Yo Peter and Jack and the dev team! Let's jam!

Remember in the Wizard of Oz when the wizard tries to make Dorothy do all kinds of dumb made-up tasks before he'll talk to her? Like fetching the wicked witch's broom and throwing the One Ring into the pits of Mordor and pulling weapons from masonry?

You know what, screw it. I'm only being negative and raining on this future cinematic extravaganza because I'm so sick of this nonsense and mindgames. I bet the video will be great. Thumbs up and 5 stars and would buy again.

The likely excuse is because PM wants to be the primary force in the official response.  As was stated to me after the AMA video, PM has dyslexia and finds it easier to talk rather than type.  A video is much easier for him to convey his message.  Of course, this just reminds me of how badly I wish PM would let go of the official spokesman designation.  

I don't think PM will ever allow Jack to directly respond to the community at large without vetting or overriding what he says...

The other problem with video (from our end – it certainly feels like it seems like a benefit from their end) is that with videos like this, we'll never get an actual conversation. There's still no back-and-forth, no way to respond to their answers & get a response in turn, no way to ask for clarification on either side.

I think the reason I didn't touch on that too much was because I had George's response in the back of my head, which you saw earlier today. I also thought that, considering I pushed that idea (probably for the hundredth time) myself it would be readily apparent that I would very much love to have that instead of videos, so...Yeah. Those are probably the two major reasons I didn't address that point.

Matthew, the main root of my skepticism is that by turning this into an official video 22Cans has the opportunity to manipulate a community Q&A session into yet another puffy marketing piece. Difficult questions will not be directly addressed and unpopular answers (however true) will not be provided. All the other videos 22Cans have done have been full of big promises and enthusiasm and optimism about how incredible Godus is, but they are entirely undermined by the cold hard facts: the product they have delivered, the way in which they have delivered it, and the things PM says when the rest of his team is not around.

If Jack is going to 100% insist on doing this as a video, can we come up with some kind of compromise to spare us from another of these puff pieces? What if it was done in an interview format, with you or George taking the role of the interviewer - you guys have been around the community enough to understand the spirit with which the questions are meant. That would make it less likely that the questions would be misinterpreted or evaded.

See and this is the problem. Just like with the AMA - a pre-set timeframe is determined...
I get it, Peter has a lot on his hands - but I urge him (and indirection you, George and anyone else that can get his ear) to understand that taking the time to thoroughly answer these questions and concerns can become FAR more valuable than any number of days hammering out more design or content for the game itself.

IF as we all would like to see, a mutual understanding can be achieved. In which we have an inkling of what is going on and where Peter intends to go beyond PR-fluff and vague concepts.
And if in return Peter knows he can provide us with such information in a clear and concise manner without making it sound like promises.
If he knows that a concept as described in design is also taken in by us as design (rather than a concept brought as PR-statement to generate hype and sell the game...) then we in turn will accept that sometimes such a concept will change along the way.

And thats the thing... If Peter needs to take a day off to answer these concerns and to get a baseline down he SHOULD TAKE THAT TIME.
This is part of the problem with this entire endeavour - because this should've been done from day one. We can't go back in time but we can work towards the future.
I urged at this back during the AMA and got ignored - and look what happened since then. All hell has broken loose multiple times and Peter is frankly acting like a crybaby saying he's being bullied (I mean this in the purest sense of observation and don't mean ill will by this statement.)

Now from where I'm sitting, if communications had been initiated and pursued properly back when the AMA was held, we wouldn't be where we are right now.
MONTHS worth of accusations and obfuscation could've been prevented, and a functional understanding and baseline for communication would've been established ages ago.
As a direct result, much of the current skepticism would've been turned to understanding and patience as we would actually have a clue of what the hell is going on that is causing such delays for seemingly simple to solve problems.


All this "They are bullying me, I don't want to deal with the mean people." could've been prevented. And all it needed was for communications to be initiated and maintained.
We were willing to give Peter this chance back then - and we are willing to give him the chance now. It is ENTIRELY up to him to take up the countermove.
And if he is so utterly afraid that his words and actions might cause people to get pissed - then please allow me to point out what NOT opening communications has brought us thus far.
I have a very hard time seeing how things can get worse from here. By all accounts many allready hate Peter's guts for feeling cheated and conned. Things literally can only go uphill from here.
We all need to accept our part in getting here. It takes two to tango. And as long as either side is going to cower in a corner afraid for what might come nothing will change.

