Giving you a gold medal in mental gymnastics wouldn't do justice to your statements, but it would coat the medal in the thickest irony I've seen ever so maybe it would be fitting after all. Seriously, the way you dodged and dismissed my points without directly engaging them is actually impressive.
The analogy that I made was to explain the point, you say that I "
go far outside the context". That's what analogies are made for dummy, explained in a different way but easier to understand, although it clearly went over your head lol
The paraphrasing that I made was not a strawman because it is in fact a direct conclusion and
implication of your post. Here is how I paraphrased you: "
if only he made more traditional hentai to appease more people etc", and now let's
directly quote your original post:
If you can't see it as direct and logical conclusion by reading your post, then I can't help but wish you a happy life as an emu. Or like I said, maybe you're intentionally and dishonestly ignoring the implication of something that you wrote yourself.
For the last time, as easy as humanly possible: the dev been working on it for years, and naturally creating the content that he prefers to make. It's very simple to conclude then that the developer has a clear bias/preference towards a certain type of content (henceforth know as "
main" content), otherwise he would have already made "
other" content (by virtue of not being the dev's focus) adding more if he ever desired to.
Do you follow me until here? Good. Now the main issue is twofold:
1) repeatedly asking or even
suggesting (however nuanced) that the game add "other" content by using the argument that said content would appeal to a greater amount of people. At best this is annoying because lot's of people keep repeatedly doing this, and at worst it is entitled because it fails to respect that niche-weird games exist and not everything has to cater to majority.
2) other problem is "...
and adding options in a video game, with extra money for those options, literally takes nothing away from anyone..." But here's what you fail to see:
it does take away from the dev's motivation, because nobody likes being forced or coerced to do what they don't feel like doing (specially so for creative works which is the case here) even if they are getting paid.
Even the merest suggestion that you make is disrespectful towards the wishes of the dev, because it can be interpreted (whether you intended or not) as the dev being a monkey who would make content that he clearly doesn't give a priority to make just because you're willing to flap some moneys in front of his face.
You call me dumb, but you are the one too short sighted to see that your analogy is far too much of a stretch to apply. Thus, what I said. Someone saying you are going too far outside the context of what you are trying to twist something as in an analogy... Is not them not understanding what an analogy is, it's them saying your analogy is BS and non-applicable.
A several hour rock concert that was planned and practiced for far in advance to perform in a finite time window at a specific local is not a video game, nor is it a crowd funded development of one that spans multiple years. You are not forcing everyone who is there for that time limited event to listen to just what you like. You aren't pressuring the band, who has already prepared select songs, to randomly try to play a genre of music they aren't known for. It is simply not even remotely comparable; it's a
horrible analogy that doesn't at all apply.
If you don't like a particular animation in the game, you don't have to go out of your way to see it on repeat, and then be locked out of playing until whenever a band of people are back in town months, if not years later. It's not forcing the crowd who paid money to be at a fixed time, linear event to listen to particular music that they weren't expecting. A rock concert does not have the interactive nature of a
choose-what-happens set of events like a video game has. As for the developers, unlike a band at a rock concert that is about to be played, developers have years of time to work on the game, tend to welcome player feedback and suggestions, and actually rely on funding to see the game come to fruition. ...They do not view such things as 'coercion' because... it isn't coercion.
So, no, those significant implications of your analogy do not apply. I thought that it was already obvious, and that you weren't being a disingenuous keyboard warrior arguing in bad faith, but you proved me wrong. You're apparently a part of the
not-all there crowd who only engages with people to be self righteous and try to 'win,' rather than to have an actual constructive conversation in good faith. You're essentially an SJW, just for some misguided obsession with 'defending' the game from.. *gasp*
suggestions and feedback. Oh, righteous warrior, you are... accomplishing nothing.
1. The location... Any converse here isn't really going to affect much, if anything, in either direction.
2. Even if the developer
was here, and read what I said, and was like 'oh, hmm, okay.' ...Guess what? Nothing bad would happen. At most, the dev would ask if people would want x or y feature for a or b additional fund goal, and could make a choice based on response, if he wanted to at all. So... What the heck do you think you are defending the game from??? Suggestions and opinions are not 'coercion.' This isn't 2014 gamergate or whatever the heck you think this is, lmao. Grow up.
If you legitimately just don't care for a suggestion, it's okay. You don't have to do... whatever
this is. But, clearly you did, because you seemingly are in some weird fantasy in your head where you see yourself as some great, righteous defender of, what even? Whatever it is, it's driven you to not just be confrontational, but to devolve this into a bad faith rumpus, bordering on a mud slinging debacle. As I said originally, it's whatever either way... Because it isn't actually that sensitive of a topic, aside for yourself, it seems.
tl;dr
1. Yelling song requests at a rock concert is a horrid, bad faith analogy for feedback and suggestions in regard to a crowd funded video game.
2. Feedback and suggestions for said crowd funded video game is not coercion, in any way, shape or form. Developers do not view it as such, and, almost always, actually are welcoming to it, especially when it's for a crowd funded game.
3. Literally nothing is being defended, at all, when berating people for making suggestions for said game, especially not here, of all places. It doesn't help the game, it just displays one's internal struggles with reality and being a decent person.
