Culturally problematic?

[Beardy Wilson]

5 minutes ago, Faintly Macabre said:

People love to say this when this sort of thing comes up, but apparently they don't respect the freedom of the artists to decide that they care how a group of people, no matter how small or uninvolved they supposedly are, feel about their art. In a fit of irony, this freedom doesn't seem to include the freedom to have second thoughts. If somebody complains about something and the developer decides to heed those complaints, they're caving or pandering or whatever; they're not allowed to have just listened, learned, and changed their feelings about something based on the input of something else -- unless it's something that they've arbitrarily decided is important, and then you get a forum full of topics about how much a DLC sucks and how terrible they are for not listening to your complaints and suggestions on that topic. Seriously, the hypocrisy is incredible.

I never said they shouldn't have taken him out of the game. I said adding that as a reason was odd. So there is nothing hypocritical about that. And let's be honest, they themselves didn't find it offensive either, thats why it was put in the game in the first place. Ofc they change their mind when the loud and small miniority bullies them into it. 

[Faintly Macabre]

34 minutes ago, Beardy Wilson said:

And let's be honest, they themselves didn't find it offensive either, thats why it was put in the game in the first place. Ofc they change their mind when the loud and small miniority bullies them into it. 

Thanks for demonstrating my point perfectly. Nevermind the fact that they changed a lot of his quotes even before anybody made much of a public fuss about it -- a rather small and civil fuss, I might add -- if they change their mind, it's because they've been bullied; they're not capable of taking someone else's viewpoints and using them to finetune their own for any reason other than cowing.

Just so everyone knows: if you were ever a kid who hogged a toy a little and your friend, classmate, sibling, whatever was upset about it and your mom told you you should share? Well your mother's a filthy communist, and if you buckled under the social pressure instead of flipping her and that other kid the bird without even giving it a second thought, you're gutless and unable to think for yourself. Your first inclination is always the right call.

[axxel]

1 hour ago, Faintly Macabre said:

People love to say this when this sort of thing comes up, but apparently they don't respect the freedom of the artists to decide that they care how a group of people, no matter how small or uninvolved they supposedly are, feel about their art. In a fit of irony, this freedom doesn't seem to include the freedom to have second thoughts. If somebody complains about something and the developer decides to heed those complaints, they're caving or pandering or whatever; they're not allowed to have just listened, learned, and changed their feelings about something based on the input of something else -- unless it's something that they've arbitrarily decided is important, and then you get a forum full of topics about how much a DLC sucks and how terrible they are for not listening to your complaints and suggestions on that topic. Seriously, the hypocrisy is incredible.

Technically, it's not hypocrisy. First, it's the internet, second, not many care about constructive criticism, third, don't underestimate the Death of the author, fourth, an art piece or a game will never statisfy all people because all people are different. There will be always a group who complains about something - it's normal and it's reality and this group isn't terrible. Nothing and nobody is perfect even Klei, DS and any forum user. So please don't speak about them that badly even if they have gone on your nerves. Without complains maybe DS could've been in a bad state, who knows?

 Maybe Klei chose the lesser evil and many liked Warbucks very much. I am happy they could release the game even with delay and listened to us to implement the teleportato after its release and left us Warbucks in the gamefiles.

[Rellimarual]

Klei has stated that no one complained to them about Warbucks. Nobody bullied them or asked for the character to be removed. To the contrary, all the pressure is coming from the other side, which is far louder and more extreme. If Klei were easily bullied, they’d have brought him back by now. But they are standing firm, which is a really nice demo of artistic freedom.

[Beardy Wilson]

2 hours ago, Rellimarual said:

Klei has stated that no one complained to them about Warbucks. Nobody bullied them or asked for the character to be removed. To the contrary, all the pressure is coming from the other side, which is far louder and more extreme. If Klei were easily bullied, they’d have brought him back by now. But they are standing firm, which is a really nice demo of artistic freedom.

So why they felt adding that to their reasoning? 

[Faintly Macabre]

3 hours ago, Beardy Wilson said:

So why they felt adding that to their reasoning? 

Because they felt that way? It was part of the reason they made their decision? I think the bigger and more important question is why does it matter? They made the decision and they've said why. EIther you believe this artistic freedom stuff or you don't. If you do, leave it alone already.

