If there are "lots" of players queuing up to spend $15,000 I....
he didnt say 'lots' he said 'its not uncommon' that is VERY different. Lots implies a majority, 'not uncommon' implies a minority but not a rarity.
Here is the critical thinking question of the day. We all know companies do this, its not a surprised in the least, so the only question is the amount of dollars in question. If one is to lie why would they select that lie? Why not something with more pop to it? and given he was fired from Bioware what does this lie have to do with EA?
Who cares.
Out of curiosity, SEANMCAD, why do you always respond to people and get into long arguments. I can't do it. I don't know what it is about me, but I think I can always try to put myself in someone's shoes and possibly see their point of view, so I never come out and tell a person, "you are flat out wrong".
I can understand why people refuse to believe all media unless they witness it, at times, I find myself heading that way. I can also understand why people believe everything the media says. It is just easier than critically thinking and it is like cake if what is presented in the news aligns with your beliefs.
I personally find the way people respond to news as fascinating and pathetic all at the same time.
Also, there are times I do get triggered on this forum but the reality is it is so rare and I barely care enough to argue with a person. Why is it that you can never let anything go? Many threads you are in descend into a back-and-forth argument where you have a bunch of quote boxes.
You may have heard of the term "meta-cognition". It is basically an exercise where you reflect on why you do and think the way that you do.
Like: 1) Why do I not believe anything the media says? 2) Why do I support a certain party over other parties? 3) Why do I hate this person that I work with? 4) Why do I keep harassing this girl who dumped me? 5) Why am I wasting time at work instead of going home early when I have the option? 6) Why did I go home early yesterday? 7) Why do I always have to get the last word in and tell everyone why they are wrong and don't think critically enough?
My answer to number 5 and 6is that I need alone time where I can truly relax and home life isn't relaxing but at work I can find solace. That's why I don't go home early when I easily have the option to. I went home early yesterday to watch a football game .
When I read stuff like this it makes me wonder, am I poor by todays standards or are people selling kidneys to buy virtual items. I have a family with two kids and make a very low 6 figure income and to me $15,000 is a lot of money. That is like the choice between a built-in pool or some virtual crap in a game that you might play for a year at best. You could buy a boat, a really nice used car for that kind of money.
I guess if you live alone and have nothing but a computer for company it might make sense but I would think you would be better off finding a hobby and meeting some real people.
yeah if they are single and alone 15.000$ on virtual items when they can "meet" "real" ppl and uhm........who knows with all that money u can even rent ppl lol
maybe some rich kid on Dubai is wasting all that money on virtual items because he got tired of using it as toilet paper....
or maybe...and this is just a theory a bluesky thought so to speak. maybe he is not making anything up, maybe the article is 100% correct and maybe his information is 100% correct. Do you think that is possible?
WTF?
Some guy gets fired and then says bad stuff about the company and you think we should take him at his word but Sean Murray goes on Colbert and says other players can see you and multiplayer will be in No Mans Sky and you say that is no reason anyone should have thought NMS would have multiplayer? (check my signature for his actual quote)
What Bizarro dimension are you from and what did you do with the rational poster disguised as you from earlier today?
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
or maybe...and this is just a theory a bluesky thought so to speak. maybe he is not making anything up, maybe the article is 100% correct and maybe his information is 100% correct. Do you think that is possible?
WTF?
Some guy gets fired and then says bad stuff about the company and you think we should take him at his word but Sean Murray goes on Colbert and says other players can see you and multiplayer will be in No Mans Sky and you say that is no reason anyone should have thought NMS would have multiplayer? (check my signature for his actual quote)
What Bizarro dimension are you from and what did you do with the rational poster disguised as you from earlier today?
I ask again:
If you were to lie on a company to get back at them is this really the lie you would use? 'its not uncommon for people to spend $1500' instead of: 'its not uncommon for people to spend $150'
think about that for a second. Here you are with an opportunity to lie about ANYTHING....you can say they have sexual harassment...ANYTHING...this is what you select? $1500 instead $150? really makes no sense to me
and on another level what does he gain by doing it? does it hurt EA sales long enough for him to finish his game and take control of some market share that otherwise would be for EA? or he is just doing it for fun?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
What are you going to pirate? They're moving away from single player standalone titles and on to games as a service supported through microtransactions.
the same way people hacked PS3 and Xbox 360 and still had access to both online service and online games. I think i was the only person amongst my overseas friends that had a pristine gaming console. On PC its a lot esasier to bypass server access restrictions.
I don't condone it, but these companies are really pushing it, and as long as whales keep giving them money they will keep doing this. The rest of us not whales are the ones on the receiving end of the blow. If we pay we get screwed, and if we dont pay we lose the chance at a possibly great game that is ruined by greed.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I see "corroborating sources" as just about every person who's ever come to MMORPG.com and bemoaned the nearly out of control microtransaction trend in games these days. I don't need statistical research or company PR to tell me what most of us already know.
While the dude may have an axe to grind with EA, what he's saying is interesting nonetheless, even if something that none of us are really all that surprised by.
The creative director of dead space 3 said similar things in an interview with eurogamer when discussing what the original pitch for the game was. The video linked in the article is a summary of things.
tldr: Its expensive to make games, for EA to invest in an IP they shoot for 5 million players, with dead space 3 they shoehorned multiplayer and microtransactions and it simply didn't fit the game.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
If there are "lots" of players queuing up to spend $15,000 I....
he didnt say 'lots' he said 'its not uncommon' that is VERY different. Lots implies a majority, 'not uncommon' implies a minority but not a rarity.
Here is the critical thinking question of the day. We all know companies do this, its not a surprised in the least, so the only question is the amount of dollars in question. If one is to lie why would they select that lie? Why not something with more pop to it? and given he was fired from Bioware what does this lie have to do with EA?
As you say you have to read what I said
I never said he said "lots"
What I said was that if there were "lots" of $15k micro-transactions EA (imo) would pamper to it. They are not so - I surmise - there are not.
And the fact that they are not forging ahead with other games suggests to me that micro-transactions (+ other revenue sources) are deemed "insufficient" by EA to fund games. Which is different from suggesting that EA are not funding further games because of micro-transactions.
As I went on to say: the problem is not micro-transactions but simply people not wanting to spend anything.
(Yes this year they are doing 5 sport franchise updates, 1 port to console and 2 franchise follow ons - gosh).
If there are "lots" of players queuing up to spend $15,000 I....
he didnt say 'lots' he said 'its not uncommon' that is VERY different. Lots implies a majority, 'not uncommon' implies a minority but not a rarity.
Here is the critical thinking question of the day. We all know companies do this, its not a surprised in the least, so the only question is the amount of dollars in question. If one is to lie why would they select that lie? Why not something with more pop to it? and given he was fired from Bioware what does this lie have to do with EA?
As you say you have to read what I said
I never said he said "lots"
What I said was that if there were "lots" of $15k micro-transactions EA (imo) would pamper to it. They are not so - I surmise - there are not.
And the fact that they are not forging ahead with other games suggests to me that micro-transactions (+ other revenue sources) are deemed "insufficient" by EA to fund games. Which is different from suggesting that EA are not funding further games because of micro-transactions.
As I went on to say: the problem is not micro-transactions but simply people not wanting to spend anything.
(Yes this year they are doing 5 sport franchise updates, 1 port to console and 2 franchise follow ons - gosh).
There's nothing to support the idea that gamers simply don't want to spend. Consumers spent over $23 billion dollars on gaming in 2015. You don't get to that number via a high aversion to spending on a product.
In 2016, that number increased to over $30 billion, per the ESA. The idea that gamers don't want to spend money on their hobby doesn't hold water.
I wasn't trying to get personal, there is only one question I asked you. The rest were rhetorical.
I agree with your point that the likelihood he is lying about $15000 is practically nil as it doesn't even matter. I don't even think the point he makes about whales and people spending tons of money is an even accusatory statement.
In reference to other posters. $15,000 is not that much money to some people. If it is a person's hobby then why not. There are many hobbies that people spend thousands of dollars on per year. (Golf, following your sports team, hunting, etc).
To the other poster who wondered whether you are poor because 15k is a lot of money and you make low six figures.
- I am in the same boat, i'm not sure what low six figures means like (110k? or 200k). But you end up paying for everything possible and life is not cheap if you actually pay for everything and live in a semi-decent location.
Cryomatrix
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
The Witcher 3 is a prime example. It sold EXTREMELY well,
As a side note did you know that sales of Ark + Rust + Space Engineers is more than Witcher 3 on all platforms
Yea, but those arent linear single player games
dont get lost in the trees, I am pointing out the forest.
One of the best selling, most prized, most used as an icon of what is good about AAA market got outsold by combination of 3 indie early access titles that barely advertised at all.
its just a side note I wanted to share with you guys its not really on topic
I'm pretty sure all 3 of those got outsold by heroin . . . so . . . what does that mean?
The Witcher 3 is a prime example. It sold EXTREMELY well,
As a side note did you know that sales of Ark + Rust + Space Engineers is more than Witcher 3 on all platforms
Yea, but those arent linear single player games
dont get lost in the trees, I am pointing out the forest.
One of the best selling, most prized, most used as an icon of what is good about AAA market got outsold by combination of 3 indie early access titles that barely advertised at all.
its just a side note I wanted to share with you guys its not really on topic
I'm pretty sure all 3 of those got outsold by heroin . . . so . . . what does that mean?
Clearly, indie game buyers are more likely to be heroin users, right?
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
This dude is also racist as fuck. Either that or he just tries to be controversial. Regardless hes probably full of shit and anything he say should be taken with a grain of salt.
This dude is also racist as fuck. Either that or he just tries to be controversial. Regardless hes probably full of shit and anything he say should be taken with a grain of salt.
As a white guy myself, I think he's a little bit of both.
I was looking through google image search at some of the tweets folks put up as examples of his racism. It's about half bigotry, half accurate social commentary that's presented in an overly abrasive manner.
I consider it a scam if they trick people into paying extra. How they trick you? Activisions new patent does that. Also altering the game so that you have a bad experience unless you pay more.
I agree with this. Normal F2P monetization can be "ugly" but doing things like the patent outlines where people are setup to fail on purpose to entice them to pay is wrong (as a game developer). Putting items that players find valuable (READ: NOT POWER FOR MONEY) is a good way to monetize games. Things like skins, etc. are fair ways to monetize. If you love the skin and feel it's worth $20, then buy it. If not, you're no less competitive or at a disadvantage from others.
F2P is basically a required method for building games today due to the insane development cost. The number of people that will play your game is 10-100x higher than it would be if you sold it for any amount of money. Many, many gamers want games to be completely free, but that doesn't work for game devs that have families and need to pay their own bills. Having said that, building games JUST to make money is ruining the art form of game development. At some point, the lock boxes and these crazy schemes will backfire and the industry will once again move to a new monetization scheme. Until then, just vote with your wallets.
I'll be honest, no skin in a game is worth more than $5 I don't care what it is, its a texture, thats it, it does nothing special. The problem with most microtransactions in f2p mmorpgs is most of them just cost too much, I mean 20-30 dollars for a mount or a costume is a little nuts, never mind the scam bags/boxes where you have less than 1% to get the top item, these gacha things should be illegial IMO. Its bascally gambling no matter how you look at it.
Bad thing with normal f2p stuff, is many of them look at the firgures and find that making the game totally pay2win makes them money, what the numbers don't tell them is that ends up causing the game to die as the fact its pay2win gets out, less people try it, and as time goes on the ones in game that can't afford to spend the needed amount to compete end up just quitting. Bad Monetization has killed more f2p games than I can count. You need to make the game fun to both sides, not just the whales who will spend a ton, and this is where most f2p titles fail at.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Too bad a small portion of whales that buy micros kind of ruin it for everyone. The reality is that these systems wouldn't have to exist if gamer's would just pay more for the base game. Game prices have been stagnant for years, because gamer's refuse to pay more than 60 bucks for a game.
Even if they raised prices of games to say 80, do you think publishers like ubisoft, EA, WB, ect would drop MT and/or loot boxes? I highly doubt it.
I'm not an IT Specialist, Game Developer, or Clairvoyant in real life, but like others on here, I play one on the internet.
Just throwing in Divinity Sins 2, one of the best RPGs i have seen for years. As long as ppl buying the EA shit, they will milk the cow.
This is very true, as long as they can milk the cow they are going to milk it, the sad part is that people fall for this crap over and over, so they don't see a reason to stop.
I, myself mostly go for indie titles these days, as most AAA games just aren't worth the time anymore due to them just being shitty games. I recently (as in a day or so ago) bought the witcher 3 gotye on sale on steam, and its the first AAA game i've bought in a long time that I actually felt was good. Combat has gotten a bit stale though, hoping it may improve.
I mostly buy indie games these days as I don't care too much about graphics as long as they are good enough for what the game is. The big name devs though don't seem to relize that graphics don't make a game good, they can add to it, but if the game is a turd, covering it in sparkles isin't going to stop it from still being a turd, it'd just a turd that looks pretty to try to hide how bad it is. This is why I feel most AAA games have been crap lately, too much focus on graphics, not nearly enough anywhere else.
