Jim was hit with a dmca claim (again) *Updated* the dev response

[Mikeybb]

Here's the link to Jim's response video:
http://youtu.be/HGi_2fNi9E8

I don't know why I bothered to watch. It really was the same old stuff again.

I've been noticing that with his output lately, but some people seem to enjoy it still, so more power to him.

As to the topic, even if it was a trailer, I have little sympathy for anyone who wields dmca like a hammer, whatever circumstances they believe mitigate the action.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

Spoiler: You wrote it, ya know it

Hold on a second. You're saying it's OK to lower the bar even further on making strong points in game reviews - the failure to do so often being brushed off as "just an opinion!" - by calling it a "first impressions" video? That's a pathetic cop out. If you don't have a handle on the game, why make a video about it?

Sterling flat out says in his defense "I'm supposed to know these things in a first impression video?", as if this is an unreasonable expectation. Why yes, if you're going to make fun of certain mechanics, you're expected to understand them.

The faux hysterical laughter during this video makes evident how childish Sterling is. These guys clearly pissed him off with their response, and he couldn't wait to escalate the drama. Having a legion of supporters to stroke your ego and tell you how right you are makes it all very easy.

Also, the Dev using the DMCA to get rid of the video (along with the other shady things they were doing. Check Jim's Jimquisition on the game for more details on that), and was just generally being pretty unprofessional. As I said, if they hadn't done that and approached Jim civilly (the other devs including the latest one didn't even contact him) then this probably wouldn't have even gotten talked about and could have even ended well (or at least better) for these devs.

This issue has already been covered. No one defends false DMCA claims. It shouldn't cloud the argument of whether it's OK for developers to fight back if they feel they've been unfairly criticized.

No. What I'm saying is that it wasn't a review, it was a first impressions video. That doesn't mean it has lower standards (both a review and a first impressions video are Opinions!).

However, one is not expected to know everything about the game going in when it's a first impressions video. It's just suppose to be the person reacting to the game for the first time.

As for expecting the game to explain to new players how to play? No, that isn't unreasonable.
The only ones being childish are these developers. You know why Jim laughed so much? Because it was really funny that these people couldn't take someone not liking their games (also Jim later played S.G. for almost 2 hours after this mess. It didn't get better ;p).

Yes, Devs are able to respond to criticism. In Jim's latest video he even describes how the Devs can contact him (and have before) to ask him to change parts of his videos, or give the games a second go.

He's the thing. These devs did NONE of that. S.G.'s dev just made a whiny insulting video about Jim's video, then took Jim's down. The others didn't even contact him before also taking the videos down.

And taking down the videos weren't the only things they did to silence criticism. They also removed any negative feedback on their steam pages, and S.G.'s Devs even went so far as to fake a contest about bashing the game and banded anyone who participated.

No one has said Dev's can't comment on criticism or contact critics with concerns about reviews/commentary/impression videos. Jim even has asked them to do so.

The issue at had is that these Devs haven't been doing that. They either have just taken down any criticism or they have insulted critics and then taken down their criticism.

That's not "Fighting back against unfair criticism". That's silencing someone you don't want talking.

In short: Why aren't people talking about if a dev can defend themselves from unfair criticism?
Because Jim's criticism WAS Fair. And these Devs aren't fighting unfiar criticism, they're trying to silence negative impressions of their games that reach a large audience.

 

[StreamerDarkly]

How are you supposed to know the mechanics when the game fails to explain them? If the game fails to explain them, how is this beyond criticism?

That's a very simplistic view. Games lead players by the hand to varying degrees. Even the most polished games sometimes fail to explain certain things or do so in a bad way, as was pointed out in The Escapist's recent article about GTA V (it's hard to follow instructions when you're currently involved in a high speed chase).

To answer your question, you generally learn a lot more about a game by playing it for more than 10 minutes. Expecting to be taught everything in such a short time is just ridiculous.

