4 ms·

> We have seen the same thing happen to Star Wars where the legitimate criticism was painted as toxicity of the fandom. Hold on a minute here. Yes, the racist

> We have seen the same thing happen to Star Wars where the legitimate criticism was painted as toxicity of the fandom. Hold on a minute here. Yes, the racist assholes got more attention than they deserved. But Rise of the Skywalker was thrown together by a bunch of marketing executives looking through all that “legitimate criticism”, making a big checklist, and feeding it into their lifeless movie factory to create a giant wish fulfillment fantasy for all those “real fans” who were upset someone would dare to shake up their stale, predictable franchise. It was a terrible movie. Lessons: Disney is a cancer, but also people on the internet, as plentiful as they are, have no idea what they want.

bena 4y ago
This is one area where I think Nintendo and Apple really excel at. They hardly, if ever, cave to user "wants", because they understand that often, the user has no fucking clue what they actually want. It's why they manage to succeed despite initial opinions being so against them. It's because often the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Looking at a thing can only tell you so much, it's only when you are able to actually experience the thing will you be able to judge whether it is good or not.
- norwalkbear 4y ago
  It's not true in the case of Nintendo. They always actively get JAPANESE feedback for games like Zelda and Pokemon. As western and eastern tastes diverge, you'll see bigger issues. It's one of the reasons Square Enix just sold all their western studios.
- Wowfunhappy 4y ago
  Users often don't know what they want, but they frequently know better than rando companies. Apple's strategy worked during the era of Steve Jobs because Steve Jobs was miraculously good at intuiting what users want. Since his death, Apple has lost that ability. See: The Butterfly Keyboard, the Touchbar, the 2013 Mac Pro. Apple's recent successes have been things consumers very much said they wanted: iPhones with larger screens, Macs with better performance and incredible battery life. Nintendo does seem to have some leaders with Steve Jobs's talent, but I'd argue they're more hit or miss than he was. The Wii U didn't go so well, and the Wii—while an initial success—was ultimately kind of mixed.
  - bena 4y ago
    The reason I explicitly noted Nintendo and Apple is because they are not "rando companies". They are companies with explicit track records of not focus grouping every product to death. You say the Wii was "mixed", but that's just wrong. It outsold the PS3 and XBox 360. The Wii U was a misstep, but the Switch is essentially a Wii U/Game Boy hybrid. Because Nintendo saw what was off with the Switch and made the changes. As for Apple, they were lambasted for removing the Home button, removing the audio jack, making their own chips. But those have all been not the major missteps people thought they were.
    - Wowfunhappy 4y ago
      > You say the Wii was "mixed", but that's just wrong. It outsold the PS3 and XBox 360. It did, but many of the people who bought it purchased few (if any) games. It's not clear to me that the Wii was more profitable than the PS360 when you take the full ecosystem into account. And even if it was, remember that those competing consoles made major technical missteps—the PS3's high initial cost and weird Cell processor, and the 360's red ring of death. > As for Apple, they were lambasted for removing the Home button, removing the audio jack, making their own chips. But those have all been not the major missteps people thought they were. I don't remember as much outcry about the home button's removal. But I bet if you asked a focus group what they wanted in an iPhone, "the biggest possible screen in the smallest possible body" would have been high on the list, and that ultimately necessitates removing the home button. Android phones had already been moving in this direction. Similar situation with Apple Silicon. Normal consumers don't know what a cpu architecture is, but I'm sure a focus group would have asked for a Mac which was faster and lasted longer on battery. The headphone jack's removal was a money grab, pure and simple. It allows Apple to exert more control over the ecosystem and receive more money in licensing fees. Consumers didn't like it, they were merely willing to put up with it.

bena 4y ago

This is one area where I think Nintendo and Apple really excel at. They hardly, if ever, cave to user "wants", because they understand that often, the user has no fucking clue what they actually want. It's why they manage to succeed despite initial opinions being so against them. It's because often the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Looking at a thing can only tell you so much, it's only when you are able to actually experience the thing will you be able to judge whether it is good or not.

norwalkbear 4y ago
It's not true in the case of Nintendo. They always actively get JAPANESE feedback for games like Zelda and Pokemon. As western and eastern tastes diverge, you'll see bigger issues. It's one of the reasons Square Enix just sold all their western studios.
Wowfunhappy 4y ago
Users often don't know what they want, but they frequently know better than rando companies. Apple's strategy worked during the era of Steve Jobs because Steve Jobs was miraculously good at intuiting what users want. Since his death, Apple has lost that ability. See: The Butterfly Keyboard, the Touchbar, the 2013 Mac Pro. Apple's recent successes have been things consumers very much said they wanted: iPhones with larger screens, Macs with better performance and incredible battery life. Nintendo does seem to have some leaders with Steve Jobs's talent, but I'd argue they're more hit or miss than he was. The Wii U didn't go so well, and the Wii—while an initial success—was ultimately kind of mixed.
- bena 4y ago
  The reason I explicitly noted Nintendo and Apple is because they are not "rando companies". They are companies with explicit track records of not focus grouping every product to death. You say the Wii was "mixed", but that's just wrong. It outsold the PS3 and XBox 360. The Wii U was a misstep, but the Switch is essentially a Wii U/Game Boy hybrid. Because Nintendo saw what was off with the Switch and made the changes. As for Apple, they were lambasted for removing the Home button, removing the audio jack, making their own chips. But those have all been not the major missteps people thought they were.
  - Wowfunhappy 4y ago
    > You say the Wii was "mixed", but that's just wrong. It outsold the PS3 and XBox 360. It did, but many of the people who bought it purchased few (if any) games. It's not clear to me that the Wii was more profitable than the PS360 when you take the full ecosystem into account. And even if it was, remember that those competing consoles made major technical missteps—the PS3's high initial cost and weird Cell processor, and the 360's red ring of death. > As for Apple, they were lambasted for removing the Home button, removing the audio jack, making their own chips. But those have all been not the major missteps people thought they were. I don't remember as much outcry about the home button's removal. But I bet if you asked a focus group what they wanted in an iPhone, "the biggest possible screen in the smallest possible body" would have been high on the list, and that ultimately necessitates removing the home button. Android phones had already been moving in this direction. Similar situation with Apple Silicon. Normal consumers don't know what a cpu architecture is, but I'm sure a focus group would have asked for a Mac which was faster and lasted longer on battery. The headphone jack's removal was a money grab, pure and simple. It allows Apple to exert more control over the ecosystem and receive more money in licensing fees. Consumers didn't like it, they were merely willing to put up with it.