Post by mindless on May 5, 2015 11:47:03 GMT
pcpowerplay.com.au: Hitting the fan
Hitting The Fan
Fans are strange beasts. Sometimes fans are a loose conglomerate of people who like one thing, but sometimes that shared passion bonds fans together into some kind of super-organism that acts as one and has cells that act to protect the larger body. In many ways, February was a month that was defined by fans, fan backlash and the mishandling of fans by people who should know better. There were three fan interactions that really stood out to me as being the defining moments of the month, each illustrating a different aspect of fandom.
To start with have the debacle surrounding Peter Molyneux’s Godus. I won’t go over all the details as Ben Mansill has covered most of that ground in his column but instead focus on what I think Molyneux has missed. In interviews, especially the rather scathing one with Rock Paper Shotgun, Molyneux has stated that he no longer has a name in gaming and that, in essence, nobody knows who he is anymore. That is patently not the case as evidenced by the support for his Kickstarter campaign and the number of people that mindlessly tapped away at the Curiosity cube. The whole process, from start until now has been entirely predicated on Peter Molyneux’s gaming cachet and his large number of fans.
Curiosity revolved around Molyneux’s reputation, and when it was finally unlocked by Bryan Henderson it was Peter himself who appeared in a YouTube video to explain the purpose of the game and what the effects the game would have on the winner. It was an experiment and a crowd funding campaign based, if not exclusively then extremely strongly, on an existing fan base. Why else bill Godus as “a delightful reinvention of the god game from 22Cans and Peter Molyneux, who created the genre”? That one line is clearly calling to fans of both the developer himself and the game that arguably made him the high profile developer he is today.
Cut to now and the videos of apology, the interviews full of mea culpas and recriminations and the lack of contact or interaction with Henderson have turned the developer’s enduring fan base against him. The whole Curiosity experiment and then crowd sourcing the funding for the development of Godus both relied on fan support and gave ample opportunity for the creation of a strong new fan base through interaction and community development. Curiosity gave them the perfect leg in, with a member of the public becoming a key “member” of the team. By sidelining and ignoring Henderson, Molyneux and 22Cans essentially placed themselves apart from the community that they needed to foster for the game to thrive.
In his interview with Rock Paper Shotgun, Molyneux also claimed on numerous occasions that the interviewer John Walker was trying to run him out of the games business. Sure, the interview did start off somewhat antagonistic but given Molyneux’s history of promising far more than he ever delivered, the idea of him being a pathological liar (in this definition someone who lies without being aware of it) doesn’t seem that inappropriate. Whatever the case, Walker revealed himself to be a fan of a number of Molyneux’s games. What Peter took to be someone who had it in for him appears to the reader to be a disappointed fan rather than a hate-monger.
The second fan incident is almost entirely the opposite of Molyneux’s problem – fans coming to the strident defence of an artist rather than distancing themselves from him. I don’t want to get into the whole GamerGate/SJW diatribe that has formed around the issue of Adam Baldwin and Supanova but instead focus on what has happened between two groups of dedicated fans – those of the event and those of Baldwin himself. Long story short, Adam Baldwin, a pop-culture icon thanks to his portrayal of Jayne Cobb in the cult TV series, Firefly, has made a less stellar name for himself over the past couple of years for various reasons, including the coining of the term GamerGate, his tacit approval of doxxing, comparing same sex marriage to incest and the like.
Upon learning that Baldwin would be at Supanova, a number of people tried to have his invite rescinded as they felt that the kind of supporters that Baldwin may attract would make the event less inclusive and would leave some of them feeling unsafe. This is obviously a very cursory view of the argument, but nothing deeper is really needed with what is to come. Supanova decided to let the invite stand, arguing that a person’s politics and work could be separated, a move that angered a number of Supanova fans, leading to some high profile displays and cosplayers planning to boycott the event.
At a base level, both sides of the argument are correct. Baldwin may have shown himself to be a right wing ideologue and twitter bully through social media, but that doesn’t detract from the fact that he embodied a beloved character. Likewise, those who organised the original petition trying to remove Baldwin from the event or planning on boycotting Supanova are correct in saying that the inclusion of someone who has been outspokenly bigoted on some topics and supports/has the support of GamerGate may cause the event to be less welcoming and inclusive than it has been in previous years and could draw a crowd that would leave some attendees feeling less safe than they would like.