They weren't unfairly criticised. I can write an essay on how much the game fails based on just viewing that 10 minute video. Would you like to explain how the problems of the game weren't problems? Because I pointed out some of the glaring ones in my previous post - try starting with those - why is a monotone looping soundtrack that hides important information from you UNLESS YOU TURN IT OFF not a failure? How is the mine not working, not a failure? How is the persistent state of the game not a failure?

The game has many failings. I don't recall arguing that it's a quality title. Nevertheless, it should to be criticized for the right reasons, not because a reviewer decides to turn their brain off after deciding "this is bad" and piling up flimsy complaints.

No. What I'm saying is that it wasn't a review, it was a first impressions video. That doesn't mean it has lower standards (both a review and a first impressions video are Opinions!).

However, one is not expected to know everything about the game going in when it's a first impressions video. It's just suppose to be the person reacting to the game for the first time.

The solution is simple. If you're unsure if a perceived fault isn't due to a lack of familiarity with the game, don't make a big deal of it. Oh right, then the "first impressions" video wouldn't be nearly as entertaining. Entertainment value should never be sacrificed for something as trivial as veracity.

Let's not downplay the potential impact of these first impression videos. The whole reason reviewers do them is to cash in on the fact that this is the point when audience attention is at its peak. Which, you know, is occasionally called out by gamers who think critics ought to be a bit more patient instead of putting out clickbait quality efforts justified by "we didn't want to miss out on the sweet pagehits".

The only ones being childish are these developers. You know why Jim laughed so much? Because it was really funny that these people couldn't take someone not liking their games (also Jim later played S.G. for almost 2 hours after this mess. It didn't get better ;p).

The issue at had is that these Devs haven't been doing that. They either have just taken down any criticism or they have insulted critics and then taken down their criticism.

That's not "Fighting back against unfair criticism". That's silencing someone you don't want talking.

In short: Why aren't people talking about if a dev can defend themselves from unfair criticism?
Because Jim's criticism WAS Fair. And these Devs aren't fighting unfiar criticism, they're trying to silence negative impressions of their games that reach a large audience.

I see a common theme with your and DoPo's posts. It's that because both the game and the actions of the developers ultimately proved to be bad, this vindicates everything Jim said in his initial video as well as his immature reaction. It doesn't.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

I see a common theme with your and DoPo's posts. It's that because both the game and the actions of the developers ultimately proved to be bad, this vindicates everything Jim said in his initial video as well as his immature reaction. It doesn't.

No. The theme is that Jim didn't do anything wrong and the Dev did A LOT wrong.

Jim and others make these videos because that's their job. It's entertainment. Heck this recent one was part of a line of videos Jim does to show off trailers of games that probably wouldn't get much publicity otherwise. He also uses them to point out how many(not all but many) of these trailers aren't particularly well made (to put it mildly).

In the case of S.G., Jim filmed himself playing a game. A bad game, that didn't explain how to play. Jim wasn't just "lazy". He looked at the game menu and found no information on how to play. That's on the dev, not Jim.

The Dev made an insulting video, and Jim laughed at it (because it's funny how the dev overreacted). As Jim said recently, they could have just talked to him about it like other devs had before.

What was immature on Jim's part in this?
How are his complaints (the game has basic mechanical issues, annoying music, doesn't explain how to play, and is just generally a bad game) "flimsy complaints"?

How does play time factor in when the game didn't have a way for the player to find out how to play?

You keep saying that we should be talking about Devs responding to criticism. He's the issue. Using DMCA's IS how these devs responded to the criticism (except for S.G.'s Dev who chose to insult Jim first).

You can't separate that from the narrative (especially since most of the devs only used the DMCA without even contacting Jim).

Once again: It's not about Devs combating criticism, it's about these specific Devs who tried to silence negative opinions on their games.
Your chat about Devs responding to unfair criticism is in the wrong thread talking about the wrong situations.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

I just watched Jim's response video and can't believe Youtube makes those hit with a takedown watch a video (a Happy Tree Friends one at that) and take a quiz on copyright, in order to regain access to their channel! I can imagine someone with a busy schedule finding that email, regrettably having to go to Youtube to watch that horrible video, take the quiz and then start the appeal process on the chump that censored you. That's extra time that delayed your own schedule, all because someone can abuse Youtube's system. It's also incredibly insulting that you're guilty until proven innocent and have to serve a sentence of watching that video and taking a quiz, while to the one that issued the takedown gets away with it (unless the Streisand Effect hits them).

