The Realistic Future of MMO Fallout


ss_0ecdffa4df06e448b5f9e710d84c4a3844f0674c.1920x1080

So I can halt any fears: This is not a shut-down announcement or news that I’m getting bought out.

With MMO Fallout’s seventh (good lord) anniversary coming up, I wanted to discuss the realistic future of this website and how I see things changing in the coming months. If you’re a regular viewer of this website, you’ve probably noticed the not-so-subtle change in direction over the past year. Even if you’re not a regular, I can probably assume you have at least some interest in the MMO genre and have noticed how that has changed.

So where to begin? I conceived MMO Fallout as a spinoff of an earlier project in 2009 to document the rise and fall of developers piling onto the genre after the success of World of Warcraft. The name, and thus the current logo, reflects how success and failure has a rippling effect in the industry. Since its launch, the scope has expanded far beyond the original vision, and the industry has changed quite dramatically.

We’ve gone from a world where MMOs were quite easily defined to one where the lines have been blurred to the point of irrelevance. Everyone has a progression system, everyone has microtransactions, everyone has persistent online features, not every MMO has a hub world. With the exception of a few titles, the answer to “how is this an MMO” can only be answered with “because I believe it to be.”

In that respect, coverage has become a lot harder because I have to constantly ask how far I’m willing to stretch my own definition in order to cover something that I think is important. I’d sit down and look at a game and think “does this count? Not really, but it is 95% like another game that I did cover,” and that policy over five years has slowly diluted the overall pot. As the scope of coverage has expanded to include serious issues of consumer protection, like Steam’s refund policy, developers revoking fraudulently purchased keys, etc, I’ve had to throw those definitions out so many times that they don’t even feel relevant anymore.

For those of you who have your ad-blockers on and wouldn’t notice, this website doesn’t serve ads. It has never generated a profit or a revenue stream, and I used all of my pay from writing for MMORPG.com to cover this website’s costs. So in writing, I consider two things: interest and time. People read how to fix your FFXIV demo, or about lawsuits. According to my metrics, they don’t come here for patch notes, so I stopped writing about them.

Yea, yea, stop rambling. This was supposed to be about the future.

So where does MMO Fallout go from here?

  • More coverage of important events. Game launches, developer shuffling, new studios, etc.
  • Less coverage that boils down to small patch notes.
  • More time spent following up on previous coverage.
  • Less articles that are simply regurgitating press releases.
  • More emphasis on highlighting independent developers worthy of your attention, aka why I incorporated indie development in the first place.
  • Less emphasis on vilifying indie developers through various pieces and Crowdfunding Fraudsters (but that isn’t going away).
  • More previews, reviews, game-specific editorials. I’d like to do more of these.
  • Less dead/abandoned columns. I’m looking at you, editorials section.
  • More involvement from developers and the community. I currently do interviews/collaborations maybe once every six months. This isn’t out of a lack of offers.
  • Less news for the sake of news.

MMO Fallout will always be centered on the online game industry, so don’t worry about our focus suddenly shifting to movies or cake recipes (although I’d like to look at some game-based books/movies), but the days of folding our hands and refusing to cover something because it doesn’t 100% pass the litmus test is long gone.

I want MMO Fallout to continue to exceed my expectations, and I am nothing without my readers. I respond to all emails, questions on Ask.fm, and messages on Twitter. My doors have always, and will always, be open.

And with that, let’s go back to talking about games.

[NM] ZombieRush Is Definitely Buying Reviews


ss_1767ca132ed6771ca7d7acd2136fe9f838456908.1920x1080

I have no idea if ZombieRush is a good game, its Steam page would definitely seem to imply so despite the top two most helpful reviews being overwhelmingly negative.

The most recent review (as of this publishing) is by user tyXYDelcatQU, who I will call Ty for the foreseeable future. I looked into Ty’s account and he appears to be playing Electric Zombies. Ty has three reviews for the 44 products in his account, two of which are exactly the same: “Very simple, straightforward gameplay but highly entertaining. 9/10.” All three games have 3.9-4.1 hours invested in them.

