Razer Footprints: Poll

"

CanHasPants wrote:

[...]
A cosmetic effect that is unobtrusive and made to fit with the thematic aesthetics of Wraeclast
[...]

And here is where I don't agree at all. "Footprints" (wonder how shoes look like leaving such a trail) printing the logo of another company around the game, that's imo not fitting at all. The neon green colour of it doesn't actually help to make it blend in with the rest of the game. If it would've been a more subtle way of promotion, maybe I wouldn't be against it as much as I am. Currently I just see the footprints as a blatant ad, and it shocked me quite a bit as I didn't expect such a move.

Product placement... An in-game actually visible trademark of a real life company...

I am not impressed.

They are not really ugly, but i am not impressed. It is a principal thing, you just don't do product placement if you want to create the best product, it is compromise and favoritism.

You, in return for money, agree to influence the minds of your constumers to be favorable towards those who paid you, and not all the other similar products, so that they may gain without it being due to the quality of their products.

You are in effect being part of mentally influencing the minds of people in a poisonous game.

:(

I vote "who gives a fuck" on this weeks QQ.

Can't wait to vote the same on next weeks QQ. Hopefully it's desync or MF again...

I found this today playing some random 66 maps with a friend


Basically I'm saying no fucks are given because I'm too busy playing the game and having fun than worrying about the moral and ethical implications of some corporate partnership.


Also quit being a bunch of hipsters about it.

"I'm only into PoE because its indie and you've probably never heard of it, but now that its popular and has more mainstream support I hate it."

Thats what it sounds like to me anyway.

There more i think about this, the more it sucks.

I am disappointed.

This guy said it well honest:

"

This is insulting and shows a lack of artistic integrity on behalf of GGG. No way in Hell I'd want a corporate logo besmirching my vision.

EDIT:

"

_wuv_ wrote:

Spoiler

"

ibase wrote:

tbh -


first twitch .tv

now razer footprints



i can seriously imagine a facebook " like " button in path of exile soon.



" player a mirror posted in global channel " - ( LIKE? )

"

You have beat Merciless difficulty! You earned 1,000 points!

[ ] Let everyone know on Twitter
[ ] Tell your friends on Facebook

whoa sweet, now i have enough points to get the Astro headset helmet effect!

Ahahah :D

What a fail this advertisement is.

"

tikitaki wrote:

"

CanHasPants wrote:

You are right, though--people (can be) rightfully concerned, but that is not what is on display here.

So you group together 30 pages of responses and feedback and just say "no, these people aren't concerned."

Are you serious?

We now have a footprint available that stamps a corporate logo over Wraeclast.

And there is precedence working in my favor. The precendence of 200+ years of corporate history showing that when companies start selling out, they continue to sell out.

It's not rocket science, and it's not an exercise in first order formal logic, so drop the talk of "fallacies." It's childish at best and trolling at worst.

You have 1 logo which looks like a group of snakes that appears for a second if you choose to use an optional microtransaction. That is reality.

What people are doing, is saying because we have 1 optional microtransaction advertising a company we will surely have many more - that is a logical fallacy.

Pointing out logical fallacies isn't childish or trolling - it is educational. First order logic should be a prerequisite for posting on the internet. Also, this could be a 1000 pages long with a million people upset, but that doesn't mean they are right or that their collective anger somehow is self justifying in and of itself.

Here is an example:

The government wants to limit access to automatic weapons. You know if they take that step the next thing they'll do is come after all of our weapons. I can tell you this will surely happen because it's what happened in Nazi Germany.

If you cannot see why that is a bad argument, I cannot have a discussion with you. If you cannot see how the argument above directly parallels the arguments in this thread, I cannot have a discussion with you.

I know.. I'm "trolling" again or being a "fanboy" right?

*edit*

the only valid complaint, I suppose, is people wishing not to see it. So I'll agree that GGG should put something in place that allows you to turn it off. However, I think GGG should allow us to turn of any MTX we wish.

*edit 2*

+1 Canhaspants

"

Lord_of_Error wrote:

"

CanHasPants wrote:

[...]
A cosmetic effect that is unobtrusive and made to fit with the thematic aesthetics of Wraeclast
[...]

And here is where I don't agree at all. "Footprints" (wonder how shoes look like leaving such a trail) printing the logo of another company around the game, that's imo not fitting at all. The neon green colour of it doesn't actually help to make it blend in with the rest of the game. If it would've been a more subtle way of promotion, maybe I wouldn't be against it as much as I am. Currently I just see the footprints as a blatant ad, and it shocked me quite a bit as I didn't expect such a move.

neon green = bad

What I mean bythat quote, is that had I not read the article or had to go to Razer's site to retrieve the promo code, I would have thought it was just a free mtx. GGG took care not to make it blatant, as the conspiracy theorists like to suggest is coming next.

I do understand, though, I just fail to see how this is any worse than..
.. or if GGG decided to add a grinding gear footprint (after all, it's not just any company's logo, it's the logo of a company partnered with GGG).

"

Wittgenstein wrote:

"

tikitaki wrote:

"

CanHasPants wrote:

You are right, though--people (can be) rightfully concerned, but that is not what is on display here.

So you group together 30 pages of responses and feedback and just say "no, these people aren't concerned."

Are you serious?

We now have a footprint available that stamps a corporate logo over Wraeclast.

And there is precedence working in my favor. The precendence of 200+ years of corporate history showing that when companies start selling out, they continue to sell out.

It's not rocket science, and it's not an exercise in first order formal logic, so drop the talk of "fallacies." It's childish at best and trolling at worst.

