“Call a whambulance, but not for me.”
Within Deadpool Diner's many issues, there was one hiding between the gaps of the tables. A few people noticed it, and I only found it because someone else pointed it out to me. Likely, others didn't realize this was in the game, potentially even staff at Second Dinner who didn't notice it. I say this because if they did, they would have removed it before it went live.
It's a modest-sized company, and things fall through the cracks, so I'd like to give Second Dinner the benefit of the doubt and say it was an honest mistake. It's still worth discussing and raising awareness because I have not seen an official response about this particular issue, and I hope it doesn't happen again.
As you scrolled the tables in Deadpool's diner, you saw images in between drawn by Deadpool. Things like Arishem being busted, a jab at the $99 bundles, and other little jokes. One joke, however, was aimed squarely at the players and went a bit too far.
In the image was a set of spotlight cache cards. The second, third, and fourth were crossed out, signifying that they had been collected. Only the first card, the new release card, marked with a star, remained unclaimed. Under this was an ambulance with the text 'whaaambulance'.
What is a whambulance?
It's used as a dismissive response to a perceived overly sensitive complaint. A similar metaphor would be the world's smallest violin. So essentially, we’re making fun of players who were unlucky enough to use 4 keys to get the new card or, even worse, only had 3 keys and lucked out and will miss out on the card. Is that what’s happening here in this scenario?
Firstly, it seems out of character for Deadpool to aim at the players like that. But, more importantly, this wasn't Deadpool; this was artwork created by someone working for the company. You can't use Deadpool as an excuse to mock your players, who are also your customers. It's important to note that there has been no meaningful communication up to this point on the issue of card acquisition.
This image represented more communication about the company's position on card acquisition and what they thought about players' complaints than anything else to date. If we already had a new system or some roadmap for upcoming improvements, this image might have been more well-received or dismissed as being in bad taste. It's like the "I Survived Nexus Events" title, relating to a heavily criticized event where Second Dinner responded and did a pretty good job repairing the damage by refunding what players spent and giving the card away for free.
This image undermines comments from the company about "core issues we are all feeling about card acquisition.", emphasis mine, or “We recognize and hear your frustrations. We share many of the same.”. I don't know. If we all genuinely feel core issues about card acquisition, I probably wouldn't draw that image and put it in the game. It seems like throwing fuel on the fire, unnecessarily antagonizing the player base, and making the words hollow. If you understand and share the player's frustration, why create an image dismissing it?
Are we saying it’s okay to make fun of people who are frustrated with using 4 keys and getting the new card last, potentially getting a duplicate along the way when you only have half the Series 4 and 5 cards (oddly specific, I know), or are we also feeling the core issues around card acquisition? I don't think it can be both.
The more I examined the image and considered its meaning and representation, the more inappropriate it seemed. It didn't sit right with me that this was an official image in the game. I've seen countless social media posts depicting the same scene: Three keys are used, and the new card is last. There are no keys left. Negative comments admonish the player, saying, "Should have saved four keys?” or “Never open unless you have 4," etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.
And maybe that was what they were going for with this image. But... why? This isn't a social media meme post from a player making fun of other people's folly with an acquisition system with core issues; this is the official game communication. Everything becomes an official statement with tacit approval by being in the game. There is a precedent for the art and artists needing to maintain appropriate standards and art being removed from the game when said art, or artist, didn't align with Second Dinner's values. This one was not removed. However, it doesn't align with Second Dinner's stated values. Which side of the player base are you standing with making this kind of statement through this image, and why be divisive in the first place?
So what happened?
How did this image make it into the game? Who approved it? Do review processes need to be tightened up? Was the artist not aware of the current state of things? If more eyes higher up had seen it, would it still have been included in the game? I want to think no, it wouldn't have been included, and this was all just a very unfortunate mistake.
I had to look at the image again while writing this article. I didn't experience the shock of seeing it the first time, so I'm not upset. I'm just disappointed. In the future, whenever I see an official comment like 'We hear you,' I'll be reminded of this image. It's a shame this ended up in the game, and a little trust has been lost along the way.
I hope we get some communication soon about the state of the game and its future and that for Deadpool's Diner 3.0, we have slightly more respectful 'jokes' hidden in there so that we can all laugh together and enjoy the event with better collections than we have now. Perhaps throwing a new title in, “I Survived Deadpool's Diner, twice,” sounds fitting.