8 votes

Playdate, the most exciting device in indie gaming, is also the most depressing: The recently announced system shows that indie games can be just as myopic and male-centered as the medium’s mainstream

8 comments

  1. [2]
    NaraVara
    (edited )
    Link
    I’m having trouble seeing what the offense is here. The indie platform recruited indie developers they knew and came up with a name that coincides with a feminist conference? This seems like an...

    I’m having trouble seeing what the offense is here. The indie platform recruited indie developers they knew and came up with a name that coincides with a feminist conference?

    This seems like an extremely hard reaction to something rather mild. Based on the headline they made it sound like Panic announced a Playdate version of “Custer’s Revenge.”

    Interpreting the courtesy of calling someone about sorting out the name and offering to pay them as “a thinly veiled threat” also sounds like a real reach to me. The article itself doesn’t really cite anyone who interpreted it that way, just “interpreted by many in the community” which sounds like a spin on “sources familiar with the matter.” (i.e. something journalists say to make a point without needing to support it.) Panic hasn’t even announced all the associated developers yet and they have an open inbox for interested devs to create for the platform.

    21 votes
    1. Whom
      Link Parent
      The headline is certainly hyperbolic (and imo this might be a good example of where we might want to write our own one), but imo the article itself seems pretty level-headed. Like "hey, this...

      The headline is certainly hyperbolic (and imo this might be a good example of where we might want to write our own one), but imo the article itself seems pretty level-headed. Like "hey, this could've been an opportunity to do some interesting and helpful things, but instead it's like everything else in this way" seems like a pretty fair point to me.

      Oh, and:

      Interpreting the courtesy of calling someone about sorting out the name and offering to pay them as “a thinly veiled threat” also sounds like a real reach to me. The article itself doesn’t really cite anyone who interpreted it that way, just “interpreted by many in the community” which sounds like a spin on “sources familiar with the matter.”

      It quotes Panic themselves admitting as much:

      “Instead of [appearing] friendly and approachable [to Playdate’s organizers], our email came across as intimidating. This is, putting it mildly, not what we wanted, and it’s our mistake.”

      5 votes
  2. [2]
    Macil
    Link
    I think there's an inherent conflict between making a tightly curated experience with games by a few proven developers, and being inclusive to up-and-coming developers of varied backgrounds. I...

    I think there's an inherent conflict between making a tightly curated experience with games by a few proven developers, and being inclusive to up-and-coming developers of varied backgrounds. I think it's hard to push on both goals at once.

    If the ecosystem overall was totally going into the first goal, then a good argument would exist that just picking that goal while everyone else is also doing so is furthering an exclusionary status quo, but I don't feel like that's what the ecosystem is doing now. There's more platforms than ever allowing indies to publish. It feels like very few groups are even going for the first goal right now. It could be better if they excelled at multiple goals at the same time, but I'd rather have a few groups trying at the first goal alone than none at all.

    11 votes
    1. cptcobalt
      Link Parent
      Bingo. I've been a long time consumer of Panic software and have followed the company for just as long, and its clear they they were shooting for a for magic and surprise with the announcement. I...

      Bingo.

      I've been a long time consumer of Panic software and have followed the company for just as long, and its clear they they were shooting for a for magic and surprise with the announcement. I don't see any evidence of being exclusionary here. In the following days, Panic has clearly gone on to say that they are working with female game devs developers in Season 1—including Panic employees(!)—and that many people they wanted to work with were unable to due to scheduling conflicts, etc. When Panic says this, I'll take this at face value. (It's your choice to believe them or not.)

      We know they're opening up the SDK for developers soon. So, this "controversy" can easily be dispensed with when we see their actions with what comes next:

      • Is there a Season Two of games? Who gets top billing in S2?
      • Is there an App Store? Who is featured?
      • What are they doing to curate content from traditionally underrepresented groups after Season 1?

      It doesn't have to be "in your face", either. All that matters is that they handle it well—which I trust will happen—then it'll prove they can be good platform holders for Playdate into the future.

      9 votes
  3. [4]
    papasquat
    Link
    I think I disagree with both of the premises of the article. One, I don't know anyone who is excited about this thing. Another walled garden on underpowered hardware with a black and white display...

    I think I disagree with both of the premises of the article. One, I don't know anyone who is excited about this thing. Another walled garden on underpowered hardware with a black and white display and twelve games that may or may not be any good and a vague with a vague promise that maybe they'll make more for 150 dollars does not sound very exciting to me.

    Also, not knowing the name of a small, local event that most people have never heard of before you register the name of your (very generically named) product doesn't sound myopic at all to me. If I wanted to name a product, I would probably decide on the name, find out of it was trademarked, and if not, go out to register it. I don't think there's somehow a moral duty to make sure that your name isn't taken by an obscure queer feminist gaming showcase before you decide to name your product.

    It would be cool if they had female game developers showcased, but unfortunately there really aren't a ton of women with big names in indie game development (not sure why dream daddy was mentioned, the dev team and publishers of that game are overwhelmingly men). Maybe if this thing takes off that can be something they fix. This whole "they took someone's name" thing is sensationalism in my opinion though.

    8 votes
    1. [3]
      Whom
      Link Parent
      Idk why you'd focus on the fact that the names coincide, the article sure doesn't. It's critical of how they handled that situation, but I don't really see much suggesting that taking the name...

      Idk why you'd focus on the fact that the names coincide, the article sure doesn't. It's critical of how they handled that situation, but I don't really see much suggesting that taking the name itself was the problem.

      unfortunately there really aren't a ton of women with big names in indie game development

      ...well yeah, their point is that this could've been an opportunity to avoid just relying on the same ol big names.

      1 vote
      1. [2]
        papasquat
        Link Parent
        Seems like that was sort of the main point of the article. They spent most of the time explaining what the playdate was, then explaining the drama between the gaming device and the event. There...

        Seems like that was sort of the main point of the article. They spent most of the time explaining what the playdate was, then explaining the drama between the gaming device and the event. There were a few points about how none of the games were developed by women, but the focus was on this playdate event, because it happened to have the same name.

        1 vote
        1. Whom
          (edited )
          Link Parent
          Yes, there was attention given to the event, and that was started by them having the same names...but I really don't see how it can be read as focusing on the name thing. I can't find a single...

          Yes, there was attention given to the event, and that was started by them having the same names...but I really don't see how it can be read as focusing on the name thing. I can't find a single sentence railing on them for picking a name that's already used. Rather I see criticism of how they handled it, which got taken as essentially bullying the event to dropping the name.

          I genuinely don't see how you could read the article as just being mad about a shared name.

          1 vote