There are moral principles, and legal principles. Legally, you are right. But the moral perception of piracy is shifting, and broadly speaking, this entire debate is in the moral/philosophical realm.
Legal systems ultimately enshrine the human morality in law. Common law - through case law, civil law - by committees that the legislators consult, religious law - by morality described in legal texts. We're not talking about any of it though. We are talking about day-to-day things, like what does it mean to steal, what kind of consequences it has, are these consequences real or supposed, and other such things.
Law is generally blind to externalities of an action. An action itself is legal, illegal, or undefined in law. We're not in this domain if we talk about the consequences of piracy or how someone might feel about it. We are having a conversation on morals.
Shifting morals will eventually shift the law, of course.
Games are always pirated if they are even a little bit popular. I work in the games industry, and games I worked on are always pirated, but the more popular they are, the more copies will be sold legitimately.
People make two choices when they pirate - moral, and economical. If economically they cannot afford the game, they weren't going to pay. If morally they are against paying for a game (like if the game company is associated with suicides, etc), they weren't going to pay. There are some people that will pay if piracy isn't available, but not that many.
Anyways, after the income goes around, and all the exec, upper management, and publisher salaries are paid, the piracy or lack of it probably makes about a $1 difference to my weekly earnings. I put a lot of artistic and creative effort, blood, sweat, and tears into it. If it costs me $1 to make people enjoy it, so be it.
In the AAA games industry, piracy is a thing. People talk about it. And most people have only very mild things to say about it, except for execs. Execs make a disproportionate amount of money off games for what they do, and they do kinda have a lot of time to sit on their hands sometimes, so they can fight these piracy battles, die on these piracy hills.
That’s a very good resource, nice find! I think we can agree CO is between AA and AAA. I think it leans much more on the AAA side from my industry experience, but arguments could be made that it’s not all the way there and that therefore it’s AA. But this is a bit semantic. They make AAA money and have AAA standards and marketing. And that’s a bit unusual for 40 people, of which 10 are probably admin and 30 are dev.
They have a large publisher (Paradox Interactive) who prescribes their schedules. They also made bet bookings from Cities: Skylines that put them quite evidently in AAA. Finally, they release the games for all major platforms. All together, this describes a AAA game developer.
In contrast, an AA developer would work with publishers like Annapurna Interactive, Devolver Digital or Team 17, while a III game would have a much smaller scope - like The Witness, The Stanley Parable, or Hellblade: Senua’s Sacrifice. It is clear that Colossal Order doesn’t work with a small publisher or make games of indie scope.
If you were just sealioning, don’t do that please.
The design was iterated, but the game assets are redone almost completely, and the systems appear largely reworked, too. This is evident when you play the game.
The scope of work done for this game was exceptionally large for a company with 40 employees, assuming it was done within the usual AAA timeframe.
So you know the saying “premature optimization is the root of all evil?” Producers love that statement because it removes half of the complaints around work being rushed.
Optimization is not done throughout the process and later there’s not enough time. Assets are made with bad topology and it would take time to redo them. Or it would take time to write a tool that retopologizes them automatically.
What I’m saying is by the time it’s “time” to optimize, there’s not enough time to optimize. It happens very commonly. But the alternative is taking development slower to do things right. And you simply don’t get investment for schedules like that in most companies. Not to mention that it’s goddamn hard to do when the execs lay off people, ask them to RTO, and induce serious attrition otherwise. Sometimes the team just can’t settle into a good process as people leave it too much. So you’re between a rock and a hard place — on the one hand: attrition and low morals, on the other hand: a tight schedule. This doesn’t apply to Colossal Order from my knowledge, but it does apply to many AAAs.
There is a problem at the root of this - extremely over-ambitious production schedules as norm. Most other things are symptoms. Most of what I described is a symptom.
> I place equal blame on them for delivering a subpar product, whether it's under their control or not.
What else is there to say...
> If they don't like the environment of a particular studio, they can always choose to work elsewhere.
They like it. The industry just has issues beyond their control which are in the process of being solved, gradually. No one will drop their dream job to satisfy your entitlement right now, sorry to say. You are free to not buy the game.
Because it is one of the 1,000,000 things to pay attention to in game development. Someone or some software probably just made a mistake in setting up its LOD. Or some dynamic LODding code didn't properly cull the LOD0 mesh. Or that code couldn't be finished in time. Or it was something else.
It's completely normal in AAA games to have a few imperfect and in-optimal things. Budgets are always limiting, and development times short. Plus, it's a hit-driven industry where payoff is not guaranteed. There are some things you can do (which are usually management-related and not dev-related) to make the game a success, but estimated bookings are rarely on-point. So trade-offs have to be made to de-risk - corners cut where possible, the most expensive part - development - de-prioritized. These are much bigger trade-offs than a single mesh being unoptimized. A single mesh is nothing.
It's a fun fact that this mesh is LOD0, and so is the teeth mesh. But that alone doesn't tank the performance of the game and is probably unlikely to be addressed in lieu of actual performance fixes. The fixation on these meshes in the thread is kind of excessive.
A lot of these comments are quite galvanized so I don't want to add to that - just giving more context.
