Finish the Pit of Heresy, you get to buy a sword

https://bungiestore.com/products/preorder-bungie-rewards-hive-sword-replica

If you finish, you can buy a 42" foam Hive sword for $160 from the Bungie Store.

Pretty slick!

locked

3087 views

Yeah, but does it shoot Master Sword style magic attacks when it I swing it?

locked

2985 views

Yeah, but does it shoot Master Sword style magic attacks when it I swing it?

Only if you're at max hearts.

locked

2901 views

Yeah, but does it shoot Master Sword style magic attacks when it I swing it?

Only if you're at max hearts.

But then that means you hear a constant beeping alarm when low driving you nuts!!!

locked

2927 views

https://bungiestore.com/products/preorder-bungie-rewards-hive-sword-replica

If you finish, you can buy a 42" foam Hive sword for $160 from the Bungie Store.

Pretty slick!

Hey Cruel this one has hands in the pic for a size reference. :-p

locked

2976 views

- No text -

locked

2876 views

$160 from the Bungie Store.

Well, the money thing ... blah blah society blah blah, but I expect you get what I mean. My inner child wants this SO BAD, and my adult self is all - "Don't spend your money on this, all it's going to do is collect dust".

But I want it!

ppweeeeze

No.

Awwwww. :(

locked

2966 views

So, not only have I been priced out the market regarding D2 in-game rewards (Bright Dust-"earnable", digital items, ̶F̶e̶s̶t̶i̶v̶a̶l̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶L̶o̶s̶t̶ -> Eververse, etc.)

I have also been priced out of the market regarding real life rewards (Bungie Rewards)

I cannot express clearly how disappointed I am.
I do not find the situation Fun, nor Inviting in any way shape or form.

It sort of leaves a bad taste in the mouth, like if I opened up a can of Golden Age Fruchtmus and gave it a try

locked

3004 views

So, not only have I been priced out the market regarding D2 in-game rewards (Bright Dust-"earnable", digital items, ̶F̶e̶s̶t̶i̶v̶a̶l̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶L̶o̶s̶t̶ -> Eververse, etc.)

I have also been priced out of the market regarding real life rewards (Bungie Rewards)

I cannot express clearly how disappointed I am.
I do not find the situation Fun, nor Inviting in any way shape or form.

It sort of leaves a bad taste in the mouth, like if I opened up a can of Golden Age Fruchtmus and gave it a try

I feel you.

I have Concerns™.

locked

2919 views

At the risk of sounding like a total fucking moron, based on the thread I started last week . . .

Why? I don’t get it.

So they’re selling some overpriced toys in their store? Who cares? I mean, Funko Pops exist, this sort of fits right in with modern consumerism.

I don’t think it’s great. Seems really freaking expensive for an ugly piece of molded foam and complete waste of resources that went into designing it, but I also don’t think not being able to afford an overpriced toy is reason to be mad at Bungie.

locked

2946 views

It’s either worth it to you or not.

And honestly, for 99.99% of people it’s just gonna sit there and eventually end up in a box. It won’t increase in value.

locked

2913 views

Instead of implementing a satisfying reward in-game, they put time, effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game.

locked

2926 views

Instead of implementing a satisfying reward in-game, they put time, effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game.

Except that the people hired to do stuff like design real toys you can buy in the store are NOT the same people hired to build in-game rewards.

Your attitude is a little bit disturbing to me; you're acting scornful of (even disgusted by) a product that a) nobody is forcing you to purchase, b) some people seem to love (read a few over-the-top posts elsewhere), and c) affects your life NOT IN THE SLIGHTEST unless you want it to. It's as though you're telling people how they should live their lives...

locked

2938 views

Telling people how to live their lives?

I'd love to see how you managed to pull that out of what I actually said.

I'll take the point about the resources being different resources (although at the end of the day it all stems from the only real resource - money they're willing to invest). But the rest? Absolute nonsense.

