What’s up jimmy
I’m not gonna do that.
I like reviews from other people, I expect more objectivity from them.
-
I love the field, but I’m also working on them in the background, these are my ideas. It would be like the CEO of a company reviewing his own products. Of course he likes his own stuff. It’s not a very trustworthy source of information. There is a conflict of interest.
-
I don’t particularly like to write long texts about things I already know.
-
There is nothing in it for me
You see, the reason I write so much about public brain fields is because I want the community to have enough interest in brain fields, so that it makes sense for Dream to keep making them. I doubt he’ll keep making them only for me.
I believe they are awesome, but even then, I refrain from becoming the main testifier.
I have to give just enough information for people to understand the benefits of the public brain fields so they can see if they are interested.
Then they can share their testimonies and judge if they like it.
At this point, I’d rather be an observer.
When I had nothing to do with the creations, I shared more reviews. I was a user reviewing.
But now the cynical voice in my head would say “of course Doc Manhattan likes the fields he designed himself”.
I do share my opinions on whether it’s what I expected or even better with Dream since he is the maker. He never told me “wow, it’s awesome” either, I use it and review his work. And if it’s something more experimental that I try beforehand, I’ll be honest on whether we should release it or not.
If I always come out saying it’s awesome, then maybe I don’t believe the fields can speak for themselves.