I watched that video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InzDjH1-9Ns], too, and it is extremely patronizing and doesn't even properly cover fair use. It just gives the US gov's shitty, vague legalese summery of fair use. Another thing that pissed me off about the video is how definite its stance on copyright is, when reality is incredibly situational. It just covers uploading movies/TV shows and setting your own vids to copyrighted music. They do not say anything about what Jim Sterling and other critics do. The only mention of transformative or derivative work is discouraging music mashups. It's just more proof Youtube bends over to please the corporate masters (and by extension, their own legal asses), instead of giving the users a voice when they need it most.

Making a game critic or LPer watch that video for takedowns such as this is like when a government makes a motorist with violation[footnote]And knowing some laws and officers, that motorist possibly isn't really at fault (like the critics in YT's cases) or isn't the sole person to blame and should have a new friend with them in the class.[/footnote] take a basic traffic safety class that doesn't cover anything about the violation. There's a slight chance parties in either situation may take away some new information, but the "education" does not address the issue that brought the party. It also reminds me of a stupid thing I heard once from a friend with a DUI, where his DUI class had someone who never had a license and was there for a mary jane charge, not alcohol.

 

[Tilly]

Jim's also actually been blacklisted by Konami over criticism. So yeah. This behavior isn't just from Indie Devs.

I remember him saying how David Cage complained to him about just reviewing Heavy Rain and giving it a 7. This attitude definitely isn't just indies. It comes from an inflated sense of self-importance. People often get angry when their view of reality conflicts with facts. Even moreso when it concerns themselves.

 

[DoPo]

How are you supposed to know the mechanics when the game fails to explain them? If the game fails to explain them, how is this beyond criticism?

To answer your question, you generally learn a lot more about a game by playing it for more than 10 minutes. Expecting to be taught everything in such a short time is just ridiculous.

That's neither an answer to my question nor my expectation.

They weren't unfairly criticised. I can write an essay on how much the game fails based on just viewing that 10 minute video. Would you like to explain how the problems of the game weren't problems? Because I pointed out some of the glaring ones in my previous post - try starting with those - why is a monotone looping soundtrack that hides important information from you UNLESS YOU TURN IT OFF not a failure? How is the mine not working, not a failure? How is the persistent state of the game not a failure?

The game has many failings. I don't recall arguing that it's a quality title. Nevertheless, it should to be criticized for the right reasons, not because a reviewer decides to turn their brain off after deciding "this is bad" and piling up flimsy complaints.[/quote]

Then which complaints were flimsy? What did Jim criticise which was beyond criticism?

 

[Imp_Emissary]

Jim's also actually been blacklisted by Konami over criticism. So yeah. This behavior isn't just from Indie Devs.

I remember him saying how David Cage complained to him about just reviewing Heavy Rain and giving it a 7. This attitude definitely isn't just indies. It comes from an inflated sense of self-importance. People often get angry when their view of reality conflicts with facts. Even moreso when it concerns themselves.

<.< Ah right. I remember that.
Someone was interviewing Cage for Distructoid, but they couldn't put it up in the end because he spent most of the interview complaining about Jim's score (specifically the score, not so much the actual review).

Though, we should remember it's not just people who make the games that get upset. That's how we got that whole Hate/out of 10 business. ;p

That we know of......

 

[thoughtwrangler]

I'm sorry but no. I was in a similar situation when I made a stupid ass thread a few years back and people told me I was a dumbass for writing it. You want to know what I did about it? learn from it and moved on. I didn't try to get those people banned for pointed out my stupidity or tried to break the law to cover it up.

Fuck these thin skinned bastards!

