- Developers of Cities: Skylines 2 have noticed a growing toxicity in their community, which is affecting engagement and creativity.
- The CEO of Colossal Order expressed concern about the negative impact of toxicity on the team and the community.
- The developers still encourage helpful criticism from the community but ask for it to be constructive and kind.
Archive link: https://archive.ph/mVaIY
Toxic devs get a toxic community. Why should I express sympathy for them experiencing consequences?
Yes, this is the kind of comment I am talking about when I am talking about how this community had gone downhill massively. Thank you for the example.
It is not hard to say that the game isn’t in a good state, but that is no excuse for toxicity. Unless you yourself are a part of the problem.
Is a publisher who’s failed to live up to the promise of a good game entitled to a good community? The fact they have any at all is a blessing.
Just to clarify: if you make a bad product, people are allowed to abuse you?
Your company? 100%. Absolutely. I implore people to abuse all companies, even.
Thats not what I said. But I suppose you knew that.
Sorry but I did specify publishers and companies multiple times. I’ve never once even alluded to personal harassment as I obviously don’t believe in that. I however do think that this game deserves the toxicity it sees and the company deserves to be harassed for not delivering on their promise of a worthwhile product for which many people paid nearly $70 (CAD).
So erm… who is this “company” that reads the comments on the forum, again?
As in, what’s their account name? Should be easy enough to direct the harassment at them instead of a dev or a social engagement rep or a support rep then, after all.
Sorry, but being toxic about a company is distinct from harassing the individual CM. You’re gonna need to try a different line of reasoning because this is a pretty foolish one.
This video was released 3 days before the game released. In response to Colossal Order (game creator) being transparent about issues they were seeing.
The video I linked is a known and well regarded YouTube contributor with a significant following. He, himself, was transparent in his testing and results also.
All of this was out there before the game was released and refunds were available.
How were the devs behaving toxic? I mean, should be easy enough to provide quotes, right?
Remember when they launched the game in a shit state and charged full price for it, then failed to communicate? Actions speak louder than words, and those are some pretty toxic actions.
Failure to communicate.
They’ve had regular updates to their blog since before and well after the release. It’s a recent blog post that led to people hoping the toxicity could chill a little.
So far I’m seeing implications but haven’t been able to find facts to support. Where are you seeing dishonesty or shadiness?
That’s not toxic, though. I get that those actions are annoying and really poor, but they’re not… toxic. As in, they aren’t done with the intention of poisoning the relationship, in fact quite the opposite, they’re meant to exploit it to take money out of it. Hence “exploitative” might be a much better term to use.
But importantly, being exploited is no reason to be toxic to workers who don’t make the decisions in return. Especially not in a situation where there are ample ways to go about just undoing the damage done to you, namely refunding the game then putting the company on ignore on whatever stores you frequent.
I repeat, for the last time, I’ve never advocated for toxicity or harassment to workers. Only to the companies they represent. Please, if you’re going to argue with me, argue based on what I say, not what you decide I mean.
Are these not your words? I get that you aren’t advocating toxicity to workers, but you are defending it.
Devs clearly refers to the company that develops the game. Try again.
The fact that you’re harping on this point is because you know I don’t agree with personal harassment. You are aware that I don’t agree with people being abusive about specific people who work for the company. You’re making bad faith arguments to try to prove “You were saying this”, which I was not, and if I was, is clearly not what I intended. Move on.
You were repeatedly stating things not supported by facts or events. And how I read your dev statement was completely reasonable.
I think that’s where many people got that impression.
I’m not really the person who needs to know when to quit.
Argue based on what you said, and not some invented/imaginary version of what you said?
This is the internet, sir. Such factual discourse is greatly frowned upon! /s