time soon, and until there's actually real competition for that niche, I think this is largely irrelevant.
_________________
Voted Most Likely to Thread-Jack and Most Patient Explainer in the ILoveBees Awards.

World Champion: Cruel 2B Kind

PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 3:53 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
thebruce
Dances With Wikis


Joined: 16 Aug 2004
Posts: 6899
Location: Kitchener, Ontario

 		 
Sidenote: (feel free to ignore)

"This is not a bad thing"
...TINABATH?
ETA: wow, that seems so out of place =P
_________________
@4DFiction/@Wikibruce/Contact
ARGFest 2013 - Seattle! ARGFest.com

PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 4:23 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
krystyn
I Never Tire of My Own Voice


Joined: 26 Sep 2002
Posts: 3651
Location: Is not Chicago

 		Steve hit the nail on the head for me. ESPECIALLY ABOUT THE BROWNIES.

Re-read the bit about the brownies. That's good stuff.



I bake mine with string!
_________________
Alternate Currency
Stories and dreams, crossing my palm like silver.

xbl gamertag: krystyn

PostPosted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:52 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
enaxor
I Have No Life

Joined: 25 Feb 2003
Posts: 2395
Rose wrote:
As part of this background work I've been very surprised, to put it mildly, at the extent of the perception of unfiction as a negative place. The overall general feeling is that unfiction is unduly critical of games, particularly new games.


I'm a little concerned that this perception is so generalized. Just because a few are critical, doesn't mean they represent all 14,000+ members of the forum. I'm a bit put off by this. If I don't like a game, I generally don't play it, I don't make any remarks. On the other hand, if I'm playing a game created by a well known PM and I don't think it's quite up to par, I might make a comment or two, but I hope it's viewed as intended, as constructive criticism.

Bagsbee wrote:
I'm well aware that the overwhelming majority of UFers are smart, funny, wonderful, creative, generous & helpful people. I've been to the last 3 ARGFests, I can personally attest to that fact. But there is an undertone of....and I'll try to be diplomatic here... elitism from some of the members, which tends to manifest itself as negativity. Negativity can and does spread like wildfire, even in a more enlightened forum like UF.


I'm more concerned that new players/members to the genre think this way. I've seen and read some pretty snarky comments to those just joining in a game or in chat for the first time. If I'd been treated like some have been when I first joined, I'd have quit and never come back. I'm not saying I don't get frustrated and a little pissy myself, but I try to make an effort to at least appear to be nice. Wink
_________________
10/05/2007, 04/23/2009, 07/02/2015
The world is a much dimmer place.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 12:15 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
konamouse
Official uF Dietitian


Joined: 02 Dec 2002
Posts: 8010
Location: My own alternate reality

 		Yeah, but some strangers jump in and post pretty snarky comments themselves.

Most of us are polite, welcoming, directing the newbies, etc.

I play the games I like, I ignore the ones I don't like. If something is happening in a game I'm playing, I'll make a comment about likes & dislikes, the PMs can take my opinion for what they want. It's just *my* opinion (and does not reflect the position of uF whatsoever).

Do we need to have that disclaimer at the bottom of all of our posts???
_________________
'squeek'
r u a Sammeeeee? I am Forever!

PostPosted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 12:19 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
HaxanMike
Veteran


Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 76
Location: Brooklyn, NY

 		Chiming in as a fan and a developer, I agree with vpisteve, especially regarding how you think about your audience in the development process.

However, I will add that while Unfiction didn't ask to be an "ambassador of ARG," it arguably is the most visible community of players online and therefore what happens here tends to be weighted more in the minds of those on the outside.

I'm not suggesting that Unfiction needs to change in any way, but considering Unfiction's stature in the space it's a valid discussion with no right or wrong answer.
_________________
http://www.campfirenyc.com
http://www.twitter.com/mikemonello
http://electriceden.posterous.com
http://www.haxan.com

PostPosted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:57 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 3 [41 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2, 3 Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Meta » General META Discussion
Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group