Writing a thread on a forum is hardly the same as spending hour's of your day everyday probably for months making somthing only for someone else to come and piss all over it.

People get attached to their work even more so if it takes a long time to make, its very easy to over react to criticism and view it as attack on your product and you personally. This is doubly compounded if this is a first time dev who isnt used to this sort of behaviour, and hasn't had any critical comments leveled at them before.

It's all well and good saying they should toughen up but people are complex, everyone reacts differently to the same situtations.

I agree that all people are complex, but the dev didn't take this very well at all. Reacting is fine, then you sober up and realize you have to take the criticism. The dev here thinks he was in the right, which sucks.

I blame this sort of thing on the perceived accessibility and "anyone can do it" mindset of indie game development. There are a lot of people "breaking in" who don't realize that it's at least 99% necessary to cut your teeth and take criticism when you're coming up.

I don't begrudge a developer taking their first stab at it, and it being a bad game. That's usually how it goes. What I object to is the perception of entitlement that the game automatically warrants serious discussion and critique. And when that unjustified expectation is not met, raging like a toddler that no one will treat them like an adult when they've done absolutely nothing to prompt that treatment.

Sometimes bad games warrant serious critique. Sometimes things that have nothing to do with the game, like political issues, current events or modern trends may force a bad, shoddy game into relevance. But often, these first-try games are best left as freeware demos that the developer distributes via channels or forums that are made for that sort of thing.

And I can understand that working hard at something makes you feel attached to it. Even a bad game takes a lot of work to pull of successfully. Even bad processed food takes thousands of man hours, millions of dollars and lots of work to make. But that will never put it above criticism.

 

[The Bucket]

The complaint about the ammo was that it was structured to only give ya ammo for the gun you were holding (not exactly how it's normally done so I don't know how playing more shooters would prepare you for that).

Plus, the Dev blamed Jim for using the worst gun in the game (to which Jim asked "How was I suppose to know it's the worst in the game?" and "Why even have the gun there in the first place if it's so bad?")

The Dev also spent most of the video calling Jim names (though "Jim Fucking Sterling Son!" did have a nice ring ;p), blaming him for things like the games annoying music, mechanics about the game that the game didn't tell him about, and kept calling it a review when it wasn't.

If the dev had been civil, contacted Jim, asked him if he could give the game another go (which Jim actually did do a while later though not because the Dev asked), given him info about the game so he could go in knowing things it didn't tell him, and maybe even replace the first video with the new one, then I'd be on the devs side in this.

You and DoPo have given a good account of the video, and I remember it more clearly now.

Be fair though. Shooters often have a wide range of weapon quality. Quake and Halo immediately come to mind as games that would be easy to label as shit if being in possession of a weak weapon is enough to make that claim. Not knowing about important mechanics is usually a sign that you haven't played a game long enough to be introduced to them or can't be arsed to look at the controls menu. Was the developer negligent in this instance, or was Jim just lazy?

Is it rational to expect more civility from a developer than from Sterling? Those who choose to make their living ridiculing the work of others aren't above reproach. Not sure if he's tried it yet, but how easy it would be for critic Yahtzee to ruthlessly trash the games that developer Yahtzee has made. I too find it hilarious when a reviewer rips apart a game verbally - comments attached to the lowest rated games on Metacritic are a constant source of amusement.

By the same standard, I can't see anything wrong with a developer or a fan taking a run at a critic. Why is this off limits? I really do think plain old fanboyism is part of the reason (when you have as many fans as TotalBiscuit, Angry Joe or even Jim Sterling), and the idea that the developer is out to rip you off if he complains about reviewers.

A dev going after a critic in such an aggressive way just makes them look petty and disdainful of criticism. A dev posted a response to Totalbuscuits video on his game to clarify a few points he felt may have been misrepresented, and received acclaim (even from TB who retweeted it) because he did it in such a reasonable and levelheaded way
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeY_vjuzln0

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

For all the money they are making, and have got, you'd think that Steam would at least hire a few people to playtest Greenlight titles for an hour or so to make sure that the title qualifies as a playable game. This would reduce the amount of crap that people like Jim Fucking Sterling Son would have to deal with.