The response from fans on both sides is awkward. On the one hand you have people, somewhat understandably, trying to exclude someone from an event in the name of inclusiveness, and on the other you have a fan base living down to expectation whilst trying to defend Baldwin. Whilst trying to justify Baldwin’s inclusion at Supanova, a number of have been harassed for speaking out by Baldwin’s supporters. According to prominent Australian cosplayer Eve Beauregard, one of the people boycotting the event, “Countless people have been threatened, harassed and targeted in the name of the movement which Adam Baldwin is the celebrity face of, many simply for voicing an opposing view. To ask your attendees to publicly speak out against GamerGate is to ask them to make targets of themselves. This quickly became apparent as several community members were doxxed for speaking about why they disagreed with having Baldwin as a guest.” By behaving in such a way in defence of Baldwin’s inclusion in the event, some fans have made people’s fears of not feeling safe at Supanova a reality.
The final problem is one I’m responsible for. In our Simulator Special we made a joke in our review of Elite Dangerous, referring to Star Citizen as “Scam Citizen” and saying that it would be released in 2047. The joke was made in reference to the huge amount of money that had been accrued by Cloud Imperium Games and the feature creep that has resulted from the budget, as well as the fact that there have been multiple articles over the past 12 months questioning the validity of the project. Although I didn’t write the words, as editor the buck stops with me. I was initially going to put inverted commas around scam, but decided against it, feeling that people would get the joke. I was wrong. The Star Citizen fan base was not happy with us to say the least.
When you look at Star Citizen you can understand why the fans take offense. There have been a number of clickbait articles about the game, but I think that the desire to leap to the defence of the game is built into the funding model. The game is crowd-funded, with a huge number of people paying not insubstantial amounts of money to buy into a game that is not yet complete, with only a dogfighting module and the ability to walk around and through your ships currently available. The fans have a lot invested, both monetarily and emotionally in the game, and any hint of disparagement is not only a knock at the game but those who have funded and anticipate the game as a whole. I misread that and was soundly slapped. That said, calling for someone to be fired over a few words meant in jest is an overreaction.
As fans ourselves we sometimes fall into these same traps – disappointing our base or lashing out at anyone we perceive as an existential threat to something we love. Passion can fill you with an almost unlimited fire that can drive your life and loves. You just need to be careful not to burn yourself or others. Fandom can bring your perspective down to a laser focus making you blind to a bigger picture. Every fan should love what they love but should also attempt to take a step back and broaden their view.
Fans are strange beasts. Sometimes fans are a loose conglomerate of people who like one thing, but sometimes that shared passion bonds fans together into some kind of super-organism that acts as one and has cells that act to protect the larger body. In many ways, February was a month that was defined by fans, fan backlash and the mishandling of fans by people who should know better. There were three fan interactions that really stood out to me as being the defining moments of the month, each illustrating a different aspect of fandom.
To start with have the debacle surrounding Peter Molyneux’s Godus. I won’t go over all the details as Ben Mansill has covered most of that ground in his column but instead focus on what I think Molyneux has missed. In interviews, especially the rather scathing one with Rock Paper Shotgun, Molyneux has stated that he no longer has a name in gaming and that, in essence, nobody knows who he is anymore. That is patently not the case as evidenced by the support for his Kickstarter campaign and the number of people that mindlessly tapped away at the Curiosity cube. The whole process, from start until now has been entirely predicated on Peter Molyneux’s gaming cachet and his large number of fans.
Curiosity revolved around Molyneux’s reputation, and when it was finally unlocked by Bryan Henderson it was Peter himself who appeared in a YouTube video to explain the purpose of the game and what the effects the game would have on the winner. It was an experiment and a crowd funding campaign based, if not exclusively then extremely strongly, on an existing fan base. Why else bill Godus as “a delightful reinvention of the god game from 22Cans and Peter Molyneux, who created the genre”? That one line is clearly calling to fans of both the developer himself and the game that arguably made him the high profile developer he is today.
Cut to now and the videos of apology, the interviews full of mea culpas and recriminations and the lack of contact or interaction with Henderson have turned the developer’s enduring fan base against him. The whole Curiosity experiment and then crowd sourcing the funding for the development of Godus both relied on fan support and gave ample opportunity for the creation of a strong new fan base through interaction and community development. Curiosity gave them the perfect leg in, with a member of the public becoming a key “member” of the team. By sidelining and ignoring Henderson, Molyneux and 22Cans essentially placed themselves apart from the community that they needed to foster for the game to thrive.
