This Guardian article(*) about stan culture (intersectional fandom) made me think deep ... ;)
"
Dr Lynn Zubernis is a professor at West Chester University in Pennsylvania and an expert in fandom. She says the bullying behaviours [...] are common to all fandoms.
[...]
“Because the object of a fan’s adoration becomes very important to the fan’s happiness, when there is some sort of disappointment, that brings a strong – and sometimes problematic – response. That is the dynamic behind the ‘mood swings’ you see in fandom, where fans love something one day and turn on it the next. [...] I think it’s a human thing.”
[...]
However, not all fandoms operate with the same power dynamics.
After the recent Delve whipping and also been a witness to the Beastiary whipping. In comparison to Incursion, I get the impression that GGG does not want to speak out for their released league nor actively defend the new league. There are upsides and downsides to doing so.
I think this is problematic long-term. Assuming Delve was created for a specific aim, internally designed by hardcore ARPG players($) (see the hype for the character league ladder and the talk about changing meta) but then make those aims void with 'reasonable' changes(&) GGG has been bombarded with by a small selective pool/type of players over the last 72 hours that dominate the publicly visible mindshare (min-max, clear speed meta, get rich quick mentality).
Second, the “Special Relationship.”
In light that the fandom did fund and is still funding GGG to work on POE (Supporter Packs, MTX, Loot Boxes), makes this picture (the last 72 hours) look abusive, in my opinion. Especially considering the pool where it comes from. And not healthy at all. Creating long-term toxic acrimonies. "On both sides." Both sides are doomed to feel disappointed, let down, or abandoned, or an abject failure (GGG), hating their job, in some ways more or less, after the first week of every fucking new league.
This also shines a light on long-term player retention rate, if there is one, GGG internally knows about. One can only speculate. I've been with POE since Abyss, and went back in time in the beginning reading and listening and watching old content. And oh man, where are the old school streamers now? They all have not fallen in love with Blizzard Card Games AFAIK.
Just my thoughts on the whole, the big picture.
Thank you very much for reading. Any additions?
PS: GGG should offer free counseling/psychiatry hours for its employees. "Still sane, exile?"
(*) https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/sep/04/they-just-wanted-to-silence-her-the-dark-side-of-gay-stan-culture
($) Chris Wilson said he plays hardcore
(&) Sharing Azurite and Upgrades between characters in the same league on your account. - https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2207418
Last edited by RPGNoobANKA#0714 on Sep 4, 2018, 9:53:58 PM Last bumped on Sep 6, 2018, 5:42:45 AM
|
Posted byRPGNoobANKA#0714on Sep 4, 2018, 9:39:31 PM
|
"
鬼殺し wrote:
There's no point 'quitting' PoE because there's nothing to gain from it.
Time. Lots of time.
As to you "not" financially supporting... I think you could go a solid 10 years of "not" supporting and still end up supporting more per year on average than most of us! :P
|
Posted bySudianX#6729on Sep 5, 2018, 5:07:52 AM
|
Most of my comments are not useful in context.
Sorry for wasting your... time.
|
Posted bySudianX#6729on Sep 5, 2018, 7:53:10 AM
|
I think part of the particular fandom the article was talking about, and in a broader general sense, is that people look for things to be perfect ..and they feel betrayed when they are not.
In one context, this means that fans will vehemently defend a person, game, etc. despite it's flaws, because ( either from desperation, validity, or ignorance ) they can neither see nor accept anything but them as being anything but amazing / perfect. To acknowledge fault, would be to acknowledge they are backing something with fault, which would reflect onto them poor choice or being at fault themselves.
If what they admire / defend can be kept as amazing / perfect, it validates their adoration and praise, which makes themselves look better for doing so. It's a common physiological phenomenon with sports ( boxing, football, etc. ) in which scouts / managers live through their acquired talent; the person they market and showboat to others as something they found / created. When that person does well, they also do well; when their talent does poorly, they internally, or get externally, negative reactions.
This similar behavior can be applied to much of anything, like cars and homes, where people will spend great effort to point out how great it is, eliciting praise and adoration.
In the other context, when a "fan" has that guise of perfection broken ..they can choose the betrayal route, which pits them against the thing they adored / saw as perfection. It becomes cruel mockery to them, that they were deceived, let down, lied to outright; that said person changed on them ...that it wasn't the fan's fault this happened.
A show of distancing oneself from the once object of their desire is a means of saving face, retaliation / revenge for having their mystified reality taken from them.
They may even lash out at those that made them aware of these faults, for irrational reasons, wanting to have been left to the delusion that they so craved. You can see a lot of this behavior in politics and relationships where women were cheated on; where rather than lashing out at the one who vexed them ...they turn their attention on the other party member involved ( usually being a victim of the circumstance themselves ).
---
In my own experience / observations with discussions on various games and communication platforms, you seldom see people quibble about details, nuances, or semantics; it goes right into ad hominem attacks and judgements based on perceived status. Much of which relies on leaving ultimate authority and decisions to the only ones not involved with the discussion, the game developers; which mean's discussions tend to be relegated to "go make your own game" or "if you don't like it, leave". None of which are contextually relevant to the discussion, nor conclude anything.
In a general sense, all forms of fandom tend to have no interest in long form discussions or criticisms; they merely want to seek out other fans, so that they can share how much of a fan they are to each other. It's a pretty straight forward fan-club mentality, which makes sense in a lot of areas like concerts, Cons, etc.. It only becomes problematic on mediums like forums, where the main focus of them is to discuss topics, rather than be a beacon for sharing anecdotes or pictures like social media.
