A Reminder to the Community

[Kozak]

Dear Community,

My name is UpsilonAerospace.

I have only ever truly loved three or four games in my lifetime. KSP is one of them. I'm proud to be a member of the community here, too. For the most part, it's a great group, and I don't know if I'll ever find a better one.

However, after the release of 1.0 and its subsequent patches, the community seems to have become less unified and more angry. While some aspects of this anger may be justified, others are certainly not. So today, I'm just going to give my two cents on the current state of affairs within the community, as well as how it can be improved. Take these opinions with a grain of salt (I'm certainly not perfect), but give them some thought, alright?

A Reminder to the Community.

~~~

I want to say that when it comes to being irritated, there are some times when your irritation is absolutely justified. However, your method of expressing this irritation is often rather extreme. Dialing back a notch would often do a better job of conveying your opinions to both SQUAD and the other members of the community.

I know that many of you will defend loudly exclaiming, "This part/system should be changed!" After all, it worked for the Round-8, for example. That's not what I'm here to talk about today.

Instead, I want to discuss times when loud statements have no chance whatsoever of doing anything other than harming the community. I will try to keep it friendly: after all, I don't want to fall under any of the categories below myself.

So, what can our community improve upon?

~~~

1. Attacking SQUAD for things that have already happened.

This has been one of the biggest points of contention for the Forum lately. After the release of 1.0, many Forum-goers have been irate about SQUAD releasing KSP prematurely, which has led to some heated discussion.

It's difficult to emphasize this enough: 1.0 has already been released. It's out, whether you like it or not. There is nothing you can do to change this fact, unless you have a time machine. And even then, the paradoxes would be immense!

Is it right to be irritated that 1.0 isn't as good a version as you thought it would be? Perhaps. But many people on the Forum are taking it one step further. Their argument is, essentially, that we warned SQUAD of the impeding problems with 1.0 and they didn't listen. Depending on who you ask, they could certainly be considered correct. But bringing up this point again and again is akin to gloating. At the end of the day, what does it accomplish? It doesn't make a better game and it doesn't make for a better community. Indeed, there have been some serious, often impolite arguments flying both ways.

The only argument you could make in favor of this gloating is that some are saying, "SQUAD should listen to the community more! If it did, these things wouldn't happen." But if we're just deadlocked in events of the past, criticizing decisions that have already been made, there's no real reason why SQUAD would listen to us.

It's time to accept that 1.0 is out, and that it's a much better use of your time to ask that SQUAD fixes things that aren't impossible to fix. Okay?

~~~

2. Claiming to know exactly how the game should be developed, and getting irritated when it is not so.

There was once an expression that went something like, "The greatest experts are the ones in the stands." I can't remember exactly how it goes, but you get the idea. (Anyone who could point me towards the real expression gets free Internet points!)

SQUAD, it is important to note, is doing what it thinks is best for KSP. There are a few people who think that it is deliberately trying to make a bad game, and this is simply not the case. If SQUAD really was trying to make a bad game, I hope you can agree that the game would be much worse than it is now.

That being said, they sometimes don't listen to their community. And sometimes they are wrong. But they listen to the community quite often, and they are actually right more often than not. I don't think that enough people appreciate this.

Is it reasonable to make requests to SQUAD? Absolutely. Is it right to get irritated if these requests are not fulfilled? Not really. While SQUAD's opinions on what make this game great may be different from ours, it has full control over the game and nothing will change this. In addition, the community's interests and SQUAD's interests often align well, though they may disagree when it comes to the minutiae of the game. There's where the "SQUAD isn't listening to us!" argument comes into play. (I know there are exceptions to this, but it seems as if many quibbles are over surprisingly minor aspects of the game.)

I would also say that few other developers work with the community at all, including indie game developers. SQUAD is doing us a huge favor as it is. When we're yelling things at SQUAD, we're going a little too far. And when SQUAD doesn't unconditionally try to work on what we want and we get irritated, we're behaving like privileged children who don't know how lucky they are. I'm sorry to say this, but it negatively impacts the community. And I don't think anyone wants that to happen.

