An observation

Astelon · 2019-05-15 17:09:41

jasonrohrer wrote:

But I am interested in the general phenomenon, and where it's coming from, and why it has changed.

I can't say what changed from your previous games since I know nothing about them, but what changed within OHOL is the direction, basically, and people who got used to the game as it is will obviously not like that. And the fact that you seem to not actually listen to what the players are saying when it comes to major changes. Then comes releasing content that fits a weird niche within the game (property fences) or that is completely unbalanced (swords). And going against what you advertised the game to be (instead of having people build civilization together, people are building their private properties - which don't actually contribute often to people working together - or going on crusades). You get the idea.

It happens to bigger studios aswell. Two particular cases I witnessed happened with Stellaris. The devs changed core aspects of the game at least twice since the game was released, and there was lots of negativity both on the forums and on steam. First time it was removing core mechanics in order to make improvements in certain directions (like "terrain" and static defenses) viable, but many people obviously didn't like that. Second time was requested by the players, but it was released in a hurry and the game was basically completely broken for many playstyles, and the team went on winter holidays right after. The devs would often stay in touch with the players, but that actually became rarer for a while due to the negativity on the forums, so it's laudable that you're still around talking with people. The difference is that the devs did come back to fix the broken stuff, and started implementing neat features, so the things cooled down. Ever since discussions regarding fences appeared though, there hasn't been enough not controversial stuff to stop people from complaining.

If you want the game to be enjoyable, there has to be a balance between the things you want and the things the players want.

MistressZues · 2019-05-15 17:18:02

I agree with you Jason, it baffles me to see how many people throw venom at you for suggesting something to be implemented or who rage at you for changing something in a game that YOU made not them YOU! This game is constantly changing nothing has to be a permanent change either, which cant be said about alot of games and every life is different, the game was made to reflect realism people have good days, bad days, great lives, shitty lives, an just ok lives that literally is life. I think your doing an amazing job and not many can boast the interactive community/developer rapport you have established. keep up the good work. Praise be Jason!

BlueDiamondAvatar · 2019-05-15 18:05:23

There are three reasons why I think you are getting more negative feedback for OHOL than for previous games - 1) people who play OHOL a lot are passionate about it, and get nervous about losing it's unique characteristics 2) people are having a hard time accepting that your vision for OHOL might not be the same as theirs and 3) an increase in our society in the time-worn confusion between the qualities of an action and the qualities of a person.

A lot of what futurebird said resonated for me... this game is important to me because it is one of the few games I enjoy. I'm older than most of the players, and have complicated health issues that make 3D gaming (something like Rust, for example) completely out of the question. Some days I can't read without triggering a migraine, but I can still play OHOL. It's just less detailed.

But that's not the only reason OHOL maters to me. You've done a great job in creating a series of lives I care about. I enjoy this game a lot.

So OHOL is important to me. The fact that there is a single guy working on updating it, who makes choices that impact how the gameplay works, regardless of whether I or the rest of the player base agree with him or not, is kinda scary. That fear response to change has nothing to do with, well, logic. The fear doesn't care who you are, the fact that you created the game in the first place, etc. So to some extent - my tone gets harsh because I CARE so much about this game.

I am sometimes appalled at my own tone when I go back and read things I've posted on this forum.

On a related note... American culture in particular is losing its ability to negotiate and compromise. We want it our way, and nothing else will do. I used to work in public policy --- and boy do you see this playing out in American politics. But it goes all the way down to the interpersonal levels of our society.

There are of course differences between your (Jason's) vision for what OHOL could become and the ideal game for me - and that's probably true for every single person who currently enjoys the game. I'd prefer a lot less violence, much less these wars that you envision in OHOL's future. So adding something that increases the level of violence leaves me upset. I've accepted this as a difference in our ideal playstyles... but some won't be able to make that leap. I hope you can have some sympathy for their emotional response, even if the tone is inappropriate.

On the other hand, I am enjoying the fact that it's easier to find dead towns, and the non-violent family vs. stranger interactions that have played out in my lives since the update.

But on to my most complicated point.... critiquing OHOL or your (Jason's) choices in the direction for OHOL should not be the same as personally criticizing you. But our culture is getting REALLY BAD at telling people apart from their ideas, attitudes and actions. If you've studied logic, there's the whole fallacy of an "ad hominem" attack. Saying something is a bad idea because of the person or group the idea comes from.

But we do it the other direction, too... someone did something bad, now they are permanently a racist, or some other form of "deplorable". Someone speaks critically of an idea I champion, and suddenly I feel as though they are attacking me. (I try to be really aware of this issue, and yet I still feel attacked whenever it happens...). Both the critic and the receiver of the critique can be guilty of confusing the action and the person, making it ever harder to set up constructive dialogue.

So I find it sad but unsurprising that people are attacking you when they find something they don't like or understand in the game... it's like being colorblind and not being able to tell red and green apart. We don't see the difference between the person and their actions. A lot of people are going to define who "Jason Rohrer" is by how OHOL changes, and since we have stronger emotional reactions to things in the near-term... those judgments will be based on what changed this week.

This rush to judge a person by their most recent action isn't healthy. But to withstand these kinds of personal attacks, it helps to know where it is coming from. In some cases, you might find that their critique of your action is reasonable, even if their critique of you as a person is not.

I think you are very brave for pursuing your dreams for this game so publicly, for making weekly changes, etc. and I hope you continue to craft OHOL into a better version of itself.

One Hour One Life Forums

#51 2019-05-15 17:09:41

Re: An observation

#52 2019-05-15 17:18:02

Re: An observation

#53 2019-05-15 18:05:23

Re: An observation

Board footer