That's exactly what I said. Please read my post again before calling it "nonsense".
If you don't want to feel dejected by an "unexpected" turn in a work in progress you should stay away of it. Obviously you can always say what you think about it (and you are free to even stop supporting that project) but having in mind that your opinion won't (or shouldn't) change what the dev has envisioned.
If the dev blatantly lies about his plans, it's a fraud to his supporters and complains are in order. If he doesn't want to announce what his plans are, though, then his supporters should know they could get something different from what they are expecting. So it's up to them to decide if they want to support this dev. But if they do, they should accept that risk. Saying "oh my, I'd be so angry and dissapointed if this happens" and actually meaning it... well, of course they can, but it's childlish. That's the kind of complains I was talking about.
My apologies if I came across as overly dismissive, but I still disagree. If a customer purchases a product based on the seller's description, they have every right to complain if it does not live up to their expectations. I don't feel any differently just because the product was still in development when it was bought; the seller was confident enough to offer it for sale, so it's on them to accurately describe it.
I don't see how that is inherently childish. A bad reputation is just about the only way to hold a seller accountable for a poor (but non-fraudulent) product. When a customer is dissatisfied - even if we disagree with their rationale - complaining about it
*is* the appropriate response. Sure, any given customer could voice their displeasure in a childish manner, but that would be just as true if they were complaining about a finished product. I have precious little good to say about Mass Effect 3, for example, but I read a couple rants about it that still made me embarrassed to be on their 'side.'
Exactly this. While, yes, it's important for players to have a venue to voice their opinions on the game, it's even more important that DPC is able to ignore these opinions and write his story. BaDIK is not a story written by the internet, it's a story written by DPC. When you allow a creator freedom to tell their own story their own way you get Inception... you get The Lord of The Rings... you get A New Hope. When you create art by committee, you end up with Fant4stic, Suicide Squad, or Movie 43.
It's clear that Bella has a TON of fans, and most of them don't want to see anything bad happen to her... but the groundwork has been laid. She is hiding something either in her past or in that locked room that is dark and tragic. If not, then all the 'mystery' will have been a lame redirect, and the MC's comment in the library will be a giant plot-hole at best, or 'false advertising' or cowardice by DPC at its absolute worst. Just because she's got pouty lips and enormous tits doesn't change the fact that everything being fine with her would be terrible writing at this point. No... she is absoutely not going to turn out to be some kind of psycho killer like Leah... but it is going to be revealed that something bad happened in her past (either by her or to her) or that she's suffering from some kind of mental illness, or something. It has to.
If players have a problem with something like that in this game, then maybe playing a game that literally starts with a warning not to play it if you're in a bad place in your life was not the best decision?
I can't dispute that art by committee is an invitation to mediocrity. On the other hand, The Phantom Menace is a pretty clear example of the risks of an insular creator trusting overmuch in his own vision. Does anyone think rest of the prequels would have been better if Lucas refused to dial down Jar Jar? Good art isn't about doing or avoiding specific things, it's about doing a lot of different things
enough but not
too much. If that were easy we'd all be doing it, I suppose.
So while I feel DPC should stick to his script even if the fans yell vociferously, he shouldn't just ignore what they are saying. He needs to figure out what they are actually complaining about and decide if that's because his story isn't for them, or if it's because he isn't conveying his story properly.
As an example of the latter, I think Episode 5's heavy change in emphasis on the infamous Maya & Josy library scene is (possibly) a good example of that. M&J came across as more dismissive of a 'friend' MC than was probably intended, so DPC took pains to show that both girls still had feelings for him even if they didn't express them in that moment. I think that was DPC's intent all along, but I don't think he expected to revisit the matter so quickly or explicitly until he saw lots of players worried about it. Just my opinion, of course.
On the specific topic of whether Bella meeting a tragic end is fair game, I'm inclined to say no. The warning at the start of the game is an indication that dark topics will be explored in the game. But that darkness does have to fit within the apparent context of the game. I do not think it's carte blanche for misery and suffering.
BaDIK presents itself as a relatively lighthearted comedy. What that means in practice is always going to be a judgement call, but for me it means that while dark things may happen, they will not get in the way of a happy ending (at least not for our heroes). Bella being a main LI should means she should be guaranteed a potential happy ending. What might be an acceptable fate for a side character like, say, Quinn or Camila or Neil, is a trauma too far for Bella.
Again, just my opinion.