Very smart observation. I agree it is when you have to reload that you become most vulnerable vs the Illuminates.
Really? You’ve never heard of anyone turning down any amount of money for the sake of creative freedom? I don’t think you’ve read much internet.
Yes, obviously. As a game gets older and newer players become scarce, all that will remain are the core fans who love the game the most for what it already is and will play that game until the end. It’s only natural.
The vast majority of the people who might agree with you in a lot of those regards—most of those people stopped playing long ago. So yeah, that’s why all that appears to be left are the “defenders”; we’re the ones that weathered the storm while the others were washed away, so to say. We are the majority now, or at the very least, the loudest voices by far.
I won’t apologize for sticking with a game I love or defending what I like about it (though, I haven’t even done that in this thread—I just said it was a great game, and that alone ruffled some feathers).
I already addressed this.
What is “accepting” to you? Patting you on the hand and telling you it’ll be ok? No, seriously, what more do you want? This is all but straight up agreeing. I guess you’ll stop at nothing short of that though.
Well, yeah. That’s the nature of the topic itself.
What do you want us to tell you?
You could complain that the game doesn’t have a spinning camera and disco lights too, and people may leave you to your opinion, but that doesn’t mean anyone is going to agree with you that it’s a bad thing.
Why is anything short of blind unwavering agreement the same as “Not accepting any complaint. And unobjective AF.”?
Johan: Yeah, we’ve been close to bankruptcy three times
I recommend you read the whole interview to get a little more perspective that is less cynical for yourself. You have to remember that videos games are an art form and not all people that work in the industry are out to create video games for the sole purpose of making money. Some are content to make a good enough earning that it allows them to keep doing what they love (making video games).
IMHO, it isn’t naive to recognize that not all game developers have acquisition of wealth as the primary driving force in their professional lives. Some that choose to work in the video games industry work simply to make great games they can be proud of and then hope there is enough audience that appreciates that creation to where they can continue doing what they love while having their basic financial needs also met.
Wuh, whole bunch of replies have landed
Unfortunately, I’m not that good at replying like you are(partially bcs I’m not that good in english, so I can’t fully express my thoughs) so I’ll make it short.
-About “quality vs money”:
Don’t let devs fool you please of course everyone tends to say “quality of my work is more important for me, than profit” Even we do so. But thats a pure lie. Creating some good product doesn’t feed our children. Selling it does!!
One thing I have learned in microeconomy subject at the university is: company greedy for money is healthy company. We may not like it, but that is why is economy (market)is balanced.
Of course there are some studios, which focus on creating piece of art. Try “The Beginners Guide” or “Stanley Parable”. Creator of it is one of them imho. But Arrowhead? Arrowhead is faaar away from it. I don’t want to discredit them. As I said, I like Helldivers a lot. But I wouldn’t ever try to think, that Helldivers was made to bring quality to the world. They just wanted to earn some money for their families. And they had good time and lot of fun while doing it ofc. Its propably theirs hobby and job at the same tims. But thats all.
-About "not accepting complaints"
I’m propably going to dissapoint you again, but I’m still standing for what I said. Few quotes won’t change it. You guys are rethoricaly skilled and you can wrap your thoughs in a good looking and polite sentences. But despite that, I can feel the “critic refusing” from it. For example, watch Steam Discussions. Whenever someone creates a critic thread, you reply with " You don’t get it. The game is great and you just don’t understand it’s beauty" literally every single thread.
And yet this is a much more agreeable statement than your previous one if you ask me
-About “quality vs money”:
I mostly agree with what you said here. We can and should not blindly believe everything they say. However I think its a little reductive to assume all game devs are like that. Some deliberately go against that design and find ways to make it work. I dont know enough about Arrowhead to make a more sensible contribution tho, but the interview cusman shared does sound genuine.
-About "not accepting complaints"
then again we are still discussing a topic that is mostly subjective. So Im not sure how reasonable this complaint is. In the end, there is still a difference when arguing about favorite colors compared to arguing about an exact science. Its not entirely clear where to situate this topic on that scale.
To be fair, you called out a bunch of people. Some by name, including me.
You said people aren’t accepting. I provided quotes proving otherwise. If you’re not accepting of that, then ok.
I asked you what more you wanted. You just say we’re doing the wrong thing; well this is your chance to tell us what the right thing is. You still haven’t answered that. You’ve only complained about how you feel, then have no answers about how to further accommodate you. It’s like when you have a baby that’s crying and you’re trying to figure out what it wants. You give it a bottle, and it just throws it on the floor, etc. It doesn’t tell you what it wants. It just keeps crying and all you know is that apparently you’re doing something wrong. Not calling you a baby, but the situation is the same thing.
