Streamer priority confirmed. PoE is free to play, so play it for free, but Boycott GGG.

"

SisterBlister wrote:

You certainly do not speak for me. You're projecting your motivation for buying stuff onto everybody else. That is nonsense. What do you hope to achieve with that?

Serious question: You accuse some of us of lying about our intentions.

When it comes to intent, anyone and everyone can deny everything and anything.
No need to worry about economics and psychology, I'm trained in psychology myself - people don't do things for no reason.
You might not be looking for a return monetarily but instead use it as a tool to advance arguments or hopefully persuade the receiver, which is what you're attempting in this thread.

If you really gave that money away 100% for no other reason than pure altruism, you would not be writing in bold every second post how you did it only to support them.

If you give someone $100 and say that you're giving it ONLY TO SUPPORT them but if they do something which you don't like then the supporting is over; then you're engaging in fully self-aware manipulation, not altruism.

Why would someone lie about intent? You won't be taken seriously if you admit that you're just upset that the game isn't fun anymore for you personally.
It's a lot easier to be heard if you grab a virtue of a higher, non-personal standard such as morals, altruism and fairness.

Bump with love.

Chris Wilson made something so pure that we all became enamored with it.

Then he sold out and crushed us all.

This isn't his game or our game any longer. It belongs to a giant corporation. How did you make the same mistakes that those before you made Chris?


$$$

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

[...] And it's GGG's responsibility to do everything they can to make sure everyone's playing the same game. That is their most important duty as a game developer and operator. Most. Important.

Thanks for some clarifications.

Well, the trouble is: the outer world wont stop on the fences of the playground. In no game. This is an illusion exile.

From my point of view, ggg broke this promise already *long* ago. They broke it, by desgining a game around a core mechanic ("logout out macro"), which is not integrated part of their provided game. You get an advantage by having access ( /knowledge) to macros. This was not by an unwanted sideffect, but by a core idea of their game design.

Even their *original* implentation of the trade mechanic - with the foreseeable need of a (external) trade site - or their prefered communication trough reddit went in the same direction.

Therefore I already acted like a customer - and not a supporter. But Im not so naive to say things like that:

"

Kiss_Me_Quick wrote:

And everyone else in this thread will keep donating because they like shiny armour, which is fine and has always been the reason, not pure charitable altruism.

Because ggg targeting also the emotions of their "customers". They selling a narrativ like: "support your underdog, support your independent but high creative, non exploiting company, be part of a proud community, a family, creating a greater good for all, etc..."

They want you to *support* them, not only be a customer. *Support* means: your money isnt only for the "shiny armor" and the attention, it is for their emotional promises too. And you should give them not only your money but your dedication to create this sense of community, this "family". (...as a very common marketing strategie in a postmodern enviroment)

... and they lied about it (like all the other profit driven companys)
... and they got greedy (like all the other profit driven companys)
... and they deserved a slap on the wrist (like all the other profit driven companys)

"

LanPirot wrote:

Because ggg targeting also the emotions of their "customers". They selling a narrativ like: "support your underdog, support your independent but high creative, non exploiting company, be part of a proud community, a family, creating a greater good for all, etc..."

Huh?

"

Kiss_Me_Quick wrote:

...
You might not be looking for a return monetarily but instead use it as a tool to advance arguments or hopefully persuade the receiver, which is what you're attempting in this thread...

No, I gave them that money back then to feel good about contributing to a cool project (without doing actual work, much like if I donate to a charity). So yeah, if you consider "feeling good" a goal of a payment the same way you consider "looking cool in shiny MTX", then of course it was not an altruistic support payment. But by that standard, no altruism exists...

And no, I'm not trying to manipulate GGG into changing. I just no longer feel they are as worthy a cause as they were way back then. That is the standard I'll apply in any future decisions on whether to buy a pack or not. Once again, if that is what you consider "trying to influence GGG", then everything anyone ever does is to influence someone else. That would be cheap kitchen psychology.

It seems to me you and I have very different definitions of "charity" and "altruism". Obviously, I consider my ideas to be more common-sensical than yours, but that is to be expected :)

"

Kiss_Me_Quick wrote:

...
If you really gave that money away 100% for no other reason than pure altruism, you would not be writing in bold every second post how you did it only to support them...

