PCGamer article: "Paradox Interactive says player toxicity is driving developers away from its forums"

[Sergeant Major Gross]

I really think the current angry atmosphere on the forum is greatly exacerbated by the fact that there hasn't been a dedicated post/thread by a developer or community manager taking ownership for the Leviathan mess.

This. We still didn't receive an official apology. No dedicated thread. I didn't even know a Developer posted in this thread with info until someone in another thread quoted the posts.

 

[XYN]

I don't really know what do you want from an apology. I understand it on the PR level, but seriously, what it gives?

 

[Jernau_]

Is there any way to completely filter the forum so I'll only see dev posts?

 

[DavidBrewster]

I know that's how quite a few people have interpreted these situations, but that's actually at no point what has motivated our decisions to not work with the people you're listing or any content creator/influencer we work with for that matter. You can find tons of examples of people who are critical of us and who we still work with on a regular basis. I don't want to go into too many details on the cases above and reopen these conversations we've addressed before, but in summary, I'd say every time we chose to not work with someone, it's because of how our work relationship with them is going, not because of what they say about our products.

I've followed these two situations pretty closely and I have evaluated the evidence from both sides, and while it's impossible to know for sure, in my view, the preponderance of evidence seems to suggest it was the criticism that got them canned. As a player of Paradox games, that's just how it looks to me. I've also heard from sources I consider reliable that YouTubers who cover Paradox games will warn each other to not cover things that are negative. When I watch a lot of the Paradox YouTubers who do get access, to be totally honest, that does indeed seem to be the case. Take Leviathan, for instance: massive upset on the forums, but YouTubers who got access were completely quiet prior to launch. Isn't that weird?

Look at the embargo agreements that are put out. Why would Paradox ban a streamer from sharing their opinion, if not to control the message? I know this sounds like an accusation and I really don't mean it that way - this is just how I feel and what I think and would like to have a line of communication about this. I would love to hear Paradox's side of this but when everything is shrouded in secrecy it's kinda hard to give Paradox the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Zemurin]

I don't really know what you want from an apology. I understand it on the PR level, but seriously, what it gives?
View attachment 713995

The purpose of a meaningful apology is to ensure acknowledgment of a list of corrective measures so past incidents would not repeat themselves.

 

[jr8825]

Is there any way to completely filter the forum so I'll only see dev posts?

Threads with developer responses have a small yellow tool icon in the thread list, just to the left of "replies". Then within threads there's a "show only dev responses button". I have to say I really like these features.

 

[konbendith]

@DavidBrewster
I'm sorry, I understand this might be frustrating, but I won't expand more on this. We've provided answers to that before, and if they weren't enough to convince you then, as you pointed, they won't now. It's absolutely fine for you to have your own opinion on the matter.

 

[DavidBrewster]

@DavidBrewster
I'm sorry, I understand this might be frustrating, but I won't expand more on this. We've provided answers to that before, and if they weren't enough to convince you then, as you pointed, they won't now. It's absolutely fine for you to have your own opinion on the matter.

Okay fair enough, but what about having embargos that ban streamers from giving an opinion? Or embargos that can YouTubers from reviewing before launch? As a player that's super frustrating to me, and that seems like Paradox could change since most other companies don't do it that way.

And on a larger level, I don't like the idea that reviewers need to have a working relationship with Paradox to get codes. That makes them more like contractors of Paradox, in my opinion, not independent journalists who make reviews that I might rely on as a buyer. Just my 2 cents.

 

[jr8825]

The purpose of a meaningful apology is to ensure acknowledgment of a list of corrective measures so past incidents would not repeat themselves.

...and to add to that, Paradox makes an effort to build a relationship with its players on these forums, and when something goes as spectacularly wrong as Leviathan, an acknowledgment of the disappointment and let-down caused is needed to maintain that relationship.

I don't really know what do you want from an apology. I understand it on the PR level, but seriously, what it gives?

We're also fee-paying customers as well, and as we've been sold a faulty product I think it's right to expect an explanation/update about what's happening next.

