[vonwoodson]

This article praises the game community too much. A very good reason to avoid gave development is to avoid the gamers themselves. You really are taking a chance when you dump millions of dollars into a AAA title, just to have it shat-on by everyone, and forever tarnish your brand. Think, Cyberpunk 2077, Stadia, No Man’s Sky; now you may say, “but those all sucked, especially at release!” satisfied Mmm-Hmm

Meanwhile, tools like Jira or SAP may be equally hated or “suck”, but, there are not online magazines dedicated to rating, ranking, and criticizing tools like them… or at least not popular ones. And, Jira is going to be in use for years, where even a praised game, say Stray, isn’t nearly as long lived or profitable.

Also, it’s no secret that Horizons, Roblox, Fortnite is full of screaming 8-year-olds, CoD is a recruiting tool for Neo-Nazis, and online communities are generally awful. What reasonable adult wants to get into that cesspool?

I appreciate the point of the article, but I feel like it focuses too much on Productivity VS Fun… ignoring that video games may not actually be fun. That computers may be for productivity and that fun should happen outside of Big Tech corporate production software.

[rockskon]

The hunt for and branding of toxic behavior in online communities has long since felt like the secular version of religious fundamentalists claiming games encourage youth to become Satanists and engage in violent behavior.

Many of those who hunt for online toxic behavior present day are not impartial observers and analysts. Similar to their evangelical counterparts from the 80's, 90's, and 00's, they have their own biases rooted in axioms that are not widely held in society.

[vonwoodson]

So, the problem isn’t that people are toxic, it’s that people point it out?

Classic.

[rockskon]

The problem is that the hecklers use self-defined criteria of toxicity that isn't representative of broader society's views on what is toxic.

Many assertions of toxicity in the modern era have as much relevance as assertions of Satanism did in decades past. The accusers define the criteria they then diagnose. What they diagnose often has little relevance to actual societal ills and oftentimes just serves to further stigmatize social outcasts to no productive end.