In his interview with Rock Paper Shotgun, Molyneux also claimed on numerous occasions that the interviewer John Walker was trying to run him out of the games business. Sure, the interview did start off somewhat antagonistic but given Molyneux’s history of promising far more than he ever delivered, the idea of him being a pathological liar (in this definition someone who lies without being aware of it) doesn’t seem that inappropriate. Whatever the case, Walker revealed himself to be a fan of a number of Molyneux’s games. What Peter took to be someone who had it in for him appears to the reader to be a disappointed fan rather than a hate-monger.
The second fan incident is almost entirely the opposite of Molyneux’s problem – fans coming to the strident defence of an artist rather than distancing themselves from him. I don’t want to get into the whole GamerGate/SJW diatribe that has formed around the issue of Adam Baldwin and Supanova but instead focus on what has happened between two groups of dedicated fans – those of the event and those of Baldwin himself. Long story short, Adam Baldwin, a pop-culture icon thanks to his portrayal of Jayne Cobb in the cult TV series, Firefly, has made a less stellar name for himself over the past couple of years for various reasons, including the coining of the term GamerGate, his tacit approval of doxxing, comparing same sex marriage to incest and the like.
Upon learning that Baldwin would be at Supanova, a number of people tried to have his invite rescinded as they felt that the kind of supporters that Baldwin may attract would make the event less inclusive and would leave some of them feeling unsafe. This is obviously a very cursory view of the argument, but nothing deeper is really needed with what is to come. Supanova decided to let the invite stand, arguing that a person’s politics and work could be separated, a move that angered a number of Supanova fans, leading to some high profile displays and cosplayers planning to boycott the event.
At a base level, both sides of the argument are correct. Baldwin may have shown himself to be a right wing ideologue and twitter bully through social media, but that doesn’t detract from the fact that he embodied a beloved character. Likewise, those who organised the original petition trying to remove Baldwin from the event or planning on boycotting Supanova are correct in saying that the inclusion of someone who has been outspokenly bigoted on some topics and supports/has the support of GamerGate may cause the event to be less welcoming and inclusive than it has been in previous years and could draw a crowd that would leave some attendees feeling less safe than they would like.
The response from fans on both sides is awkward. On the one hand you have people, somewhat understandably, trying to exclude someone from an event in the name of inclusiveness, and on the other you have a fan base living down to expectation whilst trying to defend Baldwin. Whilst trying to justify Baldwin’s inclusion at Supanova, a number of have been harassed for speaking out by Baldwin’s supporters. According to prominent Australian cosplayer Eve Beauregard, one of the people boycotting the event, “Countless people have been threatened, harassed and targeted in the name of the movement which Adam Baldwin is the celebrity face of, many simply for voicing an opposing view. To ask your attendees to publicly speak out against GamerGate is to ask them to make targets of themselves. This quickly became apparent as several community members were doxxed for speaking about why they disagreed with having Baldwin as a guest.” By behaving in such a way in defence of Baldwin’s inclusion in the event, some fans have made people’s fears of not feeling safe at Supanova a reality.
The final problem is one I’m responsible for. In our Simulator Special we made a joke in our review of Elite Dangerous, referring to Star Citizen as “Scam Citizen” and saying that it would be released in 2047. The joke was made in reference to the huge amount of money that had been accrued by Cloud Imperium Games and the feature creep that has resulted from the budget, as well as the fact that there have been multiple articles over the past 12 months questioning the validity of the project. Although I didn’t write the words, as editor the buck stops with me. I was initially going to put inverted commas around scam, but decided against it, feeling that people would get the joke. I was wrong. The Star Citizen fan base was not happy with us to say the least.
When you look at Star Citizen you can understand why the fans take offense. There have been a number of clickbait articles about the game, but I think that the desire to leap to the defence of the game is built into the funding model. The game is crowd-funded, with a huge number of people paying not insubstantial amounts of money to buy into a game that is not yet complete, with only a dogfighting module and the ability to walk around and through your ships currently available. The fans have a lot invested, both monetarily and emotionally in the game, and any hint of disparagement is not only a knock at the game but those who have funded and anticipate the game as a whole. I misread that and was soundly slapped. That said, calling for someone to be fired over a few words meant in jest is an overreaction.
As fans ourselves we sometimes fall into these same traps – disappointing our base or lashing out at anyone we perceive as an existential threat to something we love. Passion can fill you with an almost unlimited fire that can drive your life and loves. You just need to be careful not to burn yourself or others. Fandom can bring your perspective down to a laser focus making you blind to a bigger picture. Every fan should love what they love but should also attempt to take a step back and broaden their view.