So with this I am very picky what AAA games i'll touch, pretty much if its not an rpg I won't even consider it because 60 dollars for a game thats 5-10 hours is IMO a complete waste of money. Next AAA Game I am buying is .hack GU Last Recode, it includes volume 1-3 remastered which on the orignal system it came out on the ps2, each of these were sold as a individual game, each being 40-60+ hours to clear. Plus a short 4th voume thats completly new. IIRC its going to be 64.99 canadian/50 US, your not going to get that kind of gameplay out of most AAA titles that go for alot more than that. You can in open world games, but the problem with open world games is they get boring too fast, most of them just don't have nearly enough to do.. In terms of variety.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
He is probably correct in his assertion this time, but why are we giving Manveer Heir any credibility?
Because whether or not you like his politics, he is still an "insider" in both BioWare and at EA. His points with regard to microtransactions and EA's killing off of single player AAA games stand as valid.
C'mon... "Politics"?
The guy is a massive racist, you left out the best part of that interview on why he thought Me3 failed.
This dude is also racist as fuck. Either that or he just tries to be controversial. Regardless hes probably full of shit and anything he say should be taken with a grain of salt.
As a white guy myself, I think he's a little bit of both.
I was looking through google image search at some of the tweets folks put up as examples of his racism. It's about half bigotry, half accurate social commentary that's presented in an overly abrasive manner.
"social commentary" is that what spouting off far-left anti-white talking points is called today?
The guy who single handed killed one of the biggest franchises in gaming by given 5 years of free reign by EA, has the audacity to blame them. This is both sad and hilarious.
Maybe if he was more focused into hiring competent people and making good games (as opposed of hiring based on identity politics and promoting sjw propaganda), Mass Effect would be alive and thriving today.
Again I see the boogie man of "SJW" while conveniently forgetting the outsourced programming and other glitches that has nothing to do with the dreaded "SJW" or whatever garbage excuse people give for denying the reality that gamers are more than white straight men.
Not a boogieman when it's true. You may want to call it that but reality shows its very true and one of the reasons why ME3 and many companies are failing.
This dude is also racist as fuck. Either that or he just tries to be controversial. Regardless hes probably full of shit and anything he say should be taken with a grain of salt.
As a white guy myself, I think he's a little bit of both.
I was looking through google image search at some of the tweets folks put up as examples of his racism. It's about half bigotry, half accurate social commentary that's presented in an overly abrasive manner.
"social commentary" is that what spouting off far-left anti-white talking points is called today?
Did you see my post, or just see that I didn't wholesale condemn the guy, immediately flash to red, and post?
When he posts about Hollywood whitewashing or giving roles to white folks that are certainly not white roles, he's not making shit up. Case in point: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1528100/
Why the hell would Christian Bale be cast as Moses, and Joel Edgerton as Ramses. Da fuq?
Comments
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Some guy gets fired and then says bad stuff about the company and you think we should take him at his word but Sean Murray goes on Colbert and says other players can see you and multiplayer will be in No Mans Sky and you say that is no reason anyone should have thought NMS would have multiplayer? (check my signature for his actual quote)
What Bizarro dimension are you from and what did you do with the rational poster disguised as you from earlier today?
If you were to lie on a company to get back at them is this really the lie you would use?
'its not uncommon for people to spend $1500'
instead of:
'its not uncommon for people to spend $150'
think about that for a second. Here you are with an opportunity to lie about ANYTHING....you can say they have sexual harassment...ANYTHING...this is what you select? $1500 instead $150? really makes no sense to me
and on another level what does he gain by doing it? does it hurt EA sales long enough for him to finish his game and take control of some market share that otherwise would be for EA? or he is just doing it for fun?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Unity is free, they just take profits from you sales what the fuck are you talking about?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I don't condone it, but these companies are really pushing it, and as long as whales keep giving them money they will keep doing this. The rest of us not whales are the ones on the receiving end of the blow. If we pay we get screwed, and if we dont pay we lose the chance at a possibly great game that is ruined by greed.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
tldr: Its expensive to make games, for EA to invest in an IP they shoot for 5 million players, with dead space 3 they shoehorned multiplayer and microtransactions and it simply didn't fit the game.
I never said he said "lots"
What I said was that if there were "lots" of $15k micro-transactions EA (imo) would pamper to it. They are not so - I surmise - there are not.