~~~

3. Posting harsh things to other Forum members.

This one is a given.

As a Forum and a community, we should do our best to get along. There will be disagreements, there's no doubting that. But some people take these disagreements to a whole other level.

Maybe yelling at SQUAD will make them 'Bring Back the Round-8,' but yelling at other forum members will not change their mind. As a matter of fact, it will make them even more opposed to your point of view. Being hostile does not encourage rational thought, but instead personal attacks and other such travesties. This behavior will never be acceptable.

I'm not going to talk about this one too much, as I'm sure you already know all about it. But it is certainly something to consider before hitting the 'Post' button.

~~~

Well, that's my two cents. If you agree with them, I'm happy we're on the same page. If you disagree, having a rational and well-thought-out discussion would be great. (Anything less productive will not be tolerated. I hope you understand where I'm coming from here.)

I look forward to hearing what you have to say on this. Thanks for taking the time to read it!

-Upsilon

(P.S. I wish I could have posted this earlier. I'm having ongoing computer troubles, and thus I wasn't able to get this guy out when it was most needed. But better late than never, right?)

+rep+rep+rep+rep..... ect

That's all I have to say.

[Kerbart]

My name is UpsilonAerospace

"And I'm telling you what to do"

Bro, don't go there. I bet you don't like it to be called bro? Good. Now you know the feeling of this "friendly advice" that is just a disguised "do as I tell you".

1. Attacking SQUAD for things that have already happened.

Well, to be fair... Squad was attacked for things that hadn't happened yet, and that according to (some of) the community was a really bad idea. And they did it anyway. And it turned out to be a really bad idea.

Do you give your dog cookies for destroying your furniture, and tell him "good boy?" Because giving positive feedback when negative feedback is needed as not friendly and supporting; it's downright damaging to the receiver of the feedback as well, as they're not learning. Yes, there's beating the dead horse. And eventually we'll get over it. But when it's repeated time and time again that introducing new features without real testing is plain dangerous, and the game ends up in a state that could have been prevented with real testing, then don't expect those who are passionate about the game to shrug and say "oh well, that's water under the bridge now. Should we really tell them awesome release, bro's! Attaboy! because that well magically tell them don't try to do it like this again? I'm guessing, but I dare say that saying don't try to do it like this again gets the message of don't try to do it like this again better across than good job! attaboy!

2. Claiming to know exactly how the game should be developed, and getting irritated when it is not so and the results are disasterous, as was to be expected.

You seemed to have forgotten to add the part in red, so I added it for you. I don't think most critique in this regard was listed as I know it better; it was more listed as these are generally accepted best practices in software development that are blatantly ignored. There's a difference between "claiming to know exactly..." and "nobody does it this way unless they want to fail," especially when the delivery was exactly the failure that was predicted.

3. Posting harsh things to other Forum members.

Would that include an overly friendly tone that is actually quite condescending? Unless you actually meant rude and insulting, then yes, that should not be done. But harsh? How much different is brutally honest? Sometimes that's the best medicine.

[BagelRabbit]

The above post sort of rubbed me the wrong way. Instead of getting riled up, though, I feel as if I need to re-iterate my points... so here goes.

Bro, don't go there. I bet you don't like it to be called bro? Good. Now you know the feeling of this "friendly advice" that is just a disguised "do as I tell you".

For goodness' sake, Kerbart, I thought I had said that approaching people with a hostile tone made them less likely to agree with you!

Later in this post, you say that my tone is "actually quite condescending," but it's difficult to make these sorts of statements when you yourself start off your post by trying to insult me. It's not even in a subtle way, either. I honestly tried to present my opinions in a nice way, but if it irritated you, I'm sorry. It still doesn't justify personal attacks, though.

Well, to be fair... Squad was attacked for things that hadn't happened yet, and that according to (some of) the community was a really bad idea. And they did it anyway. And it turned out to be a really bad idea.

Do you give your dog cookies for destroying your furniture, and tell him "good boy?" Because giving positive feedback when negative feedback is needed as not friendly and supporting; it's downright damaging to the receiver of the feedback as well, as they're not learning. Yes, there's beating the dead horse. And eventually we'll get over it. But when it's repeated time and time again that introducing new features without real testing is plain dangerous, and the game ends up in a state that could have been prevented with real testing, then don't expect those who are passionate about the game to shrug and say "oh well, that's water under the bridge now. Should we really tell them awesome release, bro's! Attaboy! because that well magically tell them don't try to do it like this again? I'm guessing, but I dare say that saying don't try to do it like this again gets the message of don't try to do it like this again better across than good job! attaboy!

Let me emphasize that I don't want to praise SQUAD for this release. I don't want to criticize SQUAD for the release, though. I realize that SQUAD could have done a better job on the release, but the entire point I'm trying to make is that this release has happened. It's done. So while there may not be any reasons to praise SQUAD, criticizing it for an event that has already happened simply doesn't do anything. (I do want to direct you to my last reply, where I talk about this matter in more detail. It's halfway down Page 3.)

Instead, it's a much better use of energy to try to focus on what can make KSP better, not to slam them for something they can't do (turn back time to release 1.0 at a different opportunity).

Oh, and I should mention that comparing SQUAD to a misbehaving dog isn't the most flattering decision.

You seemed to have forgotten to add the part in red [...and the results are disastrous, as expected], so I added it for you. I don't think most critique in this regard was listed as I know it better; it was more listed as these are generally accepted best practices in software development that are blatantly ignored. There's a difference between "claiming to know exactly..." and "nobody does it this way unless they want to fail," especially when the delivery was exactly the failure that was predicted.

First of all, is KSP really a failure? For the most part, it's received overwhelmingly positive reviews and most newcomers to the Forum are saying that they really like the game. That isn't 'failure' by any means.

Second, SQUAD, as I stated, is doing what it thinks is best. Your implication that SQUAD somehow wants KSP to fail and is ignoring all of the warning signs is patently absurd. SQUAD, after all, depends on its game. They've spent four years lovingly developing it to be the best game possible. Your statement that this isn't true is almost unanimously considered to be incorrect.

Would that include an overly friendly tone that is actually quite condescending? Unless you actually meant rude and insulting, then yes, that should not be done. But harsh? How much different is brutally honest? Sometimes that's the best medicine.

Take a deep breath. Drink some tea. Walk around outside. Find a dandelion and blow it. Look for shapes in the clouds.

It'll help. I promise.

-Upsilon

[atraos]

I don't know if you realise it Upsilon, but your posts do come across as quite condescending, let me give you 2 examples, why you might have rubbed Kerbart the wrong way

The above post sort of rubbed me the wrong way. Instead of getting riled up, though, I feel as if I need to re-iterate my points... so here goes.

(emphasis mine)

Your reaction to receiving (rather harsh) criticism of the way you presented your argument, is to reiterate the argument, implying that you believe that the only reason for someone to disagree with you/your points is the person not having understood it properly. To me that comes off a arrogant and condescending.

Take a deep breath. Drink some tea. Walk around outside. Find a dandelion and blow it. Look for shapes in the clouds.

It'll help. I promise.

-Upsilon

Here you are again implying Kerbart, in criticizing you, must be driven by irrational anger, which I find is quite patronizing.

This is just my reaction to your comments, and someone else might read them differently, but I just wanted to point out to you, how you might be unwillingly antagonizing the people you addressed.

[BagelRabbit]

Hello atraos!

First off, thanks for the heads-up. I really appreciate your level-headedness here.

I don't ever try to be antagonizing, but my temper was up a little when I wrote the reply, which must be what you're detecting. I tried to respond to Kerbart's ideas and not to his irritation towards me as a person or as a writer, for the most part. That was why I wrote the first line that you quoted. I can understand why you would view the line as condescending, though. Now I want to change it somehow...

Let me also say that the last line here was more addressed towards the personal attacks at the beginning and the end than it was about the actual points Kerbart made. Some of his points were honestly pretty good and were more well-thought-out than my statement at the end suggests. But doing things that are designed to provoke me (the entire "Bro" thing at the beginning especially) seemed to have been more as a result of anger than as a response to the points I made. That's why I urged him to calm down.

I hope you can understand my point of view. Thanks for your reply.

-Upsilon

[BagelRabbit]

Gently bumped for relevancy, unfortunately.

I wish the Forums would have calmed down a little more by now, but alas, it is not so. At least things are distinctly beginning to return to normal... I think.

-Upsilon

[Merinsan]

So while there may not be any reasons to praise SQUAD, criticizing it for an event that has already happened simply doesn't do anything. (I do want to direct you to my last reply, where I talk about this matter in more detail. It's halfway down Page 3.)

I'm sorry, but are you suggesting we should criticize them for something that hasn't yet happened?

The only time it is appropriate to criticize ever, is after the event. Suggesting otherwise is illogical.

[ToddEth]

Dear Community,

My name is UpsilonAerospace.

I have only ever truly loved three or four games in my lifetime. KSP is one of them. I'm proud to be a member of the community here, too. For the most part, it's a great group, and I don't know if I'll ever find a better one.

However, after the release of 1.0 and its subsequent patches, the community seems to have become less unified and more angry. While some aspects of this anger may be justified, others are certainly not. So today, I'm just going to give my two cents on the current state of affairs within the community, as well as how it can be improved. Take these opinions with a grain of salt (I'm certainly not perfect), but give them some thought, alright?

A Reminder to the Community.

~~~

I want to say that when it comes to being irritated, there are some times when your irritation is absolutely justified. However, your method of expressing this irritation is often rather extreme. Dialing back a notch would often do a better job of conveying your opinions to both SQUAD and the other members of the community.

I know that many of you will defend loudly exclaiming, "This part/system should be changed!" After all, it worked for the Round-8, for example. That's not what I'm here to talk about today.

Instead, I want to discuss times when loud statements have no chance whatsoever of doing anything other than harming the community. I will try to keep it friendly: after all, I don't want to fall under any of the categories below myself.

So, what can our community improve upon?

~~~

1. Attacking SQUAD for things that have already happened.

This has been one of the biggest points of contention for the Forum lately. After the release of 1.0, many Forum-goers have been irate about SQUAD releasing KSP prematurely, which has led to some heated discussion.

It's difficult to emphasize this enough: 1.0 has already been released. It's out, whether you like it or not. There is nothing you can do to change this fact, unless you have a time machine. And even then, the paradoxes would be immense!

Is it right to be irritated that 1.0 isn't as good a version as you thought it would be? Perhaps. But many people on the Forum are taking it one step further. Their argument is, essentially, that we warned SQUAD of the impeding problems with 1.0 and they didn't listen. Depending on who you ask, they could certainly be considered correct. But bringing up this point again and again is akin to gloating. At the end of the day, what does it accomplish? It doesn't make a better game and it doesn't make for a better community. Indeed, there have been some serious, often impolite arguments flying both ways.

The only argument you could make in favor of this gloating is that some are saying, "SQUAD should listen to the community more! If it did, these things wouldn't happen." But if we're just deadlocked in events of the past, criticizing decisions that have already been made, there's no real reason why SQUAD would listen to us.

It's time to accept that 1.0 is out, and that it's a much better use of your time to ask that SQUAD fixes things that aren't impossible to fix. Okay?

~~~

2. Claiming to know exactly how the game should be developed, and getting irritated when it is not so.

There was once an expression that went something like, "The greatest experts are the ones in the stands." I can't remember exactly how it goes, but you get the idea. (Anyone who could point me towards the real expression gets free Internet points!)

SQUAD, it is important to note, is doing what it thinks is best for KSP. There are a few people who think that it is deliberately trying to make a bad game, and this is simply not the case. If SQUAD really was trying to make a bad game, I hope you can agree that the game would be much worse than it is now.

That being said, they sometimes don't listen to their community. And sometimes they are wrong. But they listen to the community quite often, and they are actually right more often than not. I don't think that enough people appreciate this.

Is it reasonable to make requests to SQUAD? Absolutely. Is it right to get irritated if these requests are not fulfilled? Not really. While SQUAD's opinions on what make this game great may be different from ours, it has full control over the game and nothing will change this. In addition, the community's interests and SQUAD's interests often align well, though they may disagree when it comes to the minutiae of the game. There's where the "SQUAD isn't listening to us!" argument comes into play. (I know there are exceptions to this, but it seems as if many quibbles are over surprisingly minor aspects of the game.)

I would also say that few other developers work with the community at all, including indie game developers. SQUAD is doing us a huge favor as it is. When we're yelling things at SQUAD, we're going a little too far. And when SQUAD doesn't unconditionally try to work on what we want and we get irritated, we're behaving like privileged children who don't know how lucky they are. I'm sorry to say this, but it negatively impacts the community. And I don't think anyone wants that to happen.

~~~

3. Posting harsh things to other Forum members.

This one is a given.

As a Forum and a community, we should do our best to get along. There will be disagreements, there's no doubting that. But some people take these disagreements to a whole other level.

Maybe yelling at SQUAD will make them 'Bring Back the Round-8,' but yelling at other forum members will not change their mind. As a matter of fact, it will make them even more opposed to your point of view. Being hostile does not encourage rational thought, but instead personal attacks and other such travesties. This behavior will never be acceptable.

I'm not going to talk about this one too much, as I'm sure you already know all about it. But it is certainly something to consider before hitting the 'Post' button.

~~~

Well, that's my two cents. If you agree with them, I'm happy we're on the same page. If you disagree, having a rational and well-thought-out discussion would be great. (Anything less productive will not be tolerated. I hope you understand where I'm coming from here.)

I look forward to hearing what you have to say on this. Thanks for taking the time to read it!

-Upsilon

(P.S. I wish I could have posted this earlier. I'm having ongoing computer troubles, and thus I wasn't able to get this guy out when it was most needed. But better late than never, right?)

Well said, if you you are frustrated then please pose your frustrations in a constructive manner so that squad can actually work on this issue if in fact is an issue that needs fixing and is not just something that requires a bit of thought on your behalf to solve.

I had issues with my rockets flipping to begin with and you know what I decided not to blame squad but look at my designs and see if I can work up a solution. Guess what I found that solutions all by myself and I have now eve moved o to ssto's which is the first time I have ever ventured into the plane variety of ssto's. I have made considerably strides in this field and once I get back from holiday I will go further into these.

Please please please do not attack squad for their hard work.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

This is great! Have some rep.

I rarely post in general, but I thought it was worth posting here, because that I agree with you. Personally, I'm very happy with Squad's decisions about the game, I have some reservations about some things, but overall, I love KSP! You can't please everyone (myself as an example), but Squad definitely doesn't want to make a terrible game, they might only want to make money (after all, that's what companies do), but they have made a great game, and I think I echo most regular players of KSP when I say: KSP IS REALLY FUN! There are so many things to do! It has almost infinite replayibility!

Thank you, Squad, and everyone involved, for my favorite game ever!

[waterlubber]

If you find irritating thread complaining, imagine how that people feel when you post a thread complaining about the complaining.

Conplainception.

I think that people should express their opinion. Just make sure to note that you aren't trying to be rude.

As for the other side, remember that the people are probably extremely frustrated and confused.

[hobbsyoyo]

Funny thing I just saw this thread because I was about to post in the CFC forum KSP thread about how much nastier the members here have gotten since the last time I used this forum.

I knew something really strange had happened to the community here when I opened the thread about official gaming site reviews of KSP and found it to be a lame Squad bashing session. The funniest part of the bashing to me is that the people who were beating a dead horse to death are the same people who have probably spent countless hours enjoying this game and countless more hours telling strangers about it on the internet. But low and behold and some game reviewers give the game stellar reviews and there was a massive collective freakout because 1.0 DIDN'T HAVE ALL THE THINGS.

That's what it comes down to, I think. Pre-1.0 (and especially Pre-.90 when full release seemed forever away) everyone could hope that their own pet projects and dreams would make it in the final game. I mean, release was forever away so obviously it was going to be perfect in all ways to everyone. Except that's not how perfection works, it's in the eye of the beholder and all of a sudden everyone was royally pissed that the coveted "1.0" arrived and it didn't have everything they dreamed of. Of course, KSP 1.0+ will never please everyone perfectly because it can't literally contain "all the things" but I think many posters here seemed to have adopted a mentality that eventually it.