 

[Jadelith]

As someone who's been extremely critical of Eu4 the past year (because of broken promises & repeated buggy releases):

1) thx for engaging with us. And keep in mind there's a loong context for why people are being very critical. Quick example: ai debt spiral hasn't been fixed in a year now........
2) for ppl asking for an apology. I don't think there's a need for one really. I refuse to buy another EU4 DLC until things are fixed, that's my decision. If you think the game's broken, ask for a refund, or play in a previous patch, and do what I'm doing. Apology is pointless, it's just words anyway.

 

[jr8825]

Okay fair enough, but what about having embargos that ban streamers from giving an opinion? Or embargos that can YouTubers from reviewing before launch? As a player that's super frustrating to me, and that seems like Paradox could change since most other companies don't do it that way.

I thought embargoes were pretty common across the gaming industry?

 

[konbendith]

1) thx for engaging with us. And keep in mind there's a loong context for why people are being very critical. Quick example: ai debt spiral hasn't been fixed in a year now........

It's honestly been nice to find/have the time to do so today. I know this doesn't solve all the issues, but hopefully, it brings a bit of perspective.
And as a EU4 player who follows (usually more quietly) the community and has more than 2k hours of play on the game, don't you worry, I'm aware of the issues and frustrations

 

[DavidBrewster]

I thought embargoes were pretty common across the gaming industry?

It's a little abnormal to ban reviews until launch.

 

[van Fol]

in my view, the preponderance of evidence seems to suggest it was the criticism that got them canned.

@DavidBrewster I know it might seem this way, but at least in case of Arumba it certainly wasn't the case, if you google "Groogy incident" you'll find the reason of his blacklisting, it's no secret, you can find their whole discussion on reddit, but let's not derail the discussion here. As for other EU4 youtubers not bashing PDX: some might fear being blacklisted by PDX, but refraining from strong criticism is working in their own interest, they just grin and bear it, discouraging viewers from playing the game that provides their content would be unwise and unproductive for them.

And yes, we don't need apology, what we need is explanation (and bugfixes).

 

[XYN]

The purpose of a meaningful apology is to ensure acknowledgment of a list of corrective measures so past incidents would not repeat themselves.

Yeaaah I don't see it.

In 10 years that I've been on this forum, there were numerous occasions where apology-style posts from devs would pop up from time to time,
including acknowledgement, corrective measures, and the idea that it will not be repeated.

Fans love these apology posts and shower the devs with praise, but usually it gets repeated. And will, because people need to prioritize voting with the wallet if they want to see the real change in the attitude.

 

[qwertyiop]

I'm going to take the opportunity here to try and answer the whole "Paradox is putting the blame on their players for toxicity" thing that has been making the rounds in the community since that article from PC Gamer and some other coverage following the latest HOI dev diaries, as well as the Leviathan release.

First, and I think this has been raised by everyone who made that point before: we welcome feedback and people being critical of your games, business, and/or actions. I don't believe we've ever silenced, banned, or stopped working with someone because they were critical of us. It's not always easy, and sometimes it stings more than others. If you spent weeks (or months) working on something and it doesn't get a good reception in the community, regardless of who's right or wrong, it can really suck. We're all humans with feelings and emotions after all. But it doesn't change the fact that yes, you're welcome to be critical of us, here or elsewhere.

That being said, we have observed in recent times that some of our developers feel less eager and enthusiastic about interacting on the forums with the community. This is what was raised by @Archangel85 in the latest HOI Dev Diary, which has been picked up in the article linked above. It's also a conversation we've had internally in the last couple of months. It's a complex topic, and I personally don't believe that it's as simple as the "us vs. them" situation that it's sometimes been summarized to. Neither is it as simple as "our fanbase are toxic assholes" or "our developers are snowflakes who can't handle feedback". These certainly make for catchy headlines and good memes on Reddit, but let's try to be constructive here. There are several things into play:

