Late reply in this post but I think developers need to recognise valuable and not so valuable feedback. Is opinion of neogaf users speculating about the internal workings of your company and your business deals, valuable feedback to consider?
When a developer looks at forum like neogaf, reddit, or wherever, they should be looking for valuable insight on the players perceptions of their games appeal, design, ux, etc, and in doing so, they should be able to seperate views that don't generate any value.
Neogaf and every forum on the web, is packed with absolutely useless information, opinionated criticism and speculation with no clear foundation and sometimes.
- Worry about the user experience
- Worry about your games appeal
- Worry about your audience, and how to target them
- Worry about making good games
Are neogaf and forums alike the best places to generate insight to answer these questions? No. But they can be valuable if you can sift through everything that isn't. For instance, it was feedback that Naughtydog took from Neogaf that helped remedy some of the control issues in Uncharted 3. User complaints helped direct the attention of their gameplay designers and user researchers, to remedy an issue with the game. Of course, it was presumably followed up by some form of internal experimentation and testing, but it was users on Neogaf (and likely other communities) that helped highlight the issue.
In this particular case, neogaf was provided with negative information about the game, which tainted some users perceptions of the company. Yet, the developer failed to provide any clarification, and therefore, speculation turned to negativity. It's the same reason that users assumed that Sean Murray and the team had given up on No Man's Sky when they stopped communicating with their players.
This is there conclusion
If I had to change something about development I would have been more open with the public and explained the situation
And this reflects a fair assessment of what went wrong. Negative press, based on fact or otherwise, was propogating on not just neogaf, but the internet at large, and Tequilla did little to nothing to provide any clarity. I understand the perspective that the 'proof is in the pudding' and they may have just been focused on the game, unconcerned what users thought of their studio as their intentions would be clear in due course. However, if you are going to leave users in the dark, then you should expect people to assume the worst.
People on GAF were posting GIFs of Shaun Murray flying off with their money after the development of the game.
Here's a lovely quote I just found from another neogaf user, resulting from their speculation from No Man's Sky's development.
Sony didn't know and Sean is just a prick who deceived people and ran away with people's money when he got caught.
It's toxic, and hateful, and I think considering the use of language, doesn't have a place on GAF, however Hello Games allowed this perspective to propagate. They experienced bad press, then they left their users in the dark to speculate over it.
Communicate with your players, learn which feedback you can use to generate valuable insight, and which you can't. If that chain of communication is broken or damaged because of rumours and speculation, then there's a strong argument to suggest that this can be at least partially remedied by providing clarity on what's happening. If on the other hand, you don't want to communicate, perhaps in an effort to manage expectations or something along those lines - then don't take much heed in the opinions that generate from unchecked speculation, focus on making a great game and let that speak for itself when you're ready to show it.
All merely my opinion so feel free to disagree. I wasn't part of the thread when this came around. I'm looking forward to Rime, but I want to play The Last Guardian first.