I’ve always trusted games published by Annapurna to be something exciting, new, and high quality.

That didn’t make them good either, though. Companies like them and Devolver Digital have had a bad habit of, for lack of a better term, using up developers and throwing them to the curb after. You’ll notice that a lot of stuff they publish get marketed as though Annapurna made them, which ends up hiding the actual developers behind the curtain, thereby robbing them of fans and thus seriously hurting their long-term prospects.

You’re coming out here arguing in favor of a megacorporation keeping even more money for itself instead of artists getting paid for their work. I feel like you should have expected to have upset people.

They’ll get better at managing bugs. What we’ll have to watch out for is other shit.

In particular, I’m not keen on the main menu ad for the DLC they slapped on, which stays even if you own the DLC.

Though I hope you’re right, there’s no guarantee of that:

It’s unclear why the remaining approximately 50 staff didn’t join Krafton, but it’s possible they had already found jobs elsewhere as the studio’s closure was announced three months earlier in May 2024.

(Disclaimer: I’m a Phoenix supporter of SWG)

I’ve followed this drama pretty closely in the last few days, and it’s really not all so damning as others here have found it. I could write up something longer, but I don’t want to get too far into the weeds, so I’ll leave it at a few paragraphs.

The long and short of it is that the way this video was made and posted, in combination with the general atmosphere of the internet trending towards Huge Drama™, makes this look like more than it actually is. From everything I’ve seen and heard, I’d characterize Nick’s actions as “flawed human making mistakes” — which is to say, perfectly forgivable. He’s since owned up to the more egregious things, such as his comments in the Gameumentary call, and the folks at SWG have reined in his influence recently due to things like his social media troubles. I personally feel like this was a very good call, and will likely be enough to cover the complaints raised.

It is also worth noting, though, that not all of the accusations are worth much. I really don’t know how $10 in alleged Twitter bucks is even worth mentioning, especially considering the claim later looks to have turned out to be a misunderstanding entirely.

All in all, while I believe it’s very fair to want to address these things, and it’s also fair to want to do so in a way that Patreon supporters both existing and potential can use said info to make better assessments with regard to their money, the reality is that the method and platform upon which these grievances were aired lead to a far more bitter and unproductive outcome than was necessary. I still respect Frost, and I don’t think he meant for this at all, but it still happened. Such is the nature of the web, sadly.

Honestly, it still amazes me that this never got successfully ripped and emulated. I’ve heard that it’s because there isn’t a reliable PS4 emulator, but frankly that surprises me as well. I’d think that the sheer popularity of this game alone would encourage one to be made pretty heavily, especially since this game looks to be on track to becoming lost media otherwise.

Equal representation’s good, and I never liked this mechanic to begin with. Works for me!

I still won’t buy it, but that’s because it lacks T.J. Rotolo, not anything to do with this.

I’m saying that if you think you said “that is a stupid position to take and here is why,” you missed the mark severely, and you should be more careful with your phrasing if you don’t want people to get upset at you in future. It’s not about people “willingly” misinterpreting anything — whether you realized it or not, what you said wasn’t the level-headed response you may have intended it to be.

I saw that one. It’s what I was referring to when I said “saying you want to ‘avoid alienating people’ when closing a PR that aims to improve inclusivity is more than a little pathetic.” Criticizing the maintainer response there was one of the good parts of the blog post.

But the outcome of that doesn’t really much change the fact that the sarcastic PR was sarcastic, and thus calling that PR spam is reasonable, whereas claiming they called the trans woman herself spam is not. To be clear, however: I’ve no issue with the sarcastic PR itself, only the framing of it in the blog post.

It is absolutely a reasonable interpretation to assume you were referring to the people making the decision you didn’t like. And even if it wasn’t, calling an idea a group of people have “incredibly fucking stupid” isn’t much different, as it carries an implication of how you see those people.

If you feel other people are getting offended too easily at what you say, I recommend spending extra time on your posts to ensure you avoid saying derogatory things you don’t intend for. Something that looks good to you can be incredibly insulting to others who read differently from you, and since conversation is a two-way street, that’s the kind of thing we all need to be aware of.

I’ve no love lost for the developers in question. But between the original two PRs and associated comments being from over three years ago, and the “trans woman [being called] 'spam” comment being said about a PR that seems pretty strongly to me to be meant as a sarcastic insult rather than a genuine contribution, I can’t help but find it a little unconvincing.

It’s not without merit by far. I feel that Kling’s blog post not addressing the drama was in poor taste and may indicate a lack of self-improvement regarding the initial fuckup, and saying you want to “avoid alienating people” when closing a PR that aims to improve inclusivity is more than a little pathetic. I also understand not wanting bigots to be able to just bury their past and pretend they were never bigoted. It’s just that the fiery response this has gotten still ends up feeling a bit disproportionate given how old the truly insulting issues were. Am I missing something?