It's a collision of intentions and ideals, which leads to most game forums turning into mostly vitriol and in-fighting. And the one's that could mediate this problem, the target of said admiration, tend to always step away from it sooner than later, because they want to avoid dealing with / upsetting fans in that manner by simply trying to be reasonable.
|
Posted byJoeShmo#1872on Sep 6, 2018, 4:12:52 AM
|
Huh,
It sounds like splitting/ projection.
"
Although this post will look at splitting as one of the defense mechanisms, I’d like to begin by noting that splitting also represents a normal and constructive part of our mental processes. We couldn’t think or process our experience without it. To understand the useful functions that splitting serves, we need to go through the same kind of imaginative exercise I presented in my recent post on post-traumatic stress disorder — that is, to try to envision the emotional life of an infant.
For centuries, philosophers and scientists have debated whether human beings enter the world with some kind of a priori knowledge, but for this exercise, let’s just imagine a clean slate. Nearly everything the newborn experiences is thus brand new and unfamiliar; a central need is to make sense of it all, to attempt to understand the environment and its powerful effects. From the beginning, maybe even in utero, the infant divides its experiences into those that feel “good” or gratifying vs. those that cause pain and/or frustration and feel “bad”. Good vs. bad (though not in a moral sense) is therefore the first organizing principle. It depends upon the infant splitting the confusing mass of its experience into good and bad, dividing it up so that it becomes more understandable and predictable.
The accumulation of “good” experiences, linked to repeated sensory gratification, eventually gives rise to the idea of “mother”; the bad ones (a bit later) give rise to the idea of her absence or failure to appear. An important developmental milestone occurs when the infant can understand (on a very primitive level) that the “good” experiences largely occur when this mother-entity appears and tends to it, and the bad ones (hunger, cold, etc.) tend to occur when she is absent. At this point, the infant becomes aware that other people exist, and if you’re a parent, you know that there’s a noticeable difference when this occurs. (I’m not going to talk about the good mother/bad mother issue just now; I’ll save that topic for another post.)
Splitting as a mental process thus enables us to makes distinctions. Throughout life, splitting serves this exact function: it allows us to take an undifferentiated, confusing mass of experience or information and divide it into categories that have meaning. Without splitting, nothing would make sense to us. We wouldn’t be able to understand because we couldn’t divide the mass of sensory input into meaningful categories. Projection likewise has valuable and normal functions, as do other so-called defense mechanisms.
Splitting can also serve the exact opposite function: that is, it can remove meaning by separating parts of a whole that actually belong together. This is where it becomes a defense mechanism and is used to ward off unbearable feelings and emotions. Although they’re not actually separate experiences, as I’ll discuss below, it’s useful to think about splitting either (1) the self or (2) the other person.
So far, this has been fairly abstract and I think it’s time for an example. Let’s say that I have a hard time bearing my anger and aggressive feelings; maybe they were unacceptable in my family of origin and I was expected to be “nice”. In truth, I’m a nice and also a not-so-nice person, with a mixture of loving and hating impulses; when the anger and hatred can’t be tolerated, however, I will split them off: The loving and socially acceptable feelings — those are ME — and the hostile aggressive ones are NOT ME. Thus I have split myself (more accurately, my awareness of myself) into parts and disowned one of them, which almost always goes hand-in-hand with projecting it outside. (For a more in-depth discussion of the disowned “shadow” self, see Marla Estes’ post on the film ‘Wolf’ starring Jack Nicholson, or mine on ‘Black Swan‘, both available on ‘Movies and Mental Health’.)
When we split off a part of our experience and project it outside, the disowned aspect of ourselves often leads to a distorted perception of reality, in particular the misperception of other people. Nearly everyone understands this phenomenon: it’s what we mean when we say, “Oh, stop it, you’re just projecting.” Splitting also enfeebles the self. As Marla Estes and I both point out in the above posts, aggression is a powerful and often useful force; ridding ourselves of it (our awareness of it) makes us weaker even if by doing so, we avoid some of the conflicts that come up when we feel aggressive.
We may also split the other person, which sounds strange; what actually occurs is that we split our perceptions of that other person. Again, it’s our own self that we split. It’s easiest to see this process at work in idealization, especially when it occurs in romantic love. We’ve all known someone who has fallen in love and we wonder, “What does she see in him?” Or, “Is he blind?” The person in love, often craving the drug-like feelings associated with infatuation, may want to avoid any inconvenient personality traits in the loved one that might deflate the feelings of love. So the awareness of faults and flaws is split off; it often winds up in (is projected into) friends or family members, who then have to carry all the doubts. The infatuated person may then avoid or even turn against those people so he or she won’t have to confront the split-off perceptions.
Excessive or overly rigid splitting may lead to black-and-white thinking. When splitting and projection are extreme and predominate, it makes people’s personalities, along with their perceptions of other individuals, highly unstable. One minute, they may love and revere you, the next, turn on you with vicious anger. Grandiose feelings of self-importance may suddenly give way to self-loathing. These are the hallmarks of individuals who suffer from borderline personality disorder. The attempt to split off and discard the damaged self lies at the heart of the bipolar disorders and also concerns highly competitive people who are preoccupied with winners and losers. To some degree, splitting (and its companion defense, projection) plays a role in most psychological disorders.
Full post here, from one of my fave blogs, "After Psychotherapy"
We should strive to see the GGG staff as human beings, and consider their feelings when making criticisms, I agree.
|
Posted byerdelyii#5604on Sep 6, 2018, 5:42:45 AM
|