Your main point seems to be that we the audience need to be able to see through a developer’s bullshit and accurately predict what kind of game we’re actually getting, despite the millions of dollars of advertising spent trying to convince us to just swallow what we’re told and pony up the dough. Then you go on to claim that livestreams and reviews would give us an accurate depiction of the final product, when pre-release Twitch bans and release date review embargoes make it as hard as possible to determine the accuracy of a game’s marketing before release. I suppose only a developer could convince themselves to believe that it’s not at all the developer’s fault that they couldn’t deliver what they promised (and never bothered to un-promise).
Further in your article you brings up some strawman about NDAs and evil publishers when the fact is Hello Games self-published their own title to retain control! You go on to complain about marketing and the difficulty of crafting press releases, but try to use evidence of Sean Murray downplaying the mulitplayer aspects of the game on -Twitter- as proof of sufficient messaging that gamers ignored — nevermind the next immediate tweet suggesting that it is a limitation that is the result of the immense size of their play area, not a simple ‘we weren’t able to get it working in time’. You also suggest that “it makes absolutely no sense to lie: there’s no benefit”, which is blatantly untrue. Misrepresenting the features of a game absolutely does benefit the stakeholders, especially when the misrepresented feature is one commonly used to market games to wider audiences and extract money from their pockets.
Frankly it just comes off as a long winded, poorly thought out excuse for your fellow developer. You did however pretty much prove your own warning to consumers in the article, just because someone is good at spewing alot of bullshit doesn’t make any of it true.