Devs, and any business, have the right to monetize their products as they see fit.
But here you stand, disgruntled because they don't sell and price the way you want, supporting any effort to take their very right away from them.
I can't even find words for such so simple-minded attitude...
"As they see fit" sums up your moral bankruptcy very nicely. I bet Bernie Madoff, Enron and the Lehman Brothers are you heroes. "As they see fit" ... LMAO.
I don't know about him but my moral stands behind free market. Show me proof of price fixing conspiracy and then I'll get behind you. Besides that, it is just subjective feelings and personal choices. Which I do respect yours. Support whoever you want. But you don't want to give the other people the same choice.
I draw the line at scammers getting the same choice. I also don't want murderer and rapists to have the same choice. But that's just me apparently.
Letting business do as they see fit has to be one of the dumbest thoughts a human being can have given even the tiniest awareness of the history of commerce.
We are not talking about scammers, murderers and rapists. We are talking about game developers.
I never said we should businesses do whatever they want. Free market doesn't mean that.
Your agreement with Gdemami seems to undermine your statement about not letting businesses do whatever they want since that was exactly his point. A point that he always trots out in these discussions as if it made sense.
We are talking about a very specific "thing" not whatever comes to our imagination.
I have no idea what you're trying to say with that.
We were talking about an EA exec trying to change the lootbox narrative by claiming that they internally don't call them loot boxes but "surprise mechanics" instead. I've been in enough board meetings in my working life to know that this is utter bullshit and is just a made up thing to say publicly in order to semantically try to sanitize shit... something made up by the marketting department.
Gdemami made a generalization saying quite clearly "Devs, and any business, have the right to monetize their products as they see fit" and you agreed with that.
And this is utter nonsense since regulators since ancient times have stepped in and regulated precisely that because businesses have proven over and over that they can not self-regulate worth a shit.
So which part exactly am I imagining?
I never said you are imagining things. You said I must be pro of 'businesses can do whatever they want' and I replied no, I believe in free market, and we are discussing a very specific thing--which is monetization--not anything imaginable.
Can you point out to some regulations regarding business monetization which wouldn't fall into running monopolies or price fixing?
Rent controls in many urban centers, gas prices occasionally (even Nixon did this)... there are tons of examples if you care to look it up where no, they can not monetize as they see fit.
Even beyond this, there's no ingrained right that requires some kind of judicial test to clear the bar of discriminatory action- we are free to limit business monetization however society sees fit to do so.
Folks are acting as if the right to lootbox is part of the Bill of Rights. It isn't. In any country.
If allowing the practice results in shady or undesirable outcomes, it's as easy as a legislature majority to outlaw that practice. This isn't new or novel.
The only reason gaming monetization is largely unregulated is because, let's face it, we're talking about a non-essential, affluent first world product and regulators tend to ignore that. They may want to regulate public transit and taxi fares but they couldn't give less of a shit about how much a Lambo or Ferrari sells for.
But the reason regulating them is getting some traction now is because despite their superfluous nature, kids play them and parents, who are collectively becoming aware of gaming monetization like they never have before, object to anyone trying to manipulate their kids out of their proverbial lunch money. Especially when they do it with tactics that are sophisticated enough to work on adults.
I agree, and would raise you the point of Congress and D.C. in general being just completely, utterly ignorant of all things tech up until just, like, 5 years ago. They've since progressed to geriatric levels of technological know-how, and they're scared shitless of wading into it, for the most part.
Of course, if you never dive in, you'll always be ignorant and intimidated by it to the detriment of doing one's job. Politicians don't seem to realize/care.
You know shit is real, when your 2 professions to make ends meet = being an LOLBOT and 3rd rate Devils Advocate.
I've nurtured ever sensation shitty developers and publishers have been inspired to have. I cared about what they wanted, and I never judged them. Why? Because I never rejected them. In spite of all their imperfections I'M A FAAAAAAN OF LOOTBOXES!!
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
People like surprises huh.
How about Suprise EA! You have to refund every loot box you've ever sold and pay a 10mil fine!
According to him that is the best outcome they could hope for!
Personally, I enjoy the act of opening some box of random crap and seeing what's inside, and that extends to digital crap in video games. I've never paid for a loot box in my life, but if they're rewarded for in-game play, I look forward to earning them.
As for unethical marketing and poor monetization practices, corporations are always going to do shady things to make a buck and consumers are always going to do dumb stuff with their money. If there are so many addicts blowing their rent or parents who can't manage parental controls getting surprised by huge credit card balances, I don't mind giving them up so others can sleep better at night. However, while I'm all for protecting the little guy from the big guy, I do think we're taking an awful lot of steps away from personal responsibility.
More on the specific topic, that's top-notch BS from EA's lawyer...I'd hope everyone see through it and laughs it off, but I'm more willing to bet it worked pretty well on those old timers in parliament and will work just as well in front of Congress.
More on the specific topic, that's top-notch BS from EA's lawyer...I'd hope everyone see through it and laughs it off, but I'm more willing to bet it worked pretty well on those old timers in parliament and will work just as well in front of Congress.
If you listen closely you can hear the chuckle from the guy who asked the question as soon as she said "surprise mechanics." That shit only works on their underlings who have no choice but to say "Brilliant!" if they want to keep their jobs.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Rent controls in many urban centers, gas prices occasionally (even Nixon did this)... there are tons of examples if you care to look it up where no, they can not monetize as they see fit.
Even beyond this, there's no ingrained right that requires some kind of judicial test to clear the bar of discriminatory action- we are free to limit business monetization however society sees fit to do so.
Folks are acting as if the right to lootbox is part of the Bill of Rights. It isn't. In any country.
If allowing the practice results in shady or undesirable outcomes, it's as easy as a legislature majority to outlaw that practice. This isn't new or novel.
The only reason gaming monetization is largely unregulated is because, let's face it, we're talking about a non-essential, affluent first world product and regulators tend to ignore that. They may want to regulate public transit and taxi fares but they couldn't give less of a shit about how much a Lambo or Ferrari sells for.
But the reason regulating them is getting some traction now is because despite their superfluous nature, kids play them and parents, who are collectively becoming aware of gaming monetization like they never have before, object to anyone trying to manipulate their kids out of their proverbial lunch money. Especially when they do it with tactics that are sophisticated enough to work on adults.
Loot box mechanics are also - relatively - recent; even in "non-western" countries.
Rent controls in many urban centers, gas prices occasionally (even Nixon did this)... there are tons of examples if you care to look it up where no, they can not monetize as they see fit.
Even beyond this, there's no ingrained right that requires some kind of judicial test to clear the bar of discriminatory action- we are free to limit business monetization however society sees fit to do so.
Folks are acting as if the right to lootbox is part of the Bill of Rights. It isn't. In any country.
If allowing the practice results in shady or undesirable outcomes, it's as easy as a legislature majority to outlaw that practice. This isn't new or novel.
The only reason gaming monetization is largely unregulated is because, let's face it, we're talking about a non-essential, affluent first world product and regulators tend to ignore that. They may want to regulate public transit and taxi fares but they couldn't give less of a shit about how much a Lambo or Ferrari sells for.
But the reason regulating them is getting some traction now is because despite their superfluous nature, kids play them and parents, who are collectively becoming aware of gaming monetization like they never have before, object to anyone trying to manipulate their kids out of their proverbial lunch money. Especially when they do it with tactics that are sophisticated enough to work on adults.
Loot box mechanics are also - relatively - recent; even in "non-western" countries.
Big emphasis on "relatively." FIFA and other EA sports games have had them for their online "Ultimate Team" for the least 10 years. They first appeared in digital games (apparently in the Japanese version of Maple Story) 15 years ago.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Comments
Of course, if you never dive in, you'll always be ignorant and intimidated by it to the detriment of doing one's job. Politicians don't seem to realize/care.
"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/"Devs, and any business, have the right to monetize their products as they see fit."
Let me borrow this: "I can't even find words for such so simple-minded attitude..."
If one took business advice from you, they would probably end up in an orange jumpsuit
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
"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/¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Seaspite
Playing ESO on my X-Box
How about Suprise EA! You have to refund every loot box you've ever sold and pay a 10mil fine!
According to him that is the best outcome they could hope for!
And yes I know that will never happen XD
Edit: my mistake. I misread the quoted post.
As for unethical marketing and poor monetization practices, corporations are always going to do shady things to make a buck and consumers are always going to do dumb stuff with their money. If there are so many addicts blowing their rent or parents who can't manage parental controls getting surprised by huge credit card balances, I don't mind giving them up so others can sleep better at night. However, while I'm all for protecting the little guy from the big guy, I do think we're taking an awful lot of steps away from personal responsibility.
More on the specific topic, that's top-notch BS from EA's lawyer...I'd hope everyone see through it and laughs it off, but I'm more willing to bet it worked pretty well on those old timers in parliament and will work just as well in front of Congress.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED