Why Some Fans Defend SCI Like Employees — And Attack Hardcore Boxing Voices

(Expanded with “Product Authenticity” spin)

Introduction: The Strange Loyalty of Defender Fans

In almost every gaming community, there’s a group of loyalists who defend the company at all costs. With Steel City Interactive (SCI) and their boxing game Undisputed, that pattern is magnified. These fans don’t just defend the game — they defend the company as if they were on the payroll, rewriting promises, inventing narratives, and attacking anyone who points out shortcomings. To hardcore boxing fans, it feels like shouting into the wind: no matter what was promised, no matter what changed, you’re always the villain for speaking up.

1. The Psychology of Defending a Studio

Parasocial bonds: Fans see the devs as underdogs. Supporting SCI becomes personal, almost like rooting for a struggling sports team. Criticizing SCI feels, to them, like betrayal.

Tribal identity: Their loyalty becomes part of their gamer identity. If SCI failed or misled, it means they were wrong — and that’s too painful.

Hope & copium: For many, defending the studio is less about facts and more about hope. They’ve invested years of excitement and money into SCI. Letting go of that dream feels like losing part of themselves.

2. Narratives That Protect the Company

“They never promised that.” Even when features were shown in early gameplay reveals, defenders rewrite history.

“Constructive criticism works.” They claim tone matters more than substance, but reality shows otherwise.

“Trust the process.” Fans argue that SCI is “listening behind the scenes.” This vague reassurance buys the company time while silencing dissent.

3. The Raczilla “Product Authenticity” Spin

When Will “Raczilla” Kinsler stepped in as Director of Product Authenticity, it sounded like a promise to protect realism. Hardcore fans imagined authenticity meant:

Realistic stamina and punch mechanics
Traits, tendencies, and boxer mannerisms
Mechanics like clinching, parrying, and true boxing IQ

But instead, “product authenticity” became a buzzword shield:

Authenticity was redefined as “brand presentation” — flashy entrances, belts, walkouts, and surface-level cosmetics.
Mechanics that made boxing authentic (clinch fighting, defensive layers, physics-based blocking) were stripped or sidelined.
When fans questioned missing features, the response was spin: “We’re staying true to the product’s authenticity.”

This gave defenders ammunition: whenever criticism arose, they echoed the line — as if the words themselves carried weight, even though the features didn’t match the sport’s authenticity.

4. Why Critics Become Targets

Hardcore boxing fans who demand realism, promised features, or accountability often become scapegoats.

Cognitive dissonance: When critics point out that “product authenticity” became “marketing authenticity,” defenders lash out to protect the illusion.
Investment protection: Many fans staked their identity on defending Raczilla’s framing.
Silencing doubt: By labeling critics as “gatekeepers,” they kill conversations that might expose the disconnect between spin and substance.

5. The Constructive Criticism Myth

The “be nice and they’ll listen” argument was reinforced under the product authenticity banner. But it was never about tone — it was about control.

Features like clinching or parrying were removed regardless of how fans asked.
Calls for realism were brushed aside with “we’re balancing for gameplay fun and authenticity.”
Constructive feedback became a filter excuse: if your criticism didn’t match the studio’s redefinition of authenticity, it was invalid.

6. The Cycle That Never Ends

SCI follows the same loop:

Promise Phase: Buzzwords like “realism” and “authenticity” set expectations.
Delivery Phase: Authenticity is rebranded as presentation, not mechanics.
Defense Phase: Fans parrot “product authenticity” as if it explains missing systems.
Critic Attack Phase: Realists pointing to broken promises get branded toxic.
Disillusion Phase: Disappointed players leave, but new hopefuls step in.

7. The Hardcore Fan’s Reality

Hardcore fans wanted authenticity in the ring — not just in the walkouts. They asked for:

Clinch mechanics
Parrying systems
Fatigue, damage, and footwork that matter
AI tendencies and boxer individuality

But under the “product authenticity” umbrella, those requests were reframed as secondary, while visual spectacle took priority.

Conclusion: Spin Doesn’t Build a Boxing Game

“Product authenticity” became a clever spin — a phrase that defenders could repeat like a shield. But it diluted the meaning of authenticity, shifting it from the mechanics of boxing to the marketing of boxing.

Fans who defend that spin aren’t protecting the sport — they’re protecting a narrative. And as long as criticism is dismissed under that banner, the game will never grow into what hardcore boxing fans imagined.

Silence and spin don’t build realism. Pressure and accountability do.

Poe’s Think Tank

Monday, September 1, 2025