And the fact that they are not forging ahead with other games suggests to me that micro-transactions (+ other revenue sources) are deemed "insufficient" by EA to fund games. Which is different from suggesting that EA are not funding further games because of micro-transactions.
As I went on to say: the problem is not micro-transactions but simply people not wanting to spend anything.
(Yes this year they are doing 5 sport franchise updates, 1 port to console and 2 franchise follow ons - gosh).
In 2016, that number increased to over $30 billion, per the ESA. The idea that gamers don't want to spend money on their hobby doesn't hold water.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.polygon.com/platform/amp/2016/4/29/11539102/gaming-stats-2016-esa-essential-facts
http://www.theesa.com/about-esa/essential-facts-computer-video-game-industry/
EDIT- For clarity, that's solely the U.S.. Revenue is growing at a breakneck pace in the U.S., despite the Asian market dwarfing it.
I wasn't trying to get personal, there is only one question I asked you. The rest were rhetorical.
I agree with your point that the likelihood he is lying about $15000 is practically nil as it doesn't even matter. I don't even think the point he makes about whales and people spending tons of money is an even accusatory statement.
In reference to other posters. $15,000 is not that much money to some people. If it is a person's hobby then why not. There are many hobbies that people spend thousands of dollars on per year. (Golf, following your sports team, hunting, etc).
To the other poster who wondered whether you are poor because 15k is a lot of money and you make low six figures.
- I am in the same boat, i'm not sure what low six figures means like (110k? or 200k). But you end up paying for everything possible and life is not cheap if you actually pay for everything and live in a semi-decent location.
Cryomatrix
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
This dude is also racist as fuck. Either that or he just tries to be controversial. Regardless hes probably full of shit and anything he say should be taken with a grain of salt.
I was looking through google image search at some of the tweets folks put up as examples of his racism. It's about half bigotry, half accurate social commentary that's presented in an overly abrasive manner.
Bad thing with normal f2p stuff, is many of them look at the firgures and find that making the game totally pay2win makes them money, what the numbers don't tell them is that ends up causing the game to die as the fact its pay2win gets out, less people try it, and as time goes on the ones in game that can't afford to spend the needed amount to compete end up just quitting. Bad Monetization has killed more f2p games than I can count. You need to make the game fun to both sides, not just the whales who will spend a ton, and this is where most f2p titles fail at.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!
I'm not an IT Specialist, Game Developer, or Clairvoyant in real life, but like others on here, I play one on the internet.
Kinda hard to hear over the screams of death from all the studios EA has killed.
https://heavy.com/games/2017/10/studios-ea-has-killed-visceral-games/
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/This is very true, as long as they can milk the cow they are going to milk it, the sad part is that people fall for this crap over and over, so they don't see a reason to stop.
I, myself mostly go for indie titles these days, as most AAA games just aren't worth the time anymore due to them just being shitty games. I recently (as in a day or so ago) bought the witcher 3 gotye on sale on steam, and its the first AAA game i've bought in a long time that I actually felt was good. Combat has gotten a bit stale though, hoping it may improve.
I mostly buy indie games these days as I don't care too much about graphics as long as they are good enough for what the game is. The big name devs though don't seem to relize that graphics don't make a game good, they can add to it, but if the game is a turd, covering it in sparkles isin't going to stop it from still being a turd, it'd just a turd that looks pretty to try to hide how bad it is. This is why I feel most AAA games have been crap lately, too much focus on graphics, not nearly enough anywhere else.
So with this I am very picky what AAA games i'll touch, pretty much if its not an rpg I won't even consider it because 60 dollars for a game thats 5-10 hours is IMO a complete waste of money. Next AAA Game I am buying is .hack GU Last Recode, it includes volume 1-3 remastered which on the orignal system it came out on the ps2, each of these were sold as a individual game, each being 40-60+ hours to clear. Plus a short 4th voume thats completly new. IIRC its going to be 64.99 canadian/50 US, your not going to get that kind of gameplay out of most AAA titles that go for alot more than that. You can in open world games, but the problem with open world games is they get boring too fast, most of them just don't have nearly enough to do.. In terms of variety.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!
C'mon... "Politics"?
The guy is a massive racist, you left out the best part of that interview on why he thought Me3 failed.
When he posts about Hollywood whitewashing or giving roles to white folks that are certainly not white roles, he's not making shit up. Case in point: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1528100/
Why the hell would Christian Bale be cast as Moses, and Joel Edgerton as Ramses. Da fuq?