 

[sageoftruth]

Just another dev naive in how brutally honest the internet can be, striking back because of it, and getting more flack in the process. Why don't they learn? Why don't they realize yet that DMCA's, removing bad reviews, and other such things will only get them -more- negative publicity? Why can't they just start saying "So the public sees our game as too unfinished/buggy/whatever to be sold. We'll remove it, improve, and try again"? Is it really that hard to admit that your shitty game is, indeed, shitty?

I took a look at the Kotaku article. It looks like he wasn't interesting in salvaging his dignity. Instead, it seems he wanted to take some kind of stand against Jim, hoping that if enough people did it, Jim wouldn't be able to keep doing these videos. He even admitted to Kotaku that he knew it was a BS claim. Still, as others have said, if you're going to try and sell a product, people should know if it's a crappy product. If Jim's videos help illuminate the crappiness of these products to consumers, than I stand by him, even if I think the quality of his Squirty Plays isn't that great. I just hope they don't end up making them look crappier than they actually are.

 

[sageoftruth]

The complaint about the ammo was that it was structured to only give ya ammo for the gun you were holding (not exactly how it's normally done so I don't know how playing more shooters would prepare you for that).

Plus, the Dev blamed Jim for using the worst gun in the game (to which Jim asked "How was I suppose to know it's the worst in the game?" and "Why even have the gun there in the first place if it's so bad?")

The Dev also spent most of the video calling Jim names (though "Jim Fucking Sterling Son!" did have a nice ring ;p), blaming him for things like the games annoying music, mechanics about the game that the game didn't tell him about, and kept calling it a review when it wasn't.

If the dev had been civil, contacted Jim, asked him if he could give the game another go (which Jim actually did do a while later though not because the Dev asked), given him info about the game so he could go in knowing things it didn't tell him, and maybe even replace the first video with the new one, then I'd be on the devs side in this.

You and DoPo have given a good account of the video, and I remember it more clearly now.

Be fair though. Shooters often have a wide range of weapon quality. Quake and Halo immediately come to mind as games that would be easy to label as shit if being in possession of a weak weapon is enough to make that claim. Not knowing about important mechanics is usually a sign that you haven't played a game long enough to be introduced to them or can't be arsed to look at the controls menu. Was the developer negligent in this instance, or was Jim just lazy?

Is it rational to expect more civility from a developer than from Sterling? Those who choose to make their living ridiculing the work of others aren't above reproach. Not sure if he's tried it yet, but how easy it would be for critic Yahtzee to ruthlessly trash the games that developer Yahtzee has made. I too find it hilarious when a reviewer rips apart a game verbally - comments attached to the lowest rated games on Metacritic are a constant source of amusement.

By the same standard, I can't see anything wrong with a developer or a fan taking a run at a critic. Why is this off limits? I really do think plain old fanboyism is part of the reason (when you have as many fans as TotalBiscuit, Angry Joe or even Jim Sterling), and the idea that the developer is out to rip you off if he complains about reviewers.

A dev going after a critic in such an aggressive way just makes them look petty and disdainful of criticism. A dev posted a response to Totalbuscuits video on his game to clarify a few points he felt may have been misrepresented, and received acclaim (even from TB who retweeted it) because he did it in such a reasonable and levelheaded way
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeY_vjuzln0

Nice! That is how you react to criticism. I hope lots of indie devs took notes on that one.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

I wonder if Jim crys 'Free Publicity woo!' Every time one of these devs do this. The loss of as revenue for one video for two weeks is likely more than made up for by the whole bunch of articles directing new viewers to look him up.

 

[Malpraxis]

As I look in the most commented topics in here, 2 of them are about 'controversies' surrounding Sterling.
I know he's gone independent and relies on that kind of publicity to get views, but this is getting annoying. And could he and TotalBiscuit just get a room? Their latest videos are just one fellating the other.