I don't care one bit what you all choose to spend your money on. If this is something you wanted then I'm glad it exists for you. My issue is completely unrelated to your enjoyment of the thing, and I think its intellectually dishonest to imply that I've said otherwise.

If you want to put words in my mouth, try to make them at least sound like something I'd say.

locked

2938 views

Scornful and disgusted?

Nah. Just concerned, which I had hoped would be implied by the fact I was answering the question "Why are you concerned" but maybe not.

locked

2926 views

Scornful and disgusted?

Nah. Just concerned, which I had hoped would be implied by the fact I was answering the question "Why are you concerned" but maybe not.

But why exactly are you concerned? Boldfacing “buy” leaves it open to interpretation. You say Claude’s interpretation is wrong, so what is your concern? They might make money?

locked

2889 views

"Congratulations, you did great guys! And as a special reward, your prize is the opportunity to pay over the odds for something from our store!"

How does that not concern you?

Lucky us Bungie is so benevolent eh? I bet they hate letting people purchase products from them.

locked

2915 views

Wow man. someotherguy... pull back man. You need to straight up chill on the crusade here. Your words are harsh and your attitude foaming at the mouth, or at least that's what I'm reading over here.

It's a trophy. You're (and others?) are getting worked up on a trophy. What these things are, what they are for, are something to hang on a wall. A tactile representation to the satisfaction of doing a thing.

What the actual fuck is this thread I am reading. Holy moly - freekin' chill.

locked

2908 views

Honest question, have you ever been in a situation where telling someone to chill out has helped?

I'm really not on some crusade. I have my opinions and not everyone agrees with them. And that's okay.

But yeah, I do get a little prickly when I feel like I have to constantly defend those opinions against strawmen and the assumption that I'm some frothing anti-corporate Socialist who's telling you how to spend your money.

It's hard to have a respectful conversation when what I feel is a fairly reasonable concern, albeit one most of you clearly don't share, is treated like some radical rant.

locked

2923 views

Honest question, have you ever been in a situation where telling someone to chill out has helped?

I'm really not on some crusade. I have my opinions and not everyone agrees with them. And that's okay.

But yeah, I do get a little prickly when I feel like I have to constantly defend those opinions against strawmen and the assumption that I'm some frothing anti-corporate Socialist who's telling you how to spend your money.

It's hard to have a respectful conversation when what I feel is a fairly reasonable concern, albeit one most of you clearly don't share, is treated like some radical rant.

Among friends, yeah. Shoot, in a more just world it would be at least among adults. Sometimes our primeval emotions get the better of us. Sometimes we get so thick in our cycle that we don't realize what we are doing and what we are saying. Sometimes life can kick us in the ass so hard that we don't know which way is up.

On top of that, the internet sucks. We converse with half our usual social indicators. All we have is the rawness of words and whatever formatting we can muster.

Helping you pull back is what real bros do, they help to stop you from making a further ass of yourself. Unfortunately it seems an increasingly rare thing, but it is what it is. If you still disagree, well that's your business. You disregard a warning at your own peril.

It's not what you said, it's how you said it.

Signed,

The Forum Madman. :P

locked

2853 views

It's not what you said, it's how you said it.

I really don't know how to feel about that. I genuinely appreciate the attempt at de-escalation, but I'm almost certain this only applies in spoken conversation.

Otherwise its not so much the way I said it as the way you heard it.

While I can certainly apologise for not making my intent more clear, I have very little agency over how you choose to interpret my words. Maybe it speaks to how I have comported myself, but given that I make a concerted (though not infallible) effort not to resort to namecalling, ad hominem, strawman arguments or rallying calls (unlike some here), it strikes me as disingenuous to assume ill intent with no good reason beyond the fact that you disagree with me.

But just in case I need to make this clear - I do not ever intend to incite outrage, belittle the beliefs or opinions of others, or otherwise tell you how to act or what/how you should consume.

I'm tired of this conflict. But if you take anything away from it, I'd ask that you maybe reconsider your use of language suggesting fanaticism, zealotry, or lack of control next time you want to de-escalate.