No one seems to have adopted the perspective that 'hey, so I don't like thing X, but that other guy doesn't like thing Y but overall, we're pretty happy with the whole package and the game could never satisfy us both perfectly because we like different things'. To top it all off, the people here that are so butthurt are the same people (as stated before) who have enjoyed the heck out of this game over the year and contributed numerous posts here about it. But there are some things (that, to be honest, are quite trivial in the grand scope) they don't like so they've taken to missing the forest for all the trees.

And before the 'but broken features and aero model and this, that and the other thing....!' bandwagon gets rolling - well, Squad is still putting out updates. And be happy you have already gotten (and will continue to get) so much enjoyment out of the game. You also most likely got it dirt cheap during early development and by doing so, you helped fund it and also got an outsized say in the development path that the game took. Do you think EA is going to give you that kind of input? Nope. Just be happy if their next multi-billion-dollar release isn't broken from Day 1 and require 5 months of daily patches to make it playable. Meanwhile, new KSP players get a pretty solid game from 1.0 on and old players got to directly contribute to that and all will continue to enjoy new feature roll-out and healthy mod support for the foreseeable future.

Shoot, if I was a Squad member and I spent years on this project and then opened up the 'game review thread' and read what was there, yeah, I'd stop listening to the haters too and then everyone loses.

Also - so much this:

All I can say is, enjoy that period of your life when the perceived shortcomings of a computer game are a big issue and/or problem for you. Soon enough you will have far greater things to worry about.

Edited May 18, 2015 by hobbsyoyo

[Jonboy]

Stuff

Ad hominems are a great way to get your point across.

Edited May 18, 2015 by sal_vager

[r4pt0r]

I thought it was a fair point.

[Jonboy]

more stuff

Well, the original reply attacked the character of OP, so it definitely was ad hominem. Not an argument I want to get into, however.

Edited May 18, 2015 by sal_vager

[r4pt0r]

lol. guy cant win.

[sal_vager]

Posts breaking rules 2.2D, 2.2H and 2.3B were removed

[BagelRabbit]

Even more stuff

H'm. It seems I came on a bit too late to have a specific behavior of mine attacked... Mr. sal_vager removed the content just before I came on.

I can't say for certain whether the argument was ad hominem or not, but it must have been rather unpleasant. Let me just repeat that while I respect everyone's point of view, I think all discussions on this thread (and on the Forum in general!) should be civil, regardless of what anyone personally believes. This was stated on the Original Post, but it bears repeating...

-Upsilon

Edited May 18, 2015 by sal_vager

[Cdr_Zeta]

Hello,

It is difficult to be civil I guess when some problems with supposed 'release' candidate games come out and they are, well, have minor issues; maybe the issues are more on the lines of 'tweaks' and not real bugs; I havnt had one real game breaker happen to me yet; but as a new player who doesnt work with module codes...that is what 'Sandbox' is for - it is simply called learning how to play the game and play it most any way you want to; heck with mods we have multiplayer and MODS add depth; and are player-made which is the new consensus of new gaming these days; you cant ask for more in a 'release' game of any kind.

Tho KSP doesnt have the MMO complexity; it rivals any I have played because you can create what you can play here (that is when you get more involved with the game; which is true of any game).

I am really upset about a few things but they are not game-breaking bugs; there are a few features that 'really' need to be addresses that have been consistent from v18 when I started; but those issues are slowly improving; that is what beta testing is all about...then again...hard core players want certain things they feel important and I think Squad tried to implement...now they just need to compromise.

Half of KSP is the community and I wouldnt be here without it...so yes civility is nice.

Cmdr Zeta

[Sandworm]

How about a reminder that we are all customers who have purchased a product?

As such, vocal public debate allows other potential customers to better judge future purchases. To ask customers not to speak unless they are "experts" on software development or coding defeats that public good. There are many things wrong with KSP that go beyond speculation and opinion. Equally, public criticism Squad's behavior as a developer aids in decision making re this and any potential future products.