“Rhetorically skilled” doesn’t say anything. Either it’s a good point or not.
Frankly, I’m not even trying to be “polite” either (nor trying not to be); I don’t care about that. There’s just no reason to get emotionally involved and “yell” or whatever else. I can make a point and word it calmly, and if that comes off as polite or skilled, I’ll take the compliment.
I think what you’ll find about me is that I just don’t sink to name-calling, or simply say stuff like “Wow you’re stupid. LMAO”, etc. and just stick to the points (whether you agree with me or not). That probably has something to do with how you feel.
So basically, you’re going to “feel” that you’re right no matter what’s actually written. I’m ok with this. At least now we “defenders” know that and can discard further complaints on the matter, that’s all.
I respond to a lot of threads, but to say that’s what I say is a lie. It’s easy to make broad sweeping claims like that while pointing to no specific case, since that’s where claims like this are tested and fall apart.
Prime example: take this thread. All I said was that Helldivers was a great game, that it was a subjective matter. …that’s it. Both of those things are completely true—regardless of how politely or impolitely they’re worded. It’s the very fact that anyone disagreed with the premise “Helldivers isn’t a great game” is what got people labeled as “Defenders” and “Not accepting of counter opinions” (which is the great irony here).
Anyway, if you have a problem with something on Steam, take it to Steam. It’s irrelevant here. You’re just making this a personal matter now. You can even PM me if you have a personal issue with me. I’m fine with that as well.
As for the “quality vs money” thing, I’m not going to entertain that much. You said it was naive to think any devs were like that, but I think that point has already been thoroughly dismantled by several people now. Whether or not Arrowhead is one of those companies: I don’t care. Think what you will. I tend to like their games, so I tend to buy their games.
@9.0 talked about developers valuing their original idea / vision as more important than profit. Please don’t equate that to mean quality. They are not competing on quality in a red market. They were out to create something new and unique in a blue market hoping to find a new audience currently under served. As a business Arrowhead and their publishing partners have to spend according to what they think that blue market will be and that they will be able to reach them and that it will be sufficient to cover costs and hopefully also profitable and allow for growth of studio.
A company doesn’t have to be motivated purely by top level greed. A company can treat the need to be profitable as a burden of responsibility to those employees and investors and even customers that helped build up the company and continue its path of growth or sustainability. Perspective matters.
There are more balanced ways to view the world and you should recognize that there are companies that will use micro-transactions based gambling systems within their games including targeting minors or even adults prone to addiction behavior and whale those customers or put their developers through extreme and unhealthy crunch times only to lay off majority of work force after shipping game and there are other companies that do neither of those things and are content to have a more balanced approach where they serve their customers, employees, investors and the company all in a more equitable and honorable way.
As you continue in your education, I hope you encounter courses that go into how to create a company, what is the value of a mission and vision statement, how that affects corporate culture, how to attract and retain top talent, how to build brand and consumer trust.
There are more types of business than just those with simplistic mission statement to make their stakeholders wealthy.
Yes, it is difficult, but I said “a little profit” vs “a lot of profit”, as in, both scenarios don’t involve bankruptcy.
I completely agree with you, a studio making a work of art that is 100% not marketable is going to have a lot of trouble!
There of course are compromises to be made, and in fact are made time and time again, but I feel that the studios that really feel passion for their game will only make compromises when it’s absolutely necessary, vs one who will change the entire thing to appease stakeholders.
Yes, sometimes the studio really is in a pinch and without the money they will shut down, but that’s a completely different story.
To be honest, I was just upset that nobody had an answer for the argument put up by RangerRen. All I did was show the plot holes.
I don’t have an issue with people disliking Helldivers, but I do take issue when people hate on things without much thought.
A proper, unbiased complaint is always welcome :)
The problem is when you start blaming the game for your own actions, and then spontaneously combust midway, all the while attacking everyone who dares to suggest it might be you and not the game.
The only thing that would make it better would to have some perk that would decrease reload time to beat LV 15 Lumis Solo.
Is this a good place to throw an Idea? …How about to enable all lvl 50 veteran player to do a “fast reload”, a reloading technique that requires the player to press the reload key at a specific time,something like on Alien Swarm,when you press reload button and then when indicator on the reload bar goes on the middle sector you press again.
I disagree with making any game play mechanic arbitrarily rank restricted in a skill based game like Helldivers. I like the fast reloading option in Alien Swarm which is available to all players.