I disagree, as do many others, that it’s reasonable to assume that nothing’s changed. Firstly, if it were that simple, a single “It’s still not a priority” would be allowable from the CMs and yet… we haven’t heard a thing since October 2023. Sure does seem like something’s changed to me.
I also conceded that you’re technically correct, they didn’t lie. However, they’re still failing to provide the most basic level of communication and are misleading players by omission. Whether you like it or not, we still have players returning after years and new players asking if Solo Mode was ever added to the game. By omitting the information on if Solo Mode is ever coming, Fatshark is misleading people into purchasing the game on a promise that Solo Mode will come “eventually.”
The only plausible situation is that it was canceled and FS is scared of the backlash if they say it, so they’re staying silent. I’m pushing for them to just admit it already, but it’s still an example of “why Fatshark’s poor comms have pissed people off” which was the point of my post. You latched onto the word “lies,” but haven’t exactly refuted my point.
Also let’s be real, going from ‘this WILL release at the latest a couple weeks after launch’ to ‘uhhhhhh it’s a co-op game! Not a priority!’ makes you a liar. You lied when you said it was going to release a couple weeks after launch.
A decent developer would provide an explanation for that. Instead we get years of silence.
I’m really not comfortable with claiming that’s lying. The first statement may have just been in error. Statements about schedules so often are. It is, however, certainly deceptive if “not a priority” really means, "It’s now somewhere on the list between “Adding Space Marines,” and “Things for which we have an actual plan.” Given the lack of further information and FS’s record, I believe solo should be considered an “if they get to it … and it’s a big ‘if’” feature, not a “when they get to it” feature.
I don’t believe they owe us any communication. But it’d be nice if they clarified things. If they just want to make cynical bastards like myself feel smart, and the people who believe in them feel disappointed - at best, they should keep doing what they’re doing.
This is unambiguous. This is what they said would happen. It did not. They lied. Regardless of their reasons, this was a lie. I don’t care if the hard drive containing the source code combusted, I don’t care if you suddenly uncovered some heretofore-unseen bug that makes it impossible (LMAO tell the Solo Mode modders that), I don’t care if John Tencent Himself descended from his cloud of shareholder value and told you to stop working on it - if you 180 from ‘we’re gonna either drop this on launch or right after’ to ‘uhhhhhhh NOT A PRIORITY DON’T LOOK AT IT’ with zero explanation, you were lying when you said the first thing, because you refuse to provide a reason beyond just straight lying for that to happen.
While I get why Tarquelne and Dizzy are uncomfortable with “lie” as the literal definition of lying implies “intentional falsehood with the intent to deceive,” it’s still a falsehood. It is something that is no longer true, and there’s been no efforts to explain, clarify, or correct the situation. A single “We planned to add solo mode, priorities shifted due the game state so we postponed it, and ultimately decided to cancel it.” would immediately shift sentiments from “so you lied” to “kark happens, that’s disappointing.”
Hence why I conceded that it’s more accurate to say they’re “misleading by omission,” but “lying” is shorter and close enough
Someone making a prediction or promise about their own actions - even near-future actions - that doesn’t come true isn’t necessarily lying. I’m sure you can imagine clear examples.
In this case, incompetence or lack of integrity - not giving a damn if a promised feature isn’t implemented in the face of greater-than-anticipated difficulties - both also fit the publicly available facts.
A liar might have made up a plausible lie about failing to include solo, and incompetence may be the truth the evasive “Not a priority” is trying to evade.
But, sure, that truth could be lying. Or sheer lack of care. I don’t mean to say FS couldn’t have lied, or definitely didn’t - just that there’s no proof that’s what happened. Because they’re humans, I’d apply Hanlan’s Razor. In contrast to MS, I believe people calling FS “incompetent” are actually being generous, given to the reasonable alternatives.
I think the problem with that is someone at FS may very well read that and know they weren’t lying. They know the accusations of lying are wrong. And, secure in that knowledge, they then feel absolutely no obligation to do anything about the situation.
Err … but mostly I just prize accuracy. To me, it’s not close enough. People casually say, “Sorry, I lied,” when they mean, “I was wrong,” and, yes, it does bug me. To me, the difference is extremely important.
Strawhat promised there’d be retroactive penance completion for the new class penances back when the penance track dropped. This didn’t pan out, obviously, and ‘vets’ had to grind like everyone else.
So ‘retroactive completion’ was a lie, because it was something that was promised that, with no explanation, didn’t.
Then she clarified that she’d gotten things wrong and misunderstood what the tech end was telling her.
Suddenly it’s not a lie anymore, just a misunderstanding. Absent that clarification? It would’ve remained a lie.
This is why Fatshark needs to tell people things and keep telling them things. If you don’t explain wtf happened to stuff you promised, you’re lying.
Then again, we shouldn’t be surprised. Fatshark’s company culture was explained by Hedge years ago.
‘If something didn’t happen that we promised, it’s not a lie, it’s simply no longer true’.
“A lie is an assertion that is believed to be false and is intended to deceive or mislead someone, while a falsehood is a broader term that refers to any statement that is not true, regardless of the intent behind it.”
When Ragnarok is saying “they’re lying until they clarify” he’s saying “It’s a falsehood until they clarify.”
“Lie” and “Falsehood” are often used interchangably, since the only difference between them is the intent behind it
Err … looking at his last post, his position seems to be he will assume a demonstrably false-to-facts statement is a lie, insist the corp islying, then reclassify the original statement if he is satisfied by the explanation.
That’s a way to approach it. I’d be loathe to trust any explanation. We’re often faced with judging whether someone is lying or incompetent or, more starkly, evil or stupid. Without trust, I think it’s better to largely ignore what is said - I guess that’s part of why I feel FS don’t owe us any communication - and watch what is actually done.
If an information source is actually caught in a lie - knowledge, not assumption - I think it’s a really big deal. If nothing else, it’s a steel club you can beat them with. Much better than the weak reeds of assumption and accusation.
(I like to think of it like wu wei in a martial art. Be open, go with the flow … clobber 'em when your opponent makes an unwise commitment. And, yes, I do think we are in an oppositional relationship with FS. I wouldn’t actually strike anyone at FS, and I don’t blame the CMs. The problem is the corporate policies or behaviors that has us debating whether FS is lying, incompetent, or worse.)
This is silly. Intent matters with lies. If I got hit by bus and was in the hospital for 4 months, was I a liar when I said it would be done by Friday? No. If FS thought they would have SP soon after launch and said as much, if it all falls apart for reasons that are unknown to us that does not make it a lie.
My point was you consistently insult the people at FS and then whine about them not talking to you.
Stop lying about my position. It’s not the community at large, it’s just a handful of people here who are toxic and abusive.
Good example! I don’t think he’s lying, but I think he might be wrong. Or might not. I see little distinction in your posts between “toxicity” or “abuse” and what I’d call legitimate, well founded criticism.
Pretty much. Corporate comms require deliberation and approval - intent, in other words. This isn’t like Arrowhead where some CEO will randomly say something on the Discord - every word out of a CMs mouth of consequence, especially official blog posts, is a product of an approval process.
To me, that satisfies the requirements that something be considered a lie until proven otherwise. An explanation is the bare minimum requirement of proof otherwise, Fatshark refuses to give it, ergo Solo Mode was and remains a lie.
Them refusing to tell us what happened and why it fell apart a couple weeks before launch all of a sudden does make it a lie, though. There’s no reason given, Solo Mode being released on or shortly after launch remains a lie of theirs.
In your example, even if you got hit by a bus, you refusing to tell anyone you got hit by a bus and refusing to show up to work would get you fired, because you didn’t give a reason for why you didn’t show up to work. Same with Fatshark. If something broke or they found it impossible to run Solo or the server guys said no, they owed us an explanation during that process in order to not be proven liars.
Oh wait, Hank isn’t a Fatshark employee. So I guess absent his intervention the company would have continued blithely on and then wonder why people are calling them liars for explicitly stating something would happen and then not following up.
Hearing what my friend said about swedes (Dev ops guy that moved there from South Africa and been living there for many years). They are not really the most communicative bunch especially in Stockholm. My guess is that it’s the Swedish culture keeping them in their own bubble.
I went to Stockholm to see that friend and actually saw how a̶n̶t̶i̶ ̶s̶o̶c̶i̶a̶l̶ asocial the swedes are. Also took a picture in front of their office which reminds me of the one mortis trail map with the brick buildings. For all we know someone just needs to break the ice to actually have good comms with someone on the other side. But I guess that doesn’t seem work well as it appears from the outside that the CM and Sales Rep are left without decent comms.
From my perspective I do find it a little bit unhinged to say the devs are incompitent. As a dev myself I’ve been on the other end. Deadlines and unhappy clients. I’d much prefer having an environment without that kind of hostility. Sure mention broken promises(Or currently a false statement) hold them accountable for the things they have said. That is people voicing their legitimate concerns and discontent. I do agree that the solo mode is waaaaaaaaaay overdue and necessary as my brothers and sisters from South Africa are left in the dust without a decent experience. You can barely find players in that region. Same with VT2. When I was still there I just played with bots because that’s all I had. It’s a horrible experience with 180ms ping. You can say sure use solo and better bots mod but you are disconnected from progression.
Dude, I was in a coma… In all seriousness though… I work as a dev (not gaming) and my priorities shift all the time. If production breaks I have to drop whatever I was working on to diagnose and fix it. My boss never calls me a liar when a deadline is missed. We talk it out, reevaluate priorities and distribution of labor. Communication, the thing we all want to improve.
We’re all going to have a different line on what is toxic or abusive. 99.999% of us agree that the stuff directed at Aqshy was toxic and abusive, and that’s great. Personally, I think calling someone else incompetent is also toxic and abusive, and I struggle to understand how others don’t see it as anything but a personal attack.
Criticism doesn’t need to have a personal attack tacked on to the end. ‘hey this is broken.’ doesn’t need ‘and you’re incompetent’ added to it. There’s plenty to complain about with DT, FS, etc. But it doesn’t need to have personal attacks added to them.