This means you are, sadly, very uninformed. There is a lot of rolling with the punches in the games industry, and many engineers want to optimize things more, and work OT to do so (as there is an extreme shortage of time to do this in AAA space on company time).
I think just having to watch a significant portion of the video before you can leave a like or a dislike would have largely mitigated the brigading issue. Besides, it would have made the reviews more thoughtful overall.
Maybe removing the dislike count is a simple and effective solution, but I would not call it good or elegant because of its downsides.
Thanks for the insight, it would be very interesting to see some company's UX guidelines for the two markets.
I've heard that Americans prioritize comfort and practicality in their cars while Germans prefer control and performance. But I always assumed that individual preferences vary so much that any overall correlations to region would be weak. For example, I hail from Central Europe, but strongly prefer the Tesla aesthetic, even if I am not a fan of touchscreening everything.
Our car UX is becoming terrible for both touchscreens and physical controls. It could benefit from simplification a lot, and I think Tesla had many good ideas, even if they might have over-committed to the touchscreen.
For example, VW cars often have multiple knobs and buttons just for controlling the AC, which is far too complicated. If the car is electric, one might also need to put it into a regular mode (non-eco) to use AC and heating through a dedicated button/menu option. A better solution would be to emulate electric mirror adjustments, incorporating all climate control functions into one single knob - up-down for fan speed, left-right for temperature, and clockwise-ccw for zone/area.
Similarly, gear shifters come in various forms, such as buttons, levers, and sticks, or a combination of both, creating confusion. For example, it's common for AT vehicles to have a parking mode on the gear shifter, but also a parking brake button or lever. Sometimes drive, neutral, and parking are buttons, but there is a lever for multiple drive modes. The most dangerous configuration so far I've seen is where D and R buttons are next to each other. Electric cars, in particular, should only require a simple but clear switch between forward and reverse as their pedals already can stop and go, and many will be effectively parked if fully stopped, they won't roll.
Head units are also problematic with unclear and inconsistent button labels like "Media", "Source", "Input", "Map", "Nav", "Car", sometimes different on the head unit and the steering wheel.
In some cases, like Porsches, there are over 60 buttons within the driver's reach, making it difficult to operate without looking. This is not much better than a touchscreen, it totally distracts you from the road. I would even say that any interface with more than 4-5 buttons in a row that feel the same isn't much better than a touchscreen.
All these issues may not be as pronounced for those familiar with their own cars and are easier to see in rentals. And perhaps they are not big issues, there is still very significant room for UX improvement.
I would like to see more cars go in the way of Tesla and remove a lot that is not necessary. This is not to say that they can't keep buttons. But as I said, climate control could be one knob, the automatic transmission selector could be another. If the parking brake will be electronic, just make the car automatically engage it when parked and turned off. The content shown/played on the media unit could be controlled by another knob - up/down for modes and input sources, left-right to skip tracks or tune radio stations, clockwise-ccw for volume. And then sure, the rest can be on the touchscreen.
To sum up - many buttons (especially when mislabelled or when they handle the same function in combination with other inputs) are also attention-grabbing and inconvenient. Buttons or touchscreens - the UX in cars can be improved a lot.
A lot of people did. Most business communication happens in virtual meetings or on platforms like Slack and Teams. Most informal communication occurs through voice calls and instant messaging. All that used to be email around Y2K, as far as I remember.
The internet is full of lemons, not only social media, SEO-influenced services, and services where money buys you reach.
If you take any popular medical fact (for example, about diets), you will find countless published academic articles supporting and against it. This extends into other fields like physics, sociology, and politics too. But the contradictions there (while present) are not as overtly visible.
Many popular news outlets are leaning towards reporting in a "flavor" their audience expects and mixing opinions into their reporting.
By some studies, 80%+ of internet users admit to being duped at least once by fake news or misinformation online in 2022. That's the misinformation they spotted. 50%+ Americans say they read fake news online regularly.
As for logging off, according to Reuters Institute, 41% of Americans actively avoided news in 2022. And anecdotally, my friends and I have withdrawn from social media like Reddit, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and so on significantly this year. It definitely feels like a lot of information online is misinformation, either synthesized intentionally or "broken-telephoned" into fantasy by mainstream media.
I do not know how to deal with this personally but disengage from most of the online world. The signal-to-noise ratio of reliable information in many regions of the internet is meager. I mainly read Hacker News (which also sometimes features contradictory research or news), some academic journals, Wikipedia, some forums in my professional field, and some RSS news sources. Everything else on the internet has become too awash with contradictions and misinformation.
I never thought I'd have to retreat so far from mainstream media and social media. Mass logging off is going to impact these areas of the internet seriously.
I am scared of what AI language models will do to professional blogs, news, and academia. Editors and peer-reviewers there are already overwhelmed with unreliable information.
Legal systems ultimately enshrine the human morality in law. Common law - through case law, civil law - by committees that the legislators consult, religious law - by morality described in legal texts. We're not talking about any of it though. We are talking about day-to-day things, like what does it mean to steal, what kind of consequences it has, are these consequences real or supposed, and other such things.
Law is generally blind to externalities of an action. An action itself is legal, illegal, or undefined in law. We're not in this domain if we talk about the consequences of piracy or how someone might feel about it. We are having a conversation on morals.
Shifting morals will eventually shift the law, of course.