 

[StreamerDarkly]

As I look in the most commented topics in here, 2 of them are about 'controversies' surrounding Sterling.
I know he's gone independent and relies on that kind of publicity to get views, but this is getting annoying. And could he and TotalBiscuit just get a room? Their latest videos are just one fellating the other.

Indeed, a growing faction cannot seem to detach their lips far enough from Jimquisition's and TotalBiscuit's rotund asses to notice that their perspective might be obscured.

TotalBiscuit in particular appears to relish this state of affairs, regularly tweeting to the effect of "if you attack me, you attack 2 million gamers". For someone who styles himself as an independent game critic for the intelligent consumer, it's just a tad pompous to suggest that your subscribers are sheeple who agree with every utterance that comes out of your mouth.

What I've thus far learned from these threads:
(1) A developer can respond to criticism, but he must do it in a way that is discreet, polite and amenable to the critic and in the exact manner prescribed by the critic, irrespective of the quality of the review.
(2) It's perfectly acceptable for gaming pundits to whip up outrage against devs/publishers on Twitter before they even understand whether any wrongs were committed.

 

[Kameburger]

Actually I might go devil's advocate here and say I kinda feel for this developer. I mean youtube is not the only broken system here. Steam Green light is also very very broken, and this is something that Jim especially takes full advantage of (as hilarious as it is). I mean the whole point of that series that this video was featured in, is to highlight specifically how much garbage makes it on there. I mean I'm not so sure about anyone else but this game clearly looks like this dev's first shot at making something, and similar to stepping out on stage for the first time, he's putting himself out there.

My point is basically like American Idol, or those kind of shows. We might laugh at people who sing bad, and some might be funnier then others, some my also take it better then others, but sometimes you have to reflect on the fact that it is quite mean. I don't disagree with Jim that if you put yourself out there, you're fair game, you could also argue that Jim is kinda smacking down guys quite hard and quite publicly that they might never come back to gaming, and never learn from that mistake. Is the DMCA bullshit? Sure. But right now this dev is backed into a corner, and probably doesn't have 100% a grip on his thought process. I mean think about it even in American idol, there were a lot of bad singers but only one William Hung. So yeah, I think the argument could be made that Jim in a why is almost, and I really hate to use this word because I love Jim, bullying young devs out of the industry because of one shit trailer.

I guess I think he could be a bit more constructive, I suppose is all I'm trying to say.

That game was hilariously awful looking though.

 

[Zhukov]

For anyone who didn't see the original video, someone reuploaded it:


While I am personally inclined to feel a bit sorry for someone having their work trashed... I really can't see any way to defend this.

I mean... look at it.

 

[DoPo]

I mean I'm not so sure about anyone else but this game clearly looks like this dev's first shot at making something

Actually, if we use the devs' website as evodence, it isn't. It may be the first game but not the first software project. Then again, based on the website, I wouldn't say they are good at it.

 

[Cartographer]

What I've thus far learned from these threads:
(1) A developer can respond to criticism, but he must do it in a way that is discreet, polite and amenable to the critic and in the exact manner prescribed by the critic, irrespective of the quality of the review.
(2) It's perfectly acceptable for gaming pundits to whip up outrage against devs/publishers on Twitter before they even understand whether any wrongs were committed.

Then you've frankly learned nothing.

A Developer can respond however they like to criticism, they will (and should) be judged for those actions however; you know, like everyone else on the planet is judged for their actions. If said actions are petty and childish, they'll be judged as petty and childish. If said actions are vindictive and tantamount to censorship, they be judged as vindictive and seeking to silence criticism. If said actions are measured and reasonable, BIG SHOCK! They'll be judged as measured and reasonable.

Calling out a dev/publisher on twitter for their actions is perfectly acceptable, yes. See my point above, if dev/publisher didn't want to be called out for their actions, they should consider them more carefully. It's very hard to get people worked up over reasonable and polite discourse; it's significantly less hard to do so if a butthurt and whining misanthrope comes out swinging 'cus a critic said mean things about their broken game.