June 26, 2025 - 1:46 AM
Been reading through all of the posts against me over my stance on the Stop Killing Games initiative. Tons of people calling me a liar or that I misrepresented the initiative. Also lots of content creators dogpiling on this to get their pound of flesh.
Lets dig into what I actually did and said. I put out two videos on August 6th 2024 and August 7th 2024. These videos are linked at the bottom of this post. Many people have not watched them and are just calling me a liar or attacking my character. Give the videos a watch, read the initiative itself, make a conclusion that you aren't copy pasting from social media.
Monetization on these videos is disabled so no this is not some ploy to increase revenue. I just care about this subject and have rightful concerns as a person working in this space.
In the first video.
I go through what an initiative is, how it's not law, and how it's a starting point for this entire process. This helps people understand that this is to start the conversation for change and can adapt later.
I then go through the initiative and some of it's goals from the official page for it. I then talk about the repercussions of them should they be implemented. As written all games need to be left in a "Functional Playable State".
Next I bring up The Crew and walk through the business around it, the sequels, and the size of the player-base at time of sunset. I did this because it was called out by this initiative as an example of publishers destroying a game.
I also harshly critique Ross Scotts wording in his videos because they disparage the lawmaking process and lawmakers which doesn't benefit players or this movement in any way.
In the second video.
I talk about potential scenarios where a studio could be abused if the initiative was implemented as written. It adds new paths for abuse and that needs to be discussed to help hone this initiative into something that would do good without doing harm.
I then explain that very few people in the game development space can actually discuss this from the other side due to fear of losing their jobs. A studio is much safer in silent dissent then they are discussing the drawbacks of your ideals. The recent attacks on our games is obvious evidence of this.
To recap.
My main issue with this initiative is that it is broad in it's approach to change the industry and the exact language of the initiative, not the FAQ, requests that all games stay in a "Functional Playable State".
This is not feasible for all games at a technical level and could potentially restrict developers from making online-only games like MMOs, MOBAs, and User Generated Content games in the future. That list is not exhaustive and it doesn't matter if you do or don't like those kinds of games.
Effectively this has the potential to restrict future developers from making kick-ass experiences because it locks a weight on their designs.
Even though this is an initiative that can change in the future this goal is core to the mission and deeply disruptive so it needs to be called out.
To clear up some disinformation about my character.
I left AAA in 2016 because I fucking hate how the industry is now and prefer indie entirely. I don't like Blizzard or I would have stayed working there. That's why I quit. That's the entire point. Fuck AAA and what many studios have turned games into.
Outside of that no I am not financially supported by live service games. I make a single player RPG and am the Director of Strategy for offbrand games. In that position I am paid MINIMUM WAGE by my own decision because I care about games succeeding not about profiting off of them.
To further this the games we're publishing are all playable offline anyway because their gameplay loops are not only based on inter-player interaction. Not all games are like this and not all games can be like this.
No, I have not been running away from discourse on this I talked about it for around 8 hours on stream yesterday. I never took my videos down and I have not discussed the initiative in the 10 months it's been since I released those videos. My internet also died mid-broadcast so I had to go live again 30 minutes later. Thanks ISP.
For those that will scream HE'S DOUBLING DOWN. Yes I damn well am. I give a shit about this initiative and what it means for games, developers, and players in the future.
To finish out.
Just because I don't support this doesn't mean you should blindly follow me in that just because I said pretty words on the internet. You also shouldn't blindly bash me because some other creator said to. Watch the videos I put out, read the initiative, decide for yourself. Apply critical thinking and don't outsource it to others.
As always.
Stay Frosty.
Lets dig into what I actually did and said. I put out two videos on August 6th 2024 and August 7th 2024. These videos are linked at the bottom of this post. Many people have not watched them and are just calling me a liar or attacking my character. Give the videos a watch, read the initiative itself, make a conclusion that you aren't copy pasting from social media.
Monetization on these videos is disabled so no this is not some ploy to increase revenue. I just care about this subject and have rightful concerns as a person working in this space.
In the first video.
I go through what an initiative is, how it's not law, and how it's a starting point for this entire process. This helps people understand that this is to start the conversation for change and can adapt later.
I then go through the initiative and some of it's goals from the official page for it. I then talk about the repercussions of them should they be implemented. As written all games need to be left in a "Functional Playable State".
Next I bring up The Crew and walk through the business around it, the sequels, and the size of the player-base at time of sunset. I did this because it was called out by this initiative as an example of publishers destroying a game.
I also harshly critique Ross Scotts wording in his videos because they disparage the lawmaking process and lawmakers which doesn't benefit players or this movement in any way.
In the second video.
I talk about potential scenarios where a studio could be abused if the initiative was implemented as written. It adds new paths for abuse and that needs to be discussed to help hone this initiative into something that would do good without doing harm.
I then explain that very few people in the game development space can actually discuss this from the other side due to fear of losing their jobs. A studio is much safer in silent dissent then they are discussing the drawbacks of your ideals. The recent attacks on our games is obvious evidence of this.
To recap.
My main issue with this initiative is that it is broad in it's approach to change the industry and the exact language of the initiative, not the FAQ, requests that all games stay in a "Functional Playable State".