Peter wants Godus to become the crown jewel to his career - Guess what, *SO DO WE*. Most of us got on board initially because we loved his games.
REGARDLESS of all the stigma that his names bring with it, we decided that his accomplishments outshone his failures and we decided to support him.
All we asked in return was that he deliver on what he promised. People only started to get pissed once it turned out that that which was originally described is a far cry from what he's actually been creating...
And from where we're sitting, it seems more than obvious that after seeing the monetary potential of the mobile platform, Peter was swayed by dollarsigns.

Now correct me if I'm wrong - but isn't Peter himself (or 22cans as a company) the only one that can provide the information that explain their actions?
Wouldn't it be a relatively easy task to provide a non-PR hype piece explaining to the backers and supporters why certain decisions were made?
I'm not talking about trying to sell more copies - we already paid... We already support your ideas...
All we ask is some respect and some trust in return. Like we trusted 22cans to deliver the product it originally described.
And to deliver it in a reasonable manner (no, 10 years from now is not acceptable if you're not showing any results regarding progression).


All we ask is that our worries and questions are answered - and that a further understanding is met going forward.
No hiding, no being afraid that you're gonna be burnt at the stake. Often its not the message itself, but the way the message gets delivered that sets the tone.
If you deliver a message like a PR-hype piece, do you think it is strange that people expect that you are going to DELIVER on what you mentioned?
Whereas if you deliver the message as a pure sharing of information "Currently we're working on this and that, these are the problems we're forseeing and dealing with, this is what we need to reach an acceptable result." then it stands to reason that such information CAN CHANGE. We're not a bunch of idiots here.
Most of us have backed multiple kickstarters or early access titles and even those that haven't understand that things are subject to change.

It is Peter who seems to have a hard time understanding this. Because (and this is speculation on my part) he's always dealt with consumers from a corporate industry setting.
In all dealings he's had in the past, secrecy was crucial. Because your "big reveal" and the generation of hype was what brought you sales.
This isn't the case in his current endeavour. He doesn't NEED to generate hype or make things look better than they are.
What he needs is to deliver an enjoyable game and the community will do the rest. If the game is fun we will tell our friends and if the game is fun people will make youtube video's.
This will spread resulting in sales meaning that with each update, Godus reaches the Steam frontpage. Meaning more exposure and more sales.

MUCH like IAPs and the like generate exposure on mobile devices, so do similar mechanics work on PC.
And yes, we have different standards and expectations. And yes, you currently have a need to focus on iOS to ensure your continued revenue.
Guess what, *we understand*. Without continued revenue, there is no money to develop PC either.
So it is on OUR best interests that the content generated right now is going to be GOOD. That it is content that will assure the future sales and playerretention of Godus.
It is on OUR best interests that the content generated is that what the players will want to play. Cause if they play the game, there will be IAPs.
Which directly results in continued generation of more content and improvement of the game.


And guess what, most of us are willing to and have been willing to provide assistance in suggesting solutions.
Not because we doubt Peter's abilities as a developer - but because WE are gamers. And as many gamers as there are, there are also just as many different things that gamers enjoy.
Just on this board alone there are a variety of distinct playstyles and preferences. And it'll take bringing together those preferences to reach a point where everyone will say "This is a game I would love to play for years to come."

Wow, it seems that TotalBiscuit is on a roll lately.
His latest video is in defence of the correct usage of specific definitions within gaming.

I'd say that this is a particularly relevant topic to our current problem at hand.
Much of the miscommunications and skewed expectations come from the poor and sometimes even completely wrong usage of definitions.
Concepts and definitions such as "What is a mobile game?" and why PC players don't like to see them on their platform.
Things such as "What is F2P/monetization and when does it become abusive?" aswell as "What is a godgame?" and "What makes a game fun/entertaining?".
Questions about what defines a good mechanic and what determines a bad one.

In my opinion, the correct usage of such definitions is CRUCIAL if you want to get somewhere.
And going off of the discourse that Peter sends out, he occasionally misuses such definitions causing the results that people end up taking his statements as fact or promise.
The continual attempt to hype up everything and to make every exchange of information into a PR piece.
When ultimately, the definitions as used apparently aren't being interpreted the same way by both sides...


Its definitely worth a watch, about 20 minute video.

and to the problem with the 30 mins timframe just skip the Video and just answer the question then many many more questions can be answered

I really don't care the particulars about how we get more information. I just wish for more information so we can actually put our energy into areas that will provide meaningful change. A lot of this sounds like deja vu and, despite it being initiated from the community rather than a CM, just feels like more of the same old same old.

The biggest problem with all of this is how it's being treated as some sort of gigantic event. Every communication is treated as if we're hosting a foreign dignitary and have to research their cultural habits to avoid an incident. We're trying to discuss a game's development, not a mission to Mars...