But whoever said lacking creativity was a crime? Let’s go down to #2, user yXSSkittJH, who I will be referring to as Skitt. Now Skitt has three reviews out of 44 games in their library and has reviewed ZombieRush, BaseSquad 49, and The Culling of the Cows, the same three games as Ty above with identical reviews on two games. Skitt was also playing Electric Zombies at the time of this publishing.

bought

Alright, two could still be a coincidence. Let’s look at the following set of reviews to see if there is a correlation.

There appear to be around 200 fake reviews in a row, and I know because I counted all of them, all by accounts with the same three games, same review structure, same comments in many cases (reviewing two games exactly the same and then reviewing Culling of the Cows as ‘gg’). Like every instance of mass production, the reviews come in blocks. Thirty reviews in a row from accounts with 44 games and 3 reviews, followed by another fifty of accounts with 50 games and 4 reviews.

So it’s obvious that Zombie Rush is buying reviews in bulk, thinking that the average consumer is too stupid to notice hundreds of positive, one line reviews written by accounts with generated names and the same number of games/reviews, all playing the same games.

ZombieRush was developed by Arthur Kariev.

[Community] The Beast That Wouldn’t Stop It


sinister

It’s time for another Community Monday here at DH Fallout, the website that used to cover those online games, and as usual I have another Digital Homicide update for you. The last post on Digital Homicide got such a huge response that it shut down the website for part of the day. The positive side is that it spurred me to upgrade us to Cloudflare, so this shouldn’t be a problem going forward.

Despite having nearly two dozen of their games slammed with an “incompatible with Greenlight” sticker from Valve, rejection both by the gaming community at large and now their would-be host doesn’t seem to be slowing the developer down. No, on Sunday the 5th, Digital Homicide added another seven games to their Greenlight portfolio. Let’s break them down:

  • Barnacle Explorer Sub: Fish Rescue – Another Space Invaders clone, the exact same looking game from the dozen other clones DH uploaded last week.
  • Barnacle Explorer Sub: Shark Rescue – A clone of the game above, but with sharks instead of fish.
  • Barnacle Explorer Sub: Octo Helper – A clone of the game above, but with octopus instead of sharks.
  • Mike the Astronaut: Battle on Arturian Twelve – A clone of the game above, but in space.
  • Star Scream on Orion – Looks like a clone of DH’s other game, Decimation of Olarath.
  • Sharktastic Yum Yums – Probably as close as you’ll get to an original Digital Homicide title.

What caught my eye is the last game on the list, Clickerton Gang. I couldn’t figure out for the life of me why this game in particular was screaming for my attention, at least not until a couple of people on Twitter pointed it out: We’ve seen Clickerton Gang before.

Clickerton Gang was first put up on Greenlight by user Bobmiddleton80, an indie developer who appeared out of the blue with three games ready for the Steam community to vote on. We first heard of Bob Middleton under allegations that the account was actually a sock puppet of Digital Homicide. One of Middleton’s games, as it turns out, was Clickerton Gang. In what can only be pure coincidence, the logo for Clickerton Gang bears a strong resemblance to Digital Homicide’s game Wyatt Derp. You might even say it looks like two alternatives to the same stock photo.

You have to imagine that Valve is getting tired of Digital Homicide’s shenanigans. The seven new games weren’t even up for a day and Valve has already struck down five of them as incompatible with Greenlight. This leaves DH with 50 games currently on Greenlight. 26 of its titles are listed as “incompatible with Greenlight.”

With the developer shoveling more trash into the pile every week and Valve increasingly stomping down on it, you have to wonder how long it takes until the developer is blacklisted from uploading new titles period, and whether or not that will be enough to prevent an entity that has had no problem changing its name in the past.

Crowdfunding Fraudsters: 8-Bit MMO


2d68e6af78207375155690aa23d85223_original

Fraudster:
2
a:  a person who is not what he or she pretends to be :impostor;

Good day everyone! I’m going to keep this short and sweet, since this is an obvious one. Today’s project of note is for an 8-bit MMO by Pixels of the Night. Is Pixels of the Night the name of the company or the name of the game? I can’t say for sure.

So what information can Pixels of the Night give us about their game?

This project has been in works for two years now. With help from my college teacher to really put the code behind the game in place. What this money will do is help with the cost of servers, and hire another programmer to help with the many errors that may arise when dealing with building an MMO.

Cool, understandable. It makes sense that you’d need money to run the servers, hire more programmers, and dealing with technical issues. Since the game has been in the works for two years, what other information can you give? Screenshots? Game mechanics? Anything? Bueller?

No, despite being in development for two years, PotN doesn’t deem it necessary to give us even the most minimal of details on their game. No screenshots, no concept art, no details on game mechanics, no nothing. Evidently the creator should have had their college teacher help with the Kickstarter campaign as well.

Unsurprisingly, people aren’t too enthused about funding this campaign, and it has yet break $0 in funding with 11 days to go. The creator is hoping to raise two grand. So since I have absolutely no idea what this game is about, the next logical question is: How much can I donate and what do I get for it?

People who donate 100 dollars will receive a limited addition of the game, featuring 1k gold, and a exclusive armor set keeping you ahead of the game.

Any lingering doubt that the creator doesn’t know what he’s doing should vanish when you note that the only reward tier is for $20, but the detail of the reward is only for donations of at least $100.

[Community] A Response To Paste Magazine’s “Git Gud” Article


Overwatch 2016-05-06 05-39-24-40

Hi Garrett Martin,

Recently Paste Magazine posted an article on the “Git Gud Mentality,” and how it is why people don’t take games seriously. I considered dropping a comment on the page but, frankly, the odds of it getting lost in the kerfuffle and not read or given attention by anyone outside of the mob would make the whole act futile. Just look at the length!

So here I am. I wanted to discuss a few points brought up in the piece, civilly, and point out a few things without letting the trolls or #gamergate people get in the way.

First off, let’s get something clear about the “git gud” meme. It is just that, a meme. Most of the people who use the term are using it ironically, but the sentiment is two-tiered. On one side, it’s an attack on the idea that if a game is too hard, the answer is to demand that the game become easier. The other half, as games are competitive, part of the strategy people use is psychological. Get in your opponent’s head and frustrate them to throw them off.

Let’s talk about Polygon’s Let’s Play of Doom, to which you state:

These critics argue that the person playing DOOM in that video isn’t “good” at games and thus their opinions shouldn’t be respected, and since they work for Polygon it undermines the entire site’s credibility.

You know what? I completely agree. Polygon, like any individual or organization in existence has a target painted on its back by the world’s population of cynics. Since the big thing these days is for the public to brigade pretty much anyone calling themselves a journalist and attack their credibility, the best you can do is to ignore these people. Do you really think that they would stop shouting if the video that was put up was well played? No, like everyone’s mother-in-law, these people will find their flaws to point out, even if they have to pull out a magnifying glass and start calculating the person’s hit percentage.

Devoid of any obvious critiques, they’d make something up. Again, think mother-in-law. Yes, you became a self-made millionaire and got yourself a mansion and got married but that Miller boy down the street has two kids and when are you going to give your mother some grandkids?

It goes back to that old idea that if you hate someone, all of a sudden everything they do is offensive to you. Look at them playing their games, like they know journalism. Shooting aliens in the crotch like they own the freaking place. Jerks. Except in this case, the internet fuels something of a jilted lover complex between people and things. I hear more about Polygon from my contacts that hate them than those that casually read their pieces. Likewise, I don’t know a single person that listens to Justin Bieber, but I know two people who absolutely hate him enough to be up to speed on whatever he is doing these days.

But here’s the thing, and I say this as someone who doesn’t hate Polygon and has made several bids to try and work for them (disclaimer). The big complaint that I have, and that I’ve seen, is that the video was kind of a mess. If it was meant to show how the game plays, it didn’t do a good job of that. With no commentary, it was just awkward to watch.

In addition, it lacked a lot of important context, like who was actually playing the game, leading people to believe that the same person who played the game in the video would also be reviewing it. The gameplay footage showed a person who seemed to barely understand the controls or how to run and gun. It wasn’t a critique, but that’s not the point.

Let’s put it this way, you don’t need to know how to put together a cable box in order to review the service. That said, I wouldn’t trust my dad when he says that the remote sucks because he still hasn’t figured out that the play button is the triangle and “how is the average person supposed to know that?” Nor would I trust when he says that our wifi sucks because he drove to Walmart five miles away and couldn’t get a signal.

Now Arthur Gies reviewed Doom and gave it an 8.5, which is a very good score.

The video is still a terrible representation, but you can look at my Youtube channel and see that they can’t all be winners. I promise this is where I stop bringing up the Polygon Doom video because I want to talk about the whole ‘git gud’ argument as its own topic.

What is worth mentioning is the reaction to that video, and how it reinforces negative impressions about so-called “gamers.”

Gamers, for the most part, do not care what people think about them. They don’t have to, in spite of the negative stigma that the term “gamer” still gets, video games are the largest entertainment industry in the world. By 2017, the industry will be raking in over $100 billion globally on an annual basis. There are more than 1.2 billion people playing video games in some capacity right now. To say that video games have a problem bringing in people is about as absurd as saying that more people need to recognize Coca Cola.

I’ve written here and elsewhere in the past asking why “casual” gamers try so hard to be called gamers, in spite of the negative stigma. In fact, most titles denoting some professional air seems to come pre-packaged with some note of elitism or condescending snobbery. If you look up “why are Foodies” on Google, the first suggestion is “why are foodies so annoying.” So is the third.

The issue that we have with the ‘git gud’ crowd is that gaming is a hobby, and as such will always have the hardcore hobbyists spewing elitist dribble and talking down to everyone else because they believe that they know best. You see this in every medium, from film to music to books to cars, everything even remotely subjective. They will talk, by god will they talk, and at great lengths about how knowledgeable they are and how pathetic and plebian the rest of the world is because they know not the greatness that is [insert here].

I have to hand it to you, though, because you still have the determination to fight a toxic subset that most of us got tired of years ago. I have enough bans for arguing with efficiency trolls in MMO forums that if they were speeding tickets my license would have been revoked back in 2008. At this point, if they’re not being BTFO’d in most gaming circles, these people are just paid lip service until they go away.

There’s nothing interesting or noteworthy about one random, unnamed employee of a videogame site being bad at one specific game.

Correct.

That “Git Gud” mentality is one part of a larger effort by “gamers” to keep games as their own private sanctuary from the wider world, open only to those who are as passionate about games as they are, and only if they’re passionate about the same games as they are.

Once again, we’re talking elitism in a taste-based medium.

I’ll give you a universal phrase that gets rid of these people in any situation: I don’t care what you think. You can add all the profanity you want, so long as the final message is the same. Trust me, this works nine times out of ten. This elitist toxic subset that I speak of, they thrive not just off of the idea that their tastes are superior, but off of the acknowledgement of others that their taste is superior.

You don’t accomplish anything by shaming them, or claiming that they want the hobby to be smaller and to push the more casual crowd out. That’s exactly what they want, they talk on a daily basis about how much things were better when the [insert hobby] was smaller and the company didn’t cater to casuals. Pushing people out is the intended side effect, if not the primary goal, one that they’re not very good at because “I 100%’d Halo on Legendary” and “I only buy films on Laserdisc” isn’t an argument. But there is also a need to reaffirm said superiority through argument and putting down lesser fans and people who aren’t interested, which leads to a very fragile, easily shattered ego.

Which is why the best thing you can say is “I don’t care.” You’re not arguing details, not waxing poetic or talking semantics, you’re not really engaging the person. It serves as a rather crushing reminder that the thing they put so much dedication into really isn’t that important outside of their specific group. Treat it the same way you would some guy who pulls up next to you and starts talking about how crappy your car brand is while going into all of the modifications he made to his own ride. Or the person that pops into your conversation at a restaurant to brag about how she met one of the earlier Doctor Who actors and starts waving the photo in your face.

Roll your eyes, and walk away.

This kind of hostility towards “outsiders” is why so many think poorly of games and the people who play them.

Maybe it’s because I cover and thus play a lot of MMOs where player interaction often involves tracking someone down and murdering them in cold blood, then looting their inventory and sending them back to their spawn point empty handed, that I have a hard time taking the whole “I don’t get into games because some people are jerks” argument. For specific games, absolutely. Like I said, I’ve played a lot of games where the aim is to murder someone and render their last hour or so of resource gathering into your payday, so maybe I’m just used to offensive action being a little more in-your-face.

There is, without a doubt, a problem with toxic behavior in games. Just look at our coverage this past week to see that I don’t deny it, there are people dressing up as KKK members in RuneScape for crying out loud. The best advice I can give is to find a friendly guild and keep most of your chat to them. You can’t let the rabble keep you out of the pool.

Fighting the ‘git gud’ mentality through reasoned argument is like fighting quicksand. The more you struggle, the harder it pulls.

The market for videogames stays stagnant, with designers making the same kinds of games for the same homogeneous audience, afraid to take risks because the people who might embrace them are driven away by this arbitrary “gamer” litmus test. By trying to keep out people who don’t agree with them or share their same skill or enthusiasm level, “gamers” keep the medium trapped in an insular, incestuous bubble.

Yea, you’re right, and that is why indie development has become so massive over the past few years. Casual customers don’t really know or care about the differences between AAA and indie developers, they just know that Life is Strange is a fun game and was published by those guys at Whoeverthatwas Entertainmentwhatsit. Indie gaming is how we get titles that are experimental and are increasingly seeing crazy success, like ARK, like Bastion, Shovel Knight, Binding of Isaac, Banner Saga, Fez, This War Of Mine. We’re hitting a point where if you want a specific game, odds are someone has made it or is making it.

So at the very least, rest easy knowing that the small subset of people who want gaming to return to when it was in the toy aisle, are losing the fight. I say this as a socially awkward, pale white nerd who never had a girlfriend, can count his circle of friends on one hand, and who spends a lot more money than I should on games, Pop Vinyls, Amiibo, and video game toys. I also say it as someone who has spent years trying to bring people of all stripes into gaming, with great success.

If you’d like to check my gamer cred, my Steam account is here.

Other than that I have no opinion on the matter.

Top MMOs That Need To Come To Consoles


Bloodshade1_cp0

The current generation of consoles have played host to a major surge in massively multiplayer games, with new titles releasing and being announced every month. To date, console gamers can enjoy titles like DC Universe, Planetside 2, Neverwinter, Final Fantasy XIV, Elder Scrolls Online, and more. With Star Trek Online recently announced for both Xbox and Playstation, MMO Fallout has decided to give its list of MMOs that need to make their way to the comfy couch.

MarvelHeroes2015 2015-06-26 22-49-05-29

1. Marvel Heroes

Now that Marvel Heroes has gamepad support, a launch on Xbox and Playstation is the next logical step. Imagine the appeal of sitting on your comfy couch and beating the crap out of Magneto as Captain America, or even as Magneto since he’s a playable hero now. Since both consoles support free to play fully, with open talks of cross-platform play, it isn’t entirely out of the question to see people on all three consoles playing together in harmony.

While Marvel Heroes hasn’t been confirmed for console launch, the prospect hasn’t been denied either. There were initially plans for release on PS3 and 360, which were scrapped after the game launched for a variety of reasons, including a need to focus resources on fixing what had been a heavily panned launch on PC.
conanexiles_1

2. Age of Conan

With Exiles set for release on consoles and Funcom on a tight budget, the odds of seeing Age of Conan come to Playstation and Xbox are probably slim to none. That being said, the game’s action combat could find itself perfectly at home with a controller, and the free to play model would introduce the game to a whole new category of gamer.

Incidentally, Age of Conan was also meant to come to consoles. Initially confirmed for launch on the Xbox 360, it took Funcom until 2011 to admit that the game wasn’t coming out, likely out of a combination of the poor reception of the PC version at launch and the technical limitations of the Xbox. Regardless, the game could find a new home on PS4/Xb1.

apb

3. APB: All Points Bullet

Unlike the previous games on this list, APB is still hoping for a console launch, with Deep Silver confirming the game’s release in Q2 2015. While we are now one year late, and still without a current launch date, it is unknown exactly when the game will be coming out. Regardless, a third person shooter with cooperative/competitive elements is a sure fit for the consoles, albeit one that is now pretty dated.

You’ll notice a trend that these titles were previously confirmed for launch on Xbox 360 only to have their development quietly cancelled later on. A lot of developers wanted to be the first not-Final Fantasy MMO on Xbox 360, only to face the harsh realities of developing, releasing, and maintaining such a title and dealing with Microsoft’s policies of the time.

champs

4. Champions Online

Since Star Trek Online and Neverwinter have console ports, it only makes sense to go back and bring back the title that started it all, Champions Online. Considering that, like most other games on this list, Champions Online was originally supposed to launch on the Xbox 360, it makes sense that Cryptic Studios already had a design drawn up on how to get the game working comfortably on consoles.