This is not feasible for all games at a technical level and could potentially restrict developers from making online-only games like MMOs, MOBAs, and User Generated Content games in the future. That list is not exhaustive and it doesn't matter if you do or don't like those kinds of games.
Effectively this has the potential to restrict future developers from making kick-ass experiences because it locks a weight on their designs.
Even though this is an initiative that can change in the future this goal is core to the mission and deeply disruptive so it needs to be called out.
To clear up some disinformation about my character.
I left AAA in 2016 because I fucking hate how the industry is now and prefer indie entirely. I don't like Blizzard or I would have stayed working there. That's why I quit. That's the entire point. Fuck AAA and what many studios have turned games into.
Outside of that no I am not financially supported by live service games. I make a single player RPG and am the Director of Strategy for offbrand games. In that position I am paid MINIMUM WAGE by my own decision because I care about games succeeding not about profiting off of them.
To further this the games we're publishing are all playable offline anyway because their gameplay loops are not only based on inter-player interaction. Not all games are like this and not all games can be like this.
No, I have not been running away from discourse on this I talked about it for around 8 hours on stream yesterday. I never took my videos down and I have not discussed the initiative in the 10 months it's been since I released those videos. My internet also died mid-broadcast so I had to go live again 30 minutes later. Thanks ISP.
For those that will scream HE'S DOUBLING DOWN. Yes I damn well am. I give a shit about this initiative and what it means for games, developers, and players in the future.
To finish out.
Just because I don't support this doesn't mean you should blindly follow me in that just because I said pretty words on the internet. You also shouldn't blindly bash me because some other creator said to. Watch the videos I put out, read the initiative, decide for yourself. Apply critical thinking and don't outsource it to others.
As always.
Stay Frosty.
First Video:
Second Video:
Minimum Wage Proof:
June 26, 2025 - 5:03 AM
Just talked to Charlie and Josh Strife Hayes for a bit in DMs.
If you're mad at me for being a dick to Ross I get it and I'm sorry for that. I should not have lashed out but I had an emotional response due to how important this subject is to me.
On the developer side I have been in a constant battle with people online for nearly a decade trying to inform them how difficult it is to make and release videogames. The idea that any of these technical hurdles are easy to overcome and would be simple to implement is the exact kind of thing I've been fighting.
When I bring up the issues with leaving Online Only games in a "Functional Playable State" after sunsetting I am always met with responses diminishing the effort needed to do that. This is not a simple hurdle to overcome and is exactly why I don't like this initiative. You can't leave these challenges up to a "Figure it out" mentality and you can't diminish the work of those on the dev side just because you want your way.
Movements like this showcase to me how little the general public understands about game development, modern gaming architecture, and online games as a whole. That's why I put videos out poking holes in this because it sets that entire conversation back to the stone age in terms of developer/player understanding. Making shit is hard. Making shit when people think it's easy is harder.
If you want all games to be left in a "Functional Playable State" then you need to listen to people when they talk about how infeasible that will be in a lot of situations. Since this is the initiatives PRIMARY goal as listed on the ECI page it's kind of important to resolve that.
If you're mad at me for being a dick to Ross I get it and I'm sorry for that. I should not have lashed out but I had an emotional response due to how important this subject is to me.
On the developer side I have been in a constant battle with people online for nearly a decade trying to inform them how difficult it is to make and release videogames. The idea that any of these technical hurdles are easy to overcome and would be simple to implement is the exact kind of thing I've been fighting.
When I bring up the issues with leaving Online Only games in a "Functional Playable State" after sunsetting I am always met with responses diminishing the effort needed to do that. This is not a simple hurdle to overcome and is exactly why I don't like this initiative. You can't leave these challenges up to a "Figure it out" mentality and you can't diminish the work of those on the dev side just because you want your way.
Movements like this showcase to me how little the general public understands about game development, modern gaming architecture, and online games as a whole. That's why I put videos out poking holes in this because it sets that entire conversation back to the stone age in terms of developer/player understanding. Making shit is hard. Making shit when people think it's easy is harder.
If you want all games to be left in a "Functional Playable State" then you need to listen to people when they talk about how infeasible that will be in a lot of situations. Since this is the initiatives PRIMARY goal as listed on the ECI page it's kind of important to resolve that.
July 4, 2025 - 9:11 AM
The most interesting narrative is that my videos somehow "killed" the initiative. This graph shows that the initiative already had a downward trend in interest when my videos dropped. My videos do not seem to have had any impact on the movement at all.
Making me the villain did though.
Best of luck with your next steps.
Making me the villain did though.
Best of luck with your next steps.
July 4, 2025 - 9:31 AM
And for those that don't understand why I put out the videos in the first place you might want to give this a read.
![[Story] Perbedaan Gamer dan Player | Perspektif Bocah Era Rental PS](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEysJrXdvYWvqyDX2JZvWnw65tjZh61qN7vZDS_FJfrSoYYZ0JwYfUmregNvHAaALlh34kYIT9fqZvgSBXFZwHvHo5hSZaZPHIGJ9EOeBBTRSFPZTceb_9YkyZCYyhzK0USQxywm0VIn64NgouwfMrenb3Vq_-jStSsrt7EN_bh5c_0kQnLvZwT6-pv8uK/s72-w640-c-h360/Perbedaan%20Gamer%20dan%20Player,%20Bacotan%20Bocah%20Jaman%20Dulu.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment