I mean, you call me unquestioning and pro-corporate just because I dared to post an unpopular opinion on your circlejerk thread, it’s only proper to describe you back.
If you want my attention so much, I will tell you what I don’t like about your attitude.
First of all, I am criticizing Fatshark’s decisions on a regular basis. I’m mostly interested in balance discussion and whenever I take a moment to properly describe my opinions I make sure to make it an actually constructive criticism. See the examples below:
https://forums.fatsharkgames.com/t/duelling-sword-should-be-nerfed-1-year-anniversary-post/114268/27
In these two posts I described a problem, took time to explain why it’s affecting players, why it makes Darktide a worse product and then gave a proposal on how I believe this can be fixed.
While I do this, I also acknowledge that developers do this professionally, and if the game ends up in a state that doesn’t fit my proposition (DS is not nerfed), then it must have been caused by something, and if my suspicions are true, they won’t share it with us.
Also, I work full time in a corporate environment and I know how corporate financial decisions are made. Fatshark is an independent developer, but they must satisfy their shareholders. This doesn’t mean they are greedy or don’t love their game, it means that they simply can’t do stuff the way DRG does.
Going under every post added by a CM and typing ‘gib aquillas pls’ is not constructive criticism. Holding onto design decisions that could, or could not be considered during early beta is against common sense. Why? Please google ‘iterative game development’.
Also, I want to emphasize on how the recent aquilla as event reward was acknowledged. There were some posts that were genuinely happy on the forum, but ppl from this threat were like:
this is less bad than it used to be
And once you are on the receiving end of criticism, you clearly can’t take it, which is funny considering this topic has 1600+ posts of it.