Much like Star Trek Online, Champions Online has a ton of content built up over years of development with fairly little competition on the consoles. Apart from DC Universe, there aren’t really any online super hero games to play on Xbox.

Luchs_Factory_1920px

5. Heroes & Generals

It’s been a long time since console World War 2 shooters were fruitful and plenty. We haven’t seen a WW2 Call of Duty since 2008, Medal of Honor dropped out in 2007, Brothers in Arms was 2008, and Battlefield 2009. There is Battalion 1944 coming out in 2017, but otherwise the genre is pretty much dead on home consoles.

Heroes & Generals is just what the doctor ordered, a first person shooter that is still consistently updated, with plenty of replayability and a long progression system, and a genre that is ripe for the picking. Heroes & Generals is still in early access, so a console launch isn’t even being planned at this point while the PC version is finished.

What MMOs would you like to see on consoles? Let us know in the comments below.

Top 5: Ideas Twitch Can Adopt To Curb Racism


Overwatch 2016-05-06 05-39-24-40

Today must be a day ending in ‘day,’ because Dreamhack has come and gone and the internet has once again shown itself to be a cesspool of racism and harassment. In the wake of people piling on to the Hearthstone stream to throw racist comments at finalist Terrance Miller, both Blizzard and Twitch have committed to reducing problematic behavior on the platform.

Is there ultimately any difference between someone who posts racist remarks with the goal of trolling/harassment and someone who posts them because they are genuinely racist? Probably not, both are equally disruptive and in need of being stamped down. Because MMO Fallout’s modus operandi is to help solve problems rather than just point them out, I’ve decided to compile a list of ways Twitch can curb harmful behavior.

5. Prevent New Accounts From Using Chat

This one is simple and links in with one or two other suggestions on this list. Many MMOs already do this to curb gold farming, where accounts are not allowed to use chat or access certain trade/communication features until after they’ve hit a certain level. It doesn’t stop the problem completely, but it does lower the ability of people to mass produce burner accounts.

How would this system work with Twitch? You could theoretically introduce a minimum waiting period anywhere from a day to a week or more before an account can access chat. Said waiting period could be removed with the inclusion of two-factor authentication.

4. New Chat Mode: Authenticated

Right now there are only a few chat modes available to Twitch streamers, from subscriber only to off completely. Since Twitch already has two-factor authentication, it wouldn’t be that difficult to implement a chat mode allowing subscribers and non-subscribers that have been authenticated to chat.

Two-factor authentication also means that you have an outside identity tied to the account, be it a phone number or the hardware ID of the mobile device. This would give Twitch the ability to ban all accounts associated with that phone number/device and prevent it from being used to sign up for a new account for a period of time.

Valve already does this with Counter Strike: GO, where a ban will blacklist that person’s phone number for three months and ban all accounts associated with it.

3. Turn Off Chat For Big Events

This is a copout and not suggestion that actually fixes the problem, but right now it seems to be one of the easiest conclusions. Look at it this way, with tens of thousands of people watching these events, is having them all in one central chat room really logical? Imagine packing an entire stadium worth of people into one room letting them drown each other out. Then have a team of ten people try and keep the conversation in line. Impossible, right?

As much as I’m sure event organizers don’t want to use them, there are already systems in place on Twitch to aleviate these problems. Slow chat, subscriber-only, turning chat off, all of these are useful tools. The moderators of Dreamhack even admitted that they made mistakes, with moderators overwriting each other’s decisions.

2. Shadow Bans

Simple, efficient, and taking a card from Reddit’s book. If you aren’t familiar with a shadow ban, it is a special type of punishment where the poster can see his own messages but no one else can. The problem on Reddit is that it becomes readily apparent rather quickly that you’ve been shadow banned, as all of a sudden your posts stop receiving up-votes and replies.

The program works more effectively when the user can’t gauge reactions or isn’t paying attention to them, which is why it is a good idea for Twitch. When someone is shouting into the void (or in this case wall of text moving at 100mph), odds are they aren’t looking for a response. Banning outright tells the player to create a new account, by shadow banning they can go on for hours without realizing that no one is listening.

1. Unify Bans

I like to think of this method as the nuclear option, it is probably the most effective method while simultaneously capable of causing untold destruction with widespread nuclear fallout. It requires a collaboration by a group of people whose opinions and judgement can be trusted.

In short, a recipe for disaster.

How far you want to go with this depends on how much you really want to stomp down bad behavior. For instance, should Dreamhack share bans across all of its streams? Should Dreamhack partner with other associations to share bans? Would regular streamers have access to the ban list? Who decides who is added to the list?

It’s certainly a question, one that requires a lot of thought and planning, but one that could work.

Can toxic behavior be controlled on Twitch? Let us know in the comments below.

[Rant] How To Defeat Evil Game Scores Forever


Overwatch 2016-05-06 05-39-24-40

If you haven’t been paying attention to the news, the Washington Post has taken quite a bit of heat over its review of Uncharted 4 published just a few days ago. Some of you might be confused, since stating one’s opinion on video games isn’t known for inciting vitriol while others might not detect the sarcasm in this sentence. The rest of you are probably thinking “Washington Post reviews video games?”

Before we go on, the usual statement needs to be repeated: Given that we are talking about opinions on video games, and not how to go about convicting a serial killer, the people who have been posting death threats and death wishes to Michael Thomsen, the guy who wrote the review, can kindly see yourselves out of any further discussion. The same goes for the people spouting a variety of hate speech, a population that does not include the readers of this website who are in my opinion the cream of the crop in terms of netizens.

So with that in mind, I’ve decided to write a guide on how to beat game review scores.

The first step is to find a publication that reviews games, or even more than one, that you believe you can trust. You might have to stick with one or two websites for a while in order to get a feel for how the editors work, what they look for in games, and how they evaluate titles. In fact, these sources can easily be Youtubers, streamers, or just simple bloggers. Find the people whose interests and focus meshes with your own.

I say this because I can say with relative certainty that 90% (hyperbole) of the people piling onto the Washington Post review either have never read, or don’t generally use, the paper as a source for their game reviews. In fact, I’ll go further and say that the majority probably don’t read the Washington Post straight out. The opinion of their staff, let alone one guy writing a game review, didn’t matter until he gave this game a bad score. And by the time the Washington Post publishes its next game review, most of the people in the comments section will have returned to not reading the Washington Post.

And for the record, Michael Thomsen isn’t exactly an unknown entity in games media. Thomsen is known for taking a contrarian approach, slamming popular titles by giving them low review scores. Does it make him an expert on games? No, and the review itself isn’t particularly insightful when it comes to convincing the reader why the game isn’t good.

The second step is to avoid making your purchasing decisions based off of the aggregated opinions of a small handful of people you don’t know and whose opinions you probably don’t agree with or respect. This goes hand in hand with the step above, if you go to Metacritic and see that Uncharted 4 only has one review below an 80, from a guy at the Washington Post, and you decide not to buy the game…well that’s on you.

The problem with scores is that each publication has its own system on how it scores games. You can’t compare different metrics and aggregate a mean score, but Metacritic does it anyway. The problem isn’t with the reviewers, it exists solely on Metacritic’s side, determining arbitrarily who deserves representation.

This also goes for developers and publishers who make deals based on the game’s aggregate review score. Publishers who force developers into contracts that hold multi-million dollar bonuses ransom behind the opinions of a few editors. I’ll echo Adam Sessler when I say that publishers have a great way of figuring out how a game performed, it’s called the sales charts, you have access to them. Withholding bonuses because a game sold great but scored less-than-perfect is about as asinine as giving a bonus when a game tanks but scored really high.

And finally, the best step is to stop feeding the clickbait machine that is the internet. Let me be completely frank, the sponsored post you saw on Facebook about the dog that grabs a stick and you wouldn’t believe what happens next? Odds are you will, in fact, believe what happens next. Unbelievable, surely.

For everyone who fell into clickbait in order to leave a post complaining about clickbait or share the post to attract more traffic to said clickbait, well you’re feeding the monster. Without you, clickbait articles would be…well they’d still be easy money makers, but they’d be making less money. If you were to go by the ratio of “this is clickbait” comments, they’d be making no money at all.

The thing about clickbaity headlines is that they work, and the thing about review scores is that they work. If The Washington Post hadn’t scored Uncharted 4, would anyone be talking about their review? Yes, but it would be a small handful of people shaking their head and tutting “oh that Washington Post, they don’t really play games do they?” And that would be it. No wide attention, no Troy Baker, no nothing.

They work, and I say this as someone whose website doesn’t run ads, I still look at metrics. The more sensational a headline is, the more people pay attention to it, and the more likely they will share it.

But let’s stick in reality land, shall we? Ultimately Metacritic made the mistake in not treating the review as an outlier and ignoring it, something that any aggregator worth its salt does. It is the job of Metacritic to properly curate its list of reviewers and the job of readers to take Metacritic to task when it fails at its job.

Other than that, I have no opinion on the matter.

What Happened: Missing Ink Edition


the-missing-ink-alpha

What Happened is a series of articles partially inspired by you, the community, and otherwise brought on by a fleeting moment where the flapping wires in my brain connect and memories are able to get through. Given the long development nature of MMOs, it isn’t uncommon to have a game announced and then never hear from it again, the developer drifting silently into the night only to resurface somewhere in another dimension.

I last talked about The Missing Ink in 2014, even then asking what happened to the game and its development crew at Redbedlam. The game (pictured above) shut down in early 2014 with the note that it would be coming back later that year, and we haven’t heard anything since. None of the social media accounts have been maintained since that announcement, and the game is clearly dead.

So what happened to Redbedlam? Are they dead as well? You might think so, but they are alive and kicking. They released a game last October, a shooter called Bedlam that has quite an odd mishmash of visual styles. Bedlam is available on sale today both on Steam and on Indiegala, the latter being much cheaper, and it currently holds a “very positive” rating on Steam.

It’s safe to say that The Missing Ink has probably been shelved for now, if not indefinitely, but it’s good to see that Redbedlam is still actively creating games that people like to play.

[Community] Should Developers Start Blacklisting Customers?


Chronicle_Steam_date_announce_01

Did you know that Riot Games maintains a very small blacklist of players deemed so toxic that they are banned from having an account for life? They do, and while it takes a lot to be added to the list, the end result is that any account that can be verified as owned by said person is immediately handed a permanent ban. Sounds fun, right?

It’s important to note that these blacklisted players aren’t one-time offenders, or even two-time. If you look at their stories, the players that Riot Games decides are no longer welcome in their community have gone through a multitude of accounts, all banned for death threats, denial of service attacks, and other actions that are toxic at best, illegal at worst.

While developers are constantly looking at methods of lowering the bar of entry, by converting their games to free to play or having regular sales, the increased convenience has only made it easier for the communities of said games to be infected by the rampaging plague that are cheaters and anti-social gamers. People who have no intentions on playing fair or fostering a welcoming community, but are only interested in watching the world burn, in a manner of speaking. And because creating an account is so easy, developers waste precious time and resources trying to keep problematic re-offenders from getting back in.

Valve recently adopted a policy in Counter Strike: Global Offensive to rid the game of cheaters. In order to use the “Prime” matchmaking service, you need to have two-factor authentication with a valid phone number. Get banned for cheating, and all accounts associated with that phone number will also receive a VAC ban. In addition, the phone number cannot be used for three months.

It goes further: If you don’t own the banned game, you can’t even purchase it on any of the affected accounts. Every time a phone number is banned, the ban length gets longer. With 95% of the Steam community making use of mobile authentication, according to Valve, it’s a lot harder to avoid.

So the question this week is, should developers begin blacklisting repeat offenders? If so, how should they go about doing it? Riot Games bans accounts completely and bans that person from competing in sanctioned tournaments, while Valve’s stance has always been to segregate said players to their own corners of the game where they can be ignored.

In MMOs, the issue of cheating has raised a lot of contempt between players and developers, the latter of whom have been seen on multiple occasions being lenient towards cheaters. As it turns out, the guy who spends a fair amount of real money to cheat in a game also tends to spend a lot of money in the game itself, and like an abusive customer who also happens to bankroll a small business, they are unwilling to throw him out the door without a heaping helping of warnings.

Riot Games is regularly accused of not dealing with abusive customers unless there is enough publicity to cause actual harm, like said abuser being a streamer with a large following. We’ve seen numerous accusations against companies like Trion Worlds for allowing high-paying guilds in ArcheAge to get away with exploits.

Would a blacklist work? How would you go about identifying a problematic customer and getting rid of them? Let us know in the comments below.