• It's a vicious circle. I think the biggest value of these forums is the presence of developers active on them, to chat with the community, listen to feedback, get inspiration, answer questions, etc. I also believe that's one of the key reasons lots of you guys are active here. If devs are less present here, the forums lose some of their value, and the community rightfully gets frustrated, and maybe they're less constructive and chill, then the devs feel even less eager to be present here, etc. Until we break the cycle, it pretty much continues this way with everyone being frustrated in the process.
• It's about balance. It's fine to be critical and share constructive feedback, but if it's done with a constant negative, snarky or dismissive tone, it gets exhausting to read through it. it's the same when it comes to wild speculations and crazy conspiracy theories, or straight-up disbelief of any explanation or answer we can provide. When it eventually leads to harassment or straight-up attacks towards our staff or the community, it's absolutely unacceptable. Does this mean that all critics should be shared with a big smile and coated in honey and three layers of praise and compliments? Of course not. Does it mean people shouldn't get annoyed when we release something that doesn't match their expectations? Certainly not. Should we have less tolerance for people being overly or constantly negative and assuming by default that we're dishonest? Maybe? It's not easy to draw where the line between being critical and being toxic is, and at the end of the day, this balance, we need to find it together.
• The standards have changed. Our company is not the same as it was 15, or even 5 years ago. We're bigger, more profitable, publicly-traded, etc. Your expectations for us are not the same as they were when we were just a small scruffy Swedish studio, which is absolutely normal and fair. Our industry has also changed quite a lot, and the internet landscape and the way online conversations are handled too. You don't manage moderation the same way on Twitter, Discord, or on our good old forums. In that regard, the forums are a bit 'old school'. It is something we want to keep, but that might also need some adjustments to fit in our larger online community and ecosystem. If you're a dev who's used to how we moderate other platforms like our official Discord servers for example (where we have much stricter moderation rules because it's a platform that requires it due to its faster and more intense pace), it can be confusing to see conversations and feedback in the forums being more intense than what you're used to. Once again, there is a balance to be found there.

I think overall, we all want the same thing: forums with more active (and happy) developers, and great and constructive conversations between them and you, our most dedicated players. So, what are we planning to do?

• Ownership of the forums has changed internally to be under the direct responsibility of the Community team. That probably sounds like vague corporate lingo bullcrap, what it actually means is that it's going to more peoples' responsibility (specifically Community Developers/Managers) to spend time on the forums, care for the platform, and ensure it gets the attention and content it deserves.
• The role of the forums among our other community platforms has been formalized. Back in the days, the Paradox forums were the one core central platform for all Paradox games. But now the internet has evolved, our portfolio has changed, and while the forums remain super relevant for some of our games (namely and mainly the core PDS grand strategy titles), they're not always the best place for some other titles and communities. If you look at Cities Skylines, Prison Architect, or World of Darkness games for example, for various reasons the communities for these are more active and present in other platforms than the Paradox Forums, which often lead to these sections being rather deserted and inactive. Rather than forcing their presence there, we'd rather focus our energy and time on where these communities already are. This will most likely lead to some Paradox games not having a dedicated section on the forums in the future (but don't worry, all PDS titles will. It also means we'll be focusing our efforts on making the forums good for the community already living there (that's you!), rather than attempting to make it the perfect place for every title & community in our portfolio.
• We're going to do some adjustments to moderation. I'm being super careful with this point, and please don't go widely speculating about what this means just yet. It's still very early in this conversation, and we need to discuss with the moderation team, and people directly involved with the forums (including you). Generally, my hope is to strike that perfect balance to make the forums a bit more aligned with our community guidelines on other platforms, without losing their identity and uniqueness. It's that sweet spot where you feel empowered and allowed to be critical, and frustrated about things, but our developers still feel like they're welcomed here.
• Finally, we'll work to support more developers' presence here. The hope is to "break the wheel" of the vicious circle I've presented above if you will. We'll rely on the actions above, but also plan more dedicated activities there beyond dev diaries and the usual conversations (if you have ideas, suggestions, or expectations, let me know!)

Funnily enough, all of the above was already discussed a couple of weeks ago and isn't a reaction to the latest events. I guess the latest rightful complains and issues just showed us that we were right to identify that we needed to focus on this, and definitely helps to put it on a higher level of priority.

Damn, I wrote a big ol' wall of text. That felt weirdly good and brought back some memories from my days moderating old phpBB forums myself. Hope it provides you all with some perspective and reassurance for the future. At the very least, I hope it shows that we care and are working on improving things even if that's not always obvious or visible. Happy to answer questions and discuss this more, I happen to have a pretty open day for once!

A copy of this got posted on reddit without the thread's context. It's hilarious, everyone is complaining that 'this isn't an apology', 'what does this have to do with Leviathan', 'this is a nothing burger', as if every post ever made by a paradox employer has to be about Leviathan.

 

[DragonScythe]

One thing I'd like to comment on is that I hope the devs see the good with the bad. Now, I absolutely understand that people can cross the line when criticizing or voicing their disappointment with something, and I'm totally in favor of probating or banning people who engage in personal attacks. I'd just like to point out the stark difference in reaction to the second Poland dev diary and the Tank designer dev diary. In those two diaries you have an almost polar-opposite reaction.

What I'm trying to say is, I absolutely think directing personal attacks against the devs is completely unacceptable, it can often be difficult to tell the difference between a criticism that's directed at an idea or a decision and one directed at an individual ex: "This idea sucks" could easily be taken personally by the one who came up with the idea and thought it was good.

I'd also like to say that just as the devs are human beings with feelings and emotions, so are the posters and people aren't infallible. They can get hotheaded and say things they don't mean or just plain make mistakes. That's why I'm in favor of probation in the case personal attacks as a form of "cool down and think about what you just wrote" and bans only in the case of persistent unwillingness to adhere to basic civility in discussion.

I really like the dev interaction in the forums and I have seen many many times over the years how this interaction has worked for the better as devs get good, thoughtful suggestions and feedback. I must iterate again, personal attacks are completely unacceptable, but the ability to criticize and offer feedback is part of why Paradox has been so successful in my opinion. The "glass is half-full" perspective would be that posters wouldn't be so passionate and heated if they didn't love the games, they perhaps just need some time to step back and get some perspective if they cross the line.

 

[qwertyiop]

I think the main problem does not come from true personal attacks, rather posts which are neither legitimate criticisms nor personal attacks, but instead complaints about a product that are written in an extremely snarky, condescending and insulting tone (e.g. every complaint ever made about Leviathan).

Now I know what everyone is going to say, Leviathan deserved those responses. The problem with this response, and the similar 'why is paradox complaining about toxicity when they messed up so badly?' is that it is beside the point. Whether they deserve insulting criticism or not, the devs and the company are not going to spend their time scrolling through the forums having their hard work insulted in such a manner whether they deserve it or not. It is not just about your right to complain in such a manner, it is about the receiver having no obligation to sit through it if they do not want to.

 

[DragonScythe]

I think the main problem does not come from true personal attacks, rather posts which are neither legitimate criticisms nor personal attacks, but instead complaints about a product that are written in an extremely snarky, condescending and insulting tone (e.g. every complaint ever made about Leviathan).

Now I know what everyone is going to say, Leviathan deserved those responses. The problem with this response, and the similar 'why is paradox complaining about toxicity when they messed up so badly?' is that it is beside the point. Whether they deserve insulting criticism or not, the devs and the company are not going to spend their time scrolling through the forums having their hard work insulted in such a manner whether they deserve it or not. It is not just about your right to complain in such a manner, it is about the receiver having no obligation to sit through it if they do not want to.

That's a very good point. I'm not a fan of passive-aggressive, snarky, condescending snipes that don't contribute to the conversation. I'd be in favor of some kind of rules that require some sort of constructive content to posting. If the only purpose of a post is to be 100% negative and win some snarky points, it would probably be better off not being made.

 

[HoridMatec]

I believe we have said all these things in various threads already, but I can say them again here formally so that you can quote me on it.

• We don't think all the community is toxic, but some people are.
  I don't believe you have to go as far as personal attacks to have an attitude that is toxic, but yeah if someone reaches that level, they've definitely crossed the line.
• We are, I believe, already banning people who break this kind of rule, and are going to continue doing so. We have no tolerance for harassment and attacks in our communities.
• We are sorry about the state of the latest EU4 release, and the teams are working hard on fixing the issues that have been raised by the community.

ok, but what went wrong and how will you make sure this wont happened again in next dlc/game?