For instance: The released post-1.0 product has a readily documented memory leak, a leak that leads directly to crashes on many/most machines. You don't need to be an expert on software to understand why that is an objectively bad thing. Squad has not acknowledged the issue. And after looking at their past patterns and talking to members of the early access team, no patch seems to be in the works. We will probably have to wait a couple months for any fix. Whether from lay or expert, those are valid criticisms of a team and its product.

Edited May 19, 2015 by Sandworm

[Lord Aurelius]

@Sandworm

Definitely agree with this. While some of the frustration towards Squad has resulted in some personal attacks, that doesn't mean that anything negative towards Squad should be suppressed. Then you end up with the opposite problem where problems are glossed over and are never dealt with. In many ways we already have this now with the apparent disinterest of the devs in the forum community.

Criticism has it's place, and we should be able to have a civil debate even if we don't agree with everything others have to say. Personal attacks aren't acceptable from either side, but when we see something that doesn't look right we should be able to vocalize it in a civil manner without fear of reprisal. This is the fundamental concept of free speech.

The moderators have done an excellent job in maintaining this balance for the most part, some of my posts have been quite critical of Squad and I'm thankful for a forum community where the moderators allow us to have a critical discussion.

[Vanamonde]

It's a false dichotomy to suggest that the only alternatives are harsh negativity or meek silence. Pointing out a problem is not the same thing as throwing angry accusations and insults around. The latter helps no one.

[Sandworm]

It's a false dichotomy to suggest that the only alternatives are harsh negativity or meek silence. Pointing out a problem is not the same thing as throwing angry accusations and insults around. The latter helps no one.

Insults and anger do have a place in debate. They are modifiers. There are times when public outcry, and I mean really vicious anger, can cause an organization to move on an issue they would otherwise ignore. These days when it is to easy to close debate through heavy handed moderation, even DMCA takedowns, such anger seems needed to sway organizations. Look at Steam's recent foray into paid mods. Had people calmly disagreed with steam via polite criticism through steam-approved media, Valve would not have reacted. But sent thousands of screaming-mad kids in every corner of the internet, that moves even Valve.

A few personal insults here and there can be part of valid debate. Insult is often the only valid criticism of platitudes. I've seen Squad's various developers described as "open" and "in touch with their community". Many believe they are in fact not. That is a valid view. But any statement that a person is "closed" or "out of touch" comes across as a personal attack. It is a very personal attack. That doesn't make it inappropriate or unhelpful. The distinction is that insult must always come in response to platitudes. If someone describes themselves in some positive light, or allows themselves to be described as such, only then they may be attacked through opposite description.

[r4pt0r]

Insults and anger do have a place in debate. They are modifiers. There are times when public outcry, and I mean really vicious anger, can cause an organization to move on an issue they would otherwise ignore. These days when it is to easy to close debate through heavy handed moderation, even DMCA takedowns, such anger seems needed to sway organizations. Look at Steam's recent foray into paid mods. Had people calmly disagreed with steam via polite criticism through steam-approved media, Valve would not have reacted. But sent thousands of screaming-mad kids in every corner of the internet, that moves even Valve.

A few personal insults here and there can be part of valid debate. Insult is often the only valid criticism of platitudes. I've seen Squad's various developers described as "open" and "in touch with their community". Many believe they are in fact not. That is a valid view. But any statement that a person is "closed" or "out of touch" comes across as a personal attack. It is a very personal attack. That doesn't make it inappropriate or unhelpful. The distinction is that insult must always come in response to platitudes. If someone describes themselves in some positive light, or allows themselves to be described as such, only then they may be attacked through opposite description.

That is an excellent point.

[oversoul]

I was describing the release of 1.0 to a friend recently, and trying to summarize it, when I had an epiphany and told him "they basically took a bunch of good mods that I already used and incorporated them... poorly."

- FAR

- DRE (hell no I never used this, I don't like hurting myself, thank you for the slider in the options)

- Proc Fairings

- SCANSat

- Karbonite

I've never posted anything to this effect until now, but apparently others have, hence this thread.

But I have faith in Squad. And in the modders.

So carry on.