ZeniMax makes EA look like Valve. Truly the worst corporate scum imaginable.
Valve is hardly a saint, e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMmNy11Mn7g
My full statement regarding DOOM Eternal
261–270 of 284 posts
Re: My full statement regarding DOOM Eternal
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Lowering the volume does not equal introducing more dynamic range. It was just done to avoid clipping when pasting two bits of track on top of each other. If you overlap two tracks, and reduce volume to avoiding clipping, the combined track has spikes in volume where they overlap. This is increased dynamic range. But like I said, it is not musically pleasant to listen to, and it's certainly reasonable to complain ab…
You're making an extremely pedantic distinction, which is only correct in a purely technical sense. Which is the worst kind of correct. Yes, mastering engineers work from track-level dynamic range (usually achieved with slow-response compression) to transient-level dynamic range (fast compression/limiting), and the range in between. When the context for this discussion is about "brickwall limiting", we're talking abo…
I'm well aware of the difference, as acknowledged by my first post in this thread ("not in a way that's pleasant to listen to"). But it is not pedantry, and it is relevant to the context, because this unusual form of dynamic range provides evidence as to when the dynamic range compression was applied. If it was applied after the edits described in the article, I do not think we would not see the volume spikes.
I do not see a single complaint from Gordon about the dynamic range, only the editing. But there is a paragraph in the article suggesting the dynamic range was intentional:
"Marty says that Chad, apparently working in a hurry, only had my supposed “bricked” in-game score to work with. He points to my so-called “bricked” score and adopts that as the reason behind Chad’s poor editing. But not only is Marty confused and clearly doesn’t understand the mastering process, but he also seems ignorant of how Chad’s editing introduced significant problems."
Note that there is no objective definition of "bricked". I personally tend to prefer higher dynamic range, but I've heard plenty of recordings with higher dynamic range than I would like. It seems very likely that some people prefer lower dynamic range than I do. Arjuna attributed the dynamic range to some unknown "they". There is no evidence for this in the article, or in Arjuna's linked Twitter thread. I believe the most reasonable interpretation is that Gordon deliberately chose low dynamic range as a stylistic choice. If you disagree, how about providing evidence?
Re: My full statement regarding DOOM Eternal
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
John Carmack had no hand in DOOM (2016), and was out of iD Software for quite a while by that point, so I have no idea why you felt the need to bring him up.
He had, he worked on the level editor: https://twitter.com/id_aa_carmack/status/610468397554499584
Oh damn, I actually had no idea. I stand corrected, thanks for pointing it out.
That explains why there was so much hype for how good Snap Map (the level editor) turned out. I remember playing with it for a bit, and it seemed both powerful and super easy for someone with zero experience in it to get something simple but fun going.
Re: My full statement regarding DOOM Eternal
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
True, empathy is a function of distance.
But stating the obvious, not always actual physical distance since working remotely for example I don't feel like empathy is lacking. However it is an interesting component and I'm sure comes into play even with WFH.
It’s being removed from consequences. WFH you can still be fired, in person you can be punched in the face, but in these other settings there are no immediate consequences.
Re: My full statement regarding DOOM Eternal
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Why would companies go to bat for these execs that are liabilities? 1. Companies are not alive. They are synthetic entities made up of individuals. They do not make decisions on their own. Their decisions are dictated by the decisions of the individuals inside of the company. 2. If I work in AP and receive a notice from a company executive to pay a contract that is signed by said executive (if they have clearance in…
You can rephrase my statement to be "Why would this synthetic entity made up of individuals go to bat for these execs that are liabilities?" I'm not sure that it makes the answer clearer. It's hard to imagine a company w/o the transparency along the chain of command required to detect and prohibit and executive from getting hush-money rubber stamped. At least not one that actually makes money and isn't robbed blind b…
The only individual in the decision-making process who is able to sort right from wrong here is the exec who is a liability.
Re: My full statement regarding DOOM Eternal
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Why would companies go to bat for these execs that are liabilities? 1. Companies are not alive. They are synthetic entities made up of individuals. They do not make decisions on their own. Their decisions are dictated by the decisions of the individuals inside of the company. 2. If I work in AP and receive a notice from a company executive to pay a contract that is signed by said executive (if they have clearance in…
You can rephrase my statement to be "Why would this synthetic entity made up of individuals go to bat for these execs that are liabilities?" I'm not sure that it makes the answer clearer. It's hard to imagine a company w/o the transparency along the chain of command required to detect and prohibit and executive from getting hush-money rubber stamped. At least not one that actually makes money and isn't robbed blind b…
You focused on the wrong part of that. Yes, it's semantics, but I think having a common definition is important.
Also important - the executive controls processes. Executive level leadership is privy to information that the people who literally process payments are not.