[Maxposting]

On 22. 5. 2019 at 8:19 PM, Caochu said:

If I remember some old posts about it, it was because in some players' eyes Wendy was associated with either suicidal tendencies, either satanism. But, again, if I remember correctly, they were things never really discussed before and which really came onto the table in order to justify that Warbucks wasn't the only "culturally problematic" character. Therefore, it was used as an argument to let him in the game.

mfw people ship her ( a child ) with a old man

[minespatch]

1 minute ago, __IvoCZE__ said:

a old man

Wilson is old?

ouo;;;; ^{Does this mean I'm old?}

[Pop Guy]

14 hours ago, Rellimarual said:

Klei has stated that no one complained to them about Warbucks. Nobody bullied them or asked for the character to be removed. To the contrary, all the pressure is coming from the other side, which is far louder and more extreme. If Klei were easily bullied, they’d have brought him back by now. But they are standing firm, which is a really nice demo of artistic freedom.

12 hours ago, Beardy Wilson said:

So why they felt adding that to their reasoning? 

In my opinion, the "cultural" problem has always been a false explanation: I believe the real reason was still a copyright problem. In fact, Klei feared that the creators of Jumanji denounced Klei for taking "too much inspiration" from their colonialist. That skin was really too much, too tanned. 

1 hour ago, minespatch said:

Wilson is old?

ouo;;;; ^{Does this mean I'm old?}

Wilson is young inside 

[Faintly Macabre]

2 hours ago, Pop Guy said:

In my opinion, the "cultural" problem has always been a false explanation: I believe the real reason was still a copyright problem. In fact, Klei feared that the creators of Jumanji denounced Klei for taking "too much inspiration" from their colonialist. That skin was really too much, too tanned. 

If this was true, they wouldn't leave his information, sprites, etc. in the files, because they'd still be infringing on copyright. It is well known that the guts of the character are still there. And why wouldn't they just cop to that anyway? "We removed the character to avoid copyright concerns." IP rights are a much-despised quagmire and saying that would have made the whole thing infinitely smoother than daring to get the FYIGM crowd riled up for having the audacity/yellow bellies to give a crap about what people think of their work.

[Beardy Wilson]

12 hours ago, Faintly Macabre said:

Because they felt that way? It was part of the reason they made their decision? I think the bigger and more important question is why does it matter? They made the decision and they've said why. EIther you believe this artistic freedom stuff or you don't. If you do, leave it alone already.

If they truly felt that way how did it got into the game?

[Maxposting]

7 hours ago, minespatch said:

Wilson is old?

ouo;;;; ^{Does this mean I'm old?}

I meant Maxwell but wilson is a good guess too.

[minespatch]

2 hours ago, __IvoCZE__ said:

I meant Maxwell but wilson is a good guess too.

so both pedophilia and incest???

[Faintly Macabre]

6 hours ago, Beardy Wilson said:

If they truly felt that way how did it got into the game?

So have you just literally never done anything and realized later "oof, maybe that wasn't such a good idea?"

[Beardy Wilson]

1 hour ago, Faintly Macabre said:

So have you just literally never done anything and realized later "oof, maybe that wasn't such a good idea?"

The point i wanted to make with that question is that: Maybe they felt like it wasn't such a good idea because they didn't want people to screech at them? Even if it would probably had zero effect on them. 

[Faintly Macabre]

28 minutes ago, Beardy Wilson said:

The point i wanted to make with that question is that: Maybe they felt like it wasn't such a good idea because they didn't want people to screech at them? Even if it would probably had zero effect on them. 

Or maybe they just genuinely give a crap about how stuff they do makes other people feel. Previous remarks of yours such as people needing to "grow a pair" make it clear that this sort of thing is beyond you, but not everybody thinks the way you do, thank god.

[Beardy Wilson]

4 minutes ago, Faintly Macabre said:

Or maybe they just genuinely give a crap about how stuff they do makes other people feel. Previous remarks of yours such as people needing to "grow a pair" make it clear that this sort of thing is beyond you, but not everybody thinks the way you do, thank god.

Well if they feel like going down that route they can start to appease everyone that has a slightest offence about their work. And it won't be rewarding on the long run i can tell you that. Also there are many things that are offend me. You know what do i do? Move on with my life.

[Rellimarual]

36 minutes ago, Beardy Wilson said:

The point i wanted to make with that question is that: Maybe they felt like it wasn't such a good idea because they didn't want people to screech at them? Even if it would probably had zero effect on them. 

People have been screeching at them nonstop since they removed the character, and that's just in the forums. (I'm sure the easily outraged have slo sent them long angry emails complaining about the removal, too.) Basically, nobody who had even the slightest issue with Warbucks was even a tenth as whiny, persistent and obnoxious as the "bring-him-back" crew, and yet, Klei has stood firm. So I don't think they're afraid of that sort of pressure.

2 minutes ago, Beardy Wilson said:

Also there are many things that are offend me. You know what do i do? Move on with my life

Then you should be able to recover from the removal of Warbucks in no time, as well. Congratulations! There are many people on these forums who are just so oversensitive they're still going on and on about it.

[Beardy Wilson]

12 minutes ago, Rellimarual said:

People have been screeching at them nonstop since they removed the character, and that's just in the forums. (I'm sure the easily outraged have slo sent them long angry emails complaining about the removal, too.) Basically, nobody who had even the slightest issue with Warbucks was even a tenth as whiny, persistent and obnoxious as the "bring-him-back" crew, and yet, Klei has stood firm. So I don't think they're afraid of that sort of pressure.

Then you should be able to recover from the removal of Warbucks in no time, as well. Congratulations! There are many people on these forums who are just so oversensitive they're still going on and on about it.

Don't know if you read my previous posts but i never cared about the removal of him. The only thing i cared about is their unnecessary reasoning. But I think there is a difference between people sreeching to remove something and people screeching because an artist created something and they want it back cos they loved it.

[Rellimarual]

2 minutes ago, Beardy Wilson said:

Don't know if you read my previous posts but i never cared about the removal of him. The only thing i cared about is their unnecessary reasoning. But I think there is a difference between people sreeching to remove something and people screeching because an artist created something and they want it back cos they loved it.

Nobody screeched for the character to be removed, though. That's entirely in your imagination. Fantitlement is a thing, and for sure Klei was looking for feedback in Early Access but ultimately art is not a democracy and they have final say about the product that goes out under their name.

[Beardy Wilson]

6 minutes ago, Rellimarual said:

Nobody screeched for the character to be removed, though. That's entirely in your imagination. Fantitlement is a thing, and for sure Klei was looking for feedback in Early Access but ultimately art is not a democracy and they have final say about the product that goes out under their name.

Who claimed otherwise? I did think they were screeching too but an other commenter pointed that out to me earlier. But maybe if you'd read it you wouldn't assume its my immagination because i already knew that at this point. But it seems like you didnt really fully comprehend my previous comment either.

[inferjus4]

I am just disappointed how Klei removed a character that we had a chance to get used to. They changed his quotes, so he was not offensive anymore. He was quite boring, but there are many other characters that are simple and not interesting. I hope Klei will add him back in the future.

[Faintly Macabre]

18 minutes ago, Beardy Wilson said:

Well if they feel like going down that route they can start to appease everyone that has a slightest offence about their work. And it won't be rewarding on the long run i can tell you that. Also there are many things that are offend me. You know what do i do? Move on with my life.

"Everyone that has the slightest offence about their work" they ditched one thing, for Christ's sake, and it wasn't even the sole reason for making that decision. And nobody gives a damn how you react to things that offend you. This planet has billions of people on it that aren't you and if you really have the conceit to believe that the way you conduct yourself is the One True Path then you're not as different from the relatively small group of people you're conflating with anyone who's ever had any concerns at all about the effect something can have on a larger problem.

[Beardy Wilson]

40 minutes ago, Faintly Macabre said:

Or maybe they just genuinely give a crap about how stuff they do makes other people feel. Previous remarks of yours such as people needing to "grow a pair" make it clear that this sort of thing is beyond you, but not everybody thinks the way you do, thank god.

 

5 minutes ago, Faintly Macabre said:

"Everyone that has the slightest offence about their work" they ditched one thing, for Christ's sake, and it wasn't even the sole reason for making that decision. And nobody gives a damn how you react to things that offend you. This planet has billions of people on it that aren't you and if you really have the conceit to believe that the way you conduct yourself is the One True Path then you're not as different from the relatively small group of people you're conflating with anyone who's ever had any concerns at all about the effect something can have on a larger problem.

But i am the one contradicting myself. My only concern is that I don't want keli in the future going down appeasing game journos and hating on their own fanbase like other developer teams did. That's it. I hope i was clear on that because i don't want to see another comment talking about me reee-ing about they removing Warbucks when you only have to read the first thing that started this discussion to know that it wasn't the case.

[JoeW]

What is it specifically that needs to be more clear? Because to me the whole issue just seems like it's just a bunch of posts and comments repeating "culturally problematic" by people who have not read anything that we have said about the issue.