You have 1 logo which looks like a group of snakes that appears for a second if you choose to use an optional microtransaction. That is reality.

What people are doing, is saying because we have 1 optional microtransaction advertising a company we will surely have many more - that is a logical fallacy.

Pointing out logical fallacies isn't childish or trolling - it is educational. First order logic should be a prerequisite for posting on the internet. Also, this could be a 1000 pages long with a million people upset, but that doesn't mean they are right or that their collective anger somehow is self justifying in and of itself.

Here is an example:

The government wants to limit access to automatic weapons. You know if they take that step the next thing they'll do is come after all of our weapons. I can tell you this will surely happen because it's what happened in Nazi Germany.

If you cannot see why that is a bad argument, I cannot have a discussion with you. If you cannot see how the argument above directly parallels the arguments in this thread, I cannot have a discussion with you.

I know.. I'm "trolling" again or being a "fanboy" right?

*edit*

the only valid complaint, I suppose, is people wishing not to see it. So I'll agree that GGG should put something in place that allows you to turn it off. However, I think GGG should allow us to turn of any MTX we wish.

Are you serious. Let me explain to you why it is logical to assume that more will follow.

1. In order to sacrifice product quality you have to butcher your pride, put something in your game you didn't design just for monetary returns, compromise the quality of your product. Once you have butchered your pride once it's done for, statistics and the commulative history of the world suggests that people will not change back once they start walking down that path. That does not mean that they cannot, it just means that is it logical to assume that they probably will not.

2. Once you start depending on the money coming in from the advertisements, it is very hard to go back to it being purely the quality of your product that earns you money through regular returns. In other words, when you choose the lazy way of getting money, it is very hard to go back to being plain honest and hardworking again.

Also look at the twitch thing. You may dismiss it as alright and smart, but it does limit itself to a certain taste, a certain period in time. The higher level of artistry the more timeless your "products" are. That is true in all walks of life.

Now imagine that the whole gaming industry integrated twitch into their games, where would we be then? Monopoly like conditions. Hopefully there will be alternatives to twitch in the future, as choice means we keep evolving.

It is the sum of our choices that make the whole, that is why it is important to act with care in even the smallest of things.

Are monopolies bad? Not inherently, but it is like having a monarchy versus a democracy. Monopolies(monarchies) can work just as free markets(democracies) can, but monopolies are more prone to downfall since so much depends on one person and that persons wisdom and integrity. It is also easier to abuse the power in a monopoly.

And no, i have no interest in answering your constructed strawman argument nicely put in italics as though it wholely symbolizes the happenings of this thread. Naturally there is no point in discussing something obvious, but that argument does not touch the point and thereby is irrelevant, qualifying for a perfect strawman.

@ crackmonster

1. Isn't a reason, its an assumption - your assumption, which I do not even need to acknowledge because it is an assumption. Also your broad general statements like " statistics and the commulative history of the world suggests ." is moot - if you're going to present reasons then present reasons. What you did is something like this "Everyone knows X is true so you should agree it is true."
1a. present those statistics, give some historical data.
1b. if it 'suggests' that X then that doesn't mean it necessarily 'demonstrates' that X - you're making a false qualification.
1c. Why is in-game advertising (even though it isn't advertising, it just shows a symbol and if you have no idea what the symbol stands for it cannot be advertising, but lets just assume it IS advertising) why is that necessarily a bad thing? Lots of games have real world advertising, its *how* it is done that matters not *if* it is done.

2. See (1) But, also, you seem to be indicating that advertising something equates to not being "hardworking" if that is your argument, you need to flesh that out s LOT more because on the face of it, it appears that you're saying advertising is akin to laziness which is absurd, advertising itself is an entire industry.

The rest of what you wrote is hard to follow. I have no idea why you are discussing monopolies, it has nothing to do with what I wrote.

As for your strawman comment - I did not present a strawman, here is an example of one:

1.Prof. Jones: "The university just cut our yearly budget by $10,000."
Prof. Smith: "What are we going to do?"
Prof. Brown: "I think we should eliminate one of the teaching assistant positions. That would take care of it."
Prof. Jones: "We could reduce our scheduled raises instead."
Prof. Brown: " I can't understand why you want to bleed us dry like that, Jones."

Here is another:

After Will said that we should put more money into health and education, Warren responded by saying that he was surprised that Will hates our country so much that he wants to leave it defenceless by cutting military spending.

Here is another:

Senator X: I think it's irresponsible to keep putting so much capital into the defense budget when we are facing a severe deficit.
Senator Y: Obviously Senator X wishes to leave our country defenseless!

What I did, was present the same kind of argument that is being presented here and showed how it doesn't amount to a hill of beans. That isn't a strawman. It is refutation.

"

Wittgenstein wrote:

1. Isn't a reason, its an assumption - your assumption, which I do not even need to acknowledge because it is an assumption. Also your broad general statements like "the entire history of the world demonstrates...." is moot - if you're going to present reasons then present reasons. What you did is something like this "Everyone knows X is true so you should agree it is true."

this is adorable. lol.

you're essentially derailing on purpose. this doesn't even qualify as on-topic anymore.

the logo is fucking ugly, it doesn't fit in with Wraeclast (maybe because it's the logo of a manufacturer of sub-par and over-marketed consumer grade plastic garbage), it's bright green, and tons of people are using it already. Yuck.

and again. again. again. again. stop with the logical fallacy talk.

you obviously don't understand what a logical fallacy is, how they are used, or the proper context to point them out in.