As I said; if the paperwork is in order, AP will cut the check. They do not evaluate right/wrong. They evaluate allowable and/or appropriate based on common accounting practices and specific institutional policies. Many private companies have people who, because they are executives, are absolutely able to take advantage of the company, because they are the ones deciding what is right and wrong for the company.
What I'm saying is, the person processing payment for executive level leadership is not, generally, in a position to ferret out the right or wrong of the various contracts. Unless the contract comes across and says, "this is to keep Loughla's dirty damned mouth shut," I would bet most AP offices would never catch this sort of thing.
I hope that's clearer.
Re: My full statement regarding DOOM Eternal
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
What you are quoting was written by the composer of the soundtrack (Mick Gordon)
damn, that is so sad - it's objectively an amazing soundtrack. It's really sad that this whole experience has damaged his perception of his incredible work so badly :(
The most popular videos on YouTube aren't the officially released OST, they're remixed/remastered versions fixed up by the community. The official OST isn't terrible by any means, it's full of musically great pieces, but it has glaring objective technical flaws and nonsensical song structures. Perfect for management to think "It's good enough, ship it" while the artist behind it thinks "This is garbage, my reputation is ruined" and the community gets up in arms about its shortcomings. Especially when the community expects something on the level of the DOOM 2016 OST.
Re: My full statement regarding DOOM Eternal
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can rephrase my statement to be "Why would this synthetic entity made up of individuals go to bat for these execs that are liabilities?" I'm not sure that it makes the answer clearer. It's hard to imagine a company w/o the transparency along the chain of command required to detect and prohibit and executive from getting hush-money rubber stamped. At least not one that actually makes money and isn't robbed blind b…
The only individual in the decision-making process who is able to sort right from wrong here is the exec who is a liability.
Not that I'm denying your claim, but if there's that little oversight on the allocation of funds, I fail to see how any of these orgs not get looted before the opening bell rings.
If any exec could just cut (likely many) six-figure cheques for what really amounts to personal expenses while overseeing a project that is allocated too few funds, is way over budget, and over time, then what keeps these orgs afloat?
To reiterate, I'm not saying I don't believe you, I just don't really understand it.
Re: My full statement regarding DOOM Eternal
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can rephrase my statement to be "Why would this synthetic entity made up of individuals go to bat for these execs that are liabilities?" I'm not sure that it makes the answer clearer. It's hard to imagine a company w/o the transparency along the chain of command required to detect and prohibit and executive from getting hush-money rubber stamped. At least not one that actually makes money and isn't robbed blind b…
You focused on the wrong part of that. Yes, it's semantics, but I think having a common definition is important. Also important - the executive controls processes. Executive level leadership is privy to information that the people who literally process payments are not. As I said; if the paperwork is in order, AP will cut the check. They do not evaluate right/wrong. They evaluate allowable and/or appropriate based on…
I'm not saying that some person in Accounts Payable is meant to launch an inquisition on every cheque that goes out and blow a whistle.
What I'm saying is that I don't understand how a company does not get looted by its execs if they can unilaterally and w/o consequence cut six-figure cheques to what amounts to a personal expense. Someone like Marty sounds like the type of person to have to cut these regularly.
Surely these execs have a responsibility to their shareholders and their board to turn a profit and not misappropriate funds. Marty might be an exec but he's a cog in the ZeniMax/Bethesda machine. You'd imagine someone up the chain would notice that their project is way over-budget and over-time and look at the many zeros on the legal budget allocated to various settlements attributed to one of their rough-shot execs.
To be clear, I'm not saying what you claim isn't true, what I'm saying is that I don't understand how its in the interest of the Powers That Be at ZeniMax to do anything but bury folks like Marty by sending him to the cloud spotting division on the roof.
Re: My full statement regarding DOOM Eternal
#270”The same thoughtless disregard for basic music fundamentals that plagued the preliminary edits ended up on the final OST.” As a musician and music-lover, seeing how they brickwalled [1][2] Mick’s tracks in the screenshots only serves to add to the heartbreak of his entire saga. [1] Loudness War https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war [2] The Loudness War https://youtu.be/3Gmex_4hreQ
It seems the brickwall mastering was intentionally done by Mick Gordon. See the section starting at "id Software approved my mastering". The alleged "disregard for basic music fundamentals" appears to have introduced more dynamic range, although not in a way that's pleasant to listen to.
From the article:
> [...] Doing so caused dramatic amplitude spikes at the edit point. Chad didn’t bother to crossfade the transition: both files play simultaneously (causing spikes at double the volume).
> To compensate, he “remastered” the edited song by normalising it to 0dBFS — a rudimentary error.
That's why the OST is so incredibly brickwalled.