How so? I wrote those other posts in reply to people who misunderstand why people like I (or, probably, the OP and some others in this thread) paid more money than necessary in the past and why we might no longer do so in the future. A lot of people replying here seem to completely miss the point of the OP.

"

Kiss_Me_Quick wrote:

...if you admit that you're just upset that the game isn't fun anymore for you personally...

Like so. That is waaaay off the mark.
If the game wasn't fun anymore, I'd stop playing. As it is, I only stopped paying. Which can change at any time if GGG does stuff I consider awesome and worth supporting.

Did that clarify things for you?

"

LanPirot wrote:

Well, the trouble is: the outer world wont stop on the fences of the playground. In no game. This is an illusion exile.

Agreed, but it's like that aforementioned war on drugs, or terror, or...bots. Or, I think, any other 'in a perfect world' scenario. There are some impossible ideals that certain people must do their best to embody and uphold, and I think 'being fair to all players regardless of financial contribution OR financial potential' is one that GGG set themselves, and, ironically, it is one that saw them get out of beta in such good shape. Because I can guarantee that a *lot* of the beta support came from people who believed that GGG were different, were true to their word, would show the other companies how it's done. And they did, for years.

So maybe this was inevitable because you can't keep the illusion up forever. But then we're back to that strangely Campbellian notion: "The hero of yesterday becomes the tyrant of tomorrow, unless he crucifies himself today." And naturally we're not talking literally here -- I think it basically means the hero can't stay the hero forever, and if they stick around too long, they become if not the bad guy, certainly a force of oppression and imposition.

Which is all to say that I probably would be less incensed by this had it been done by a truly Tencent-run GGG and not, it would seem, the illusion of a GGG that is still the same company that ran on a platform of moral fortitude and the notion that free to play can also mean fair to play.

It's no secret I wanted Chris to take his 30 (000,000x3) pieces of silver and quit. That much cash, for god's sake, go enjoy the rest of your life. Buy every magic card ever made. Never work another day in your life. You more than earned it. But he wanted his baby and eat it too (!!!), because he's always worn too many hats and too many of them have molded themselves to his head, and now it's come to this: changes in the company have forced him to compromise GGG's core ethics...or maybe it was his call. Or maybe he can't quit: Tencent know he's the goose laying the golden eGGGs. Who knows. Doesn't matter. Point is, this isn't about the fact that comparatively speaking, GGG are still far more moral than many big game devs. It's the fact that they used to be more moral than any of them, and they won so much more than a mere 'big pile of money' doing so. I really, really don't want people to forget that.

As for the log-out 'macro', they did design the game with alt-f4 in mind. And that's nothing to do with what they did this time: everyone has an alt-f4 option available to them, if they want to use it. As for macro, I dunno the legality of that. Of course, I thought it was dumb to design around it but I see the logic in it: what's the alternative? A timed log-out? Given the original netcode of this game, that was never going to fly. This isn't an MMO, where you normally see such mechanics to prevent panic-quitting. Either way, if that was your breaking point, so be it. I'll just repeat what I said straight-off: if being treated like second-class players compared to a paid streamer who doesn't even play the game much AND non-paid streamers, some of whom outright disrespect not only their viewers but the game itself...if that isn't one's breaking point to not support GGG going forward, then I frankly don't know what is.

"

Gulch wrote:

"

LanPirot wrote:

Because ggg targeting also the emotions of their "customers". They selling a narrativ like: "support your underdog, support your independent but high creative, non exploiting company, be part of a proud community, a family, creating a greater good for all, etc..."

Huh?

Umm ?

(Can you please a bit more specific ?

- Did I choose a misleading or to "political" word: "narrativ" ?
Just use: background/meta - story/ selfimage

- Did I not choose the correctic narrativ ?
Yeah, maybe I was not precise or incomplete.

- There is no such thing as society ..(sorry, wrong discussion, or maybe not O.ô) - - So, there is no such thing as a narrativ ?
Maybe, but I disagree on that and its the wrong place for that discussion. I wont derail the thread and stop it here.

But maybe just look over the thread from the students of uppsala about game desinging microtransaction. I will just quote the first answer, user was shagsbeard. Maybe you can discuss with shags, about rationalism, perception and whats part of the game and what not.)

Thread: looking for interviews:

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

You should understand that there is a different dynamic going on here. People aren't just buying cosmetics for the sake of having cosmetics. There are many players who honestly just want to give money to GGG because they feel that they deserve it. To them, the cosmetics are just a way to show off that you support.

They'd likely support at a similar level even without the cosmetic reward.

This business model isn't so much about making a product to sell. The product is the game. /quote]

"

Kiss_Me_Quick wrote:

There wouldn't have been a donation

There wasn't a donation. There were purchases. Each and every one had clear terms of exchange. I supported; I contributed; I paid above and beyond for all sorts of reasons, but never out of altruism. I have never donated to GGG, which is good because I don't believe they are tax-deductible anyway. :P

I never claimed it was out of altruism. I get a lot of personal pleasure out of helping others. I wanted to design unique items, and at 1k USD a pop, I KNEW that was a bargain and wouldn't stay at that price for too long. And I also had a feeling with sufficient contributions I'd get personal attention from these devs, who intrigued me from the start. A bunch of garage, inc Kiwis taking on Blizzard and, from what I could tell, equipped to win that fight? Amazing. And yes, I liked their moral approach. I'd heard nothing but awful things about free to play, and my one run-in with it was horrendous. I threw as much cash at them as I could (without making a noticeable dent in my resources) because I WANTED PATH OF EXILE TO BE AWESOME. And it was. And it is. I. Wanted.

Other than that time I donated a bunch of cash to a koala sanctuary and asked Chris to contribute sale money from the koala pet to a charity, I don't believe I've ever been altruistic regarding PoE or GGG. And even then, as I said, I feel immense pleasure when I help others for the sake of it. This is why I bought so many closed beta keys for randoms, or gave GGGold to this person or that who impressed me one way or another. Thank yous not required but always welcome. I feel good either way.

Anyway, thanks for the bumps. They help. Do stick around as long as you feel you want or need to. ^_^

"

SisterBlister wrote:

No, I gave them that money back then to feel good about contributing to a cool project (without doing actual work, much like if I donate to a charity). So yeah, if you consider "feeling good" a goal of a payment the same way you consider "looking cool in shiny MTX", then of course it was not an altruistic support payment. But by that standard, no altruism exists...

And no, I'm not trying to manipulate GGG into changing. I just no longer feel they are as worthy a cause as they were way back then. That is the standard I'll apply in any future decisions on whether to buy a pack or not. Once again, if that is what you consider "trying to influence GGG", then everything anyone ever does is to influence someone else. That would be cheap kitchen psychology.

It seems to me you and I have very different definitions of "charity" and "altruism". Obviously, I consider my ideas to be more common-sensical than yours, but that is to be expected :)

If I were you I would say that I paid for my burger to help McDonalds grow as a business because I'm a good person and wanted to help low-paid workers (:
Although it's lying through omission, leaving out everything else important that came along with this exchange.

If that "good feeling" was everything that you wanted and got from that transaction then you would not be using these payments as a tool for manipulation or argumentation.
If you would not try to have any influence then you would not be writing your essays here.

You can give them your money and never bring it up or use it against them - altruism achieved.
Altruism does not involve self-gain, it's about self-sacrifice.

Alright, you can have the common sense, I'll have the dictionary and scientific literature - it's to be expected.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/altruism

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Because I can guarantee that a *lot* of the beta support came from people who believed that GGG were different, were true to their word, would show the other companies how it's done. And they did, for years.

Yeah, I know. If I talked to game-designers, gamers or political intellectuals, I used poe as example of a new and *financial working* gamedesign ideas. To see it, was glorious and frightning at the same time. Because it showed new ways to make a good, no pay to win game and good profits too - targeting the "believing of the people in the different game".

But I was never that much emotional involved, that there was a "breaking point". The allowing of the "logout macro" was neverless for me a warn sign.