for example it's like saying, the developers clearly chopped this finished game up to sell it piecemeal as DLC. how can anyone prove that unless it's admitted? yet surely there must be examples? do we reject all claims of this just because no dev is dumb enough to admit it?
Unlock codes for on-disc content used to get headlines. I don't think anybody cares any more. And given where we're at with post-release monetization...
I'm not familiar with The Medium
About mid-game, you play through some key traumas of a pedophile. I don't remember if his proclivities are hinted at before you explore his past (I want to say yes), or if they pull the rug, so to speak. Either way, swing-and-a-miss, like the rest of the story.
(For an all-around B-game, I enjoyed it. But I would also not have played it if not for Game Pass. I don't think it will be remembered. Not unless its developer, Blooper, actually gets to make (or re-make) a Silent Hill game in the end.)
the examples I always remember along these lines are mass effect and baldur's gate siege of dragonspear's trans characters who immediately announce themselves as trans to the player and deadname themselves, which trans players claimed to be offended by, since the goal of being trans is to BE the other gender and not have anyone even think of you as trans
Mass Effect's turn on letting you screw every alien? I've always written that off as pandering to the 'I wonder what Tali's sweat tastes like'-faction from their forums.
Dragonspear's 'controversy' I've found to be completely overblown. One badly written NPC turning into some lynchpin issue is silly, when the entire premise (mid-quel to a decades old series made on the same tech) dooms it to obscurity. Made for good fodder on RPGCodex though, I bet.
and of course you can say, the steps toward being more inclusive are always going to be riddled with mistakes that are fixed over time, and trying is better than not trying, but this is just specifically on the subject of whether it's ever been damaging to the game in some way (both of the deadname examples were apologized-for and later patched)
On social media and in critical reception, for sure. I lean toward storm in a teacup, personally, but I have no way of knowing for sure.
And I do see this as growing pains, yes. Though that doesn't mean that video games writing will suddenly be elevated beyond pulp in most cases. They'll just be more or less "of their time", depending on how things go.
there have been a number of examples of this over the years, though as usual it would be hard to quantify
That's where I fall on most of these. Any blunder on a hot-button issue has the potential to turn someone off. And in general, the more story-heavy a game is, the more vulnerable they are to even having hot-button issues. But in the end, who the fuck knows? I have a hard time making definitive statements beyond that and am dubious when people do.
indie games are more prone to these kinds of outbursts since they usually don't have a social media manager
Goodbye Volcano High which I mentioned earlier is hostile to any potential audience which offers less than 100% praise, but that game's not even out yet, and even so would not have much basis of comparison to say "yes it performed badly by this metric"
And because the devs are more accessible and more invested, as any idividual 'owns' a greater portion of the whole, etc.
The GVH devs appear to be in panic mode, for sure. Maybe the Sony spotlight or morbid curiosity alone will be enough to put them in the black. My bet is nobody will be talking about it within a week of release.
Caves of Qud was enthusiastically reviewed by problematic youtuber SsethTzeentach...he got 4 million new eyeballs on the game and the devs threw a huge fit and are paranoid to this day about anyone from his audience enjoying the game
(it's a game you slowly realize is a sexless "safe" transformation fetish game for the devs, and you're not supposed to agree with or want to roleplay as the fascist paladin faction in the game that wants to purge all the bizarre mutants)
I'm reminded of Campo Santo asking PewDiePie to take down his Let's Play of Firewatch after he had his 'gamer moment'. On the one hand, I completely understand and it was their right to do, but on the other hand - does it really matter? I can only assume that they felt forced to after publicly repudiating him. The moral high ground alone is worth it, I guess. This seems to be a similar case.
Judging by the Steam reviews for Caves of Qud, this feud has not hurt them. The opposite, in fact. So either Seth's fans don't care, or the dev didn't need to try and dissociate themselves from him.