Exhaustedly yours,
Forum SJW

locked

2865 views

- No text -

locked

2834 views

Feign the high ground when your reaction was wholly unreasonable and unjustifiable.

locked

2809 views

If you still can't see the depth of your verbage, I'm willing to explain further, should you care. Do not make the mistake I do this for internet e-peen. I jumped into this because I saw probable unreasonable escalation upon the tone of this thread. I jumped into the river to stop the topic from jumping into the river.

locked

2846 views

I'm always happy to have a learning experience, especially if it helps me right a wrong

locked

2823 views

Unfortunately, I can't give total verbatim to the moment I made the choice to post, as you've edited your posts. For reference, when I read threads here on DBO I tend to use the "Open in thread" function of the forum. Downside of that is, in the event of edits, I don't see them. Lot less clicking though, which is nice.

(cheapLEY) At the risk of sounding like a total fucking moron, based on the thread I started last week . . .

Why? I don’t get it.

So they’re selling some overpriced toys in their store? Who cares? I mean, Funko Pops exist, this sort of fits right in with modern consumerism.

I don’t think it’s great. Seems really freaking expensive for an ugly piece of molded foam and complete waste of resources that went into designing it, but I also don’t think not being able to afford an overpriced toy is reason to be mad at Bungie

(Some) Instead of implementing a satisfying reward in-game, they put time, effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game.

(Wu) Except that the people hired to do stuff like design real toys you can buy in the store are NOT the same people hired to build in-game rewards.

Your attitude is a little bit disturbing to me; you're acting scornful of (even disgusted by) a product that a) nobody is forcing you to purchase, b) some people seem to love (read a few over-the-top posts elsewhere), and c) affects your life NOT IN THE SLIGHTEST unless you want it to. It's as though you're telling people how they should live their lives...

(Some - Edited [Bold is what I recall the most])Telling people how to live their lives?

I'd love to see how you managed to pull that out of what I actually said.

I'll take the point about the resources being different resources (although at the end of the day it all stems from the only real resource - money they're willing to invest). But the rest? Absolute nonsense.

I don't care one bit what you all choose to spend your money on. If this is something you wanted then I'm glad it exists for you. My issue is completely unrelated to your enjoyment of the thing, and I think its intellectually dishonest to imply that I've said otherwise.

If you want to put words in my mouth, try to make them at least sound like something I'd say.

(Some) Scornful and disgusted?

Nah. Just concerned, which I had hoped would be implied by the fact I was answering the question "Why are you concerned" but maybe not.

(Kerm) But why exactly are you concerned? Boldfacing “buy” leaves it open to interpretation. You say Claude’s interpretation is wrong, so what is your concern? They might make money?

(Some - Edited) "Congratulations, you did great guys! And as a special reward, your prize is the opportunity to pay over the odds for something from our store!"

How does that not concern you?

Lucky us Bungie is so benevolent eh? I bet they hate letting people purchase products from them.

ALLLL RIGHTY THEN!!!!

So here is the (rough) start point that brought me to the conclusion that it would be best to jump in and pull on the breaks abit. With some of the edits, the edges are smoothed, but done is done and there is still plenty to show. Now, as a reminder, it isn't the topic it's the tone implied by the verbatim. Something that even when expressed, you seem totally blind to, thus leading to this post you read before you.

First, it should be noted the reaction to your words in the moment, which is important to consider as we dissect this into parts (which in-turn changes interpretation). Your first post has a certain obligation to it. "Yet another overpriced cosmetic". It has an air of propensity to it that implys insult, as if to indirectly say "How dare they!".

... and I'm going to stop there for the moment, as if you can't see this, everything else I have to say is moot.

locked

2835 views

With some of the edits, the edges are smoothed,

Certainly the intent of the edits. I should point out there were all made before your post however.

but done is done and there is still plenty to show.

Quoting large swathes of text with no notes beyond two bolded sentences seems rather excessive. If you want explain something please do so, rather than alluding to further explanations to come.

Now, as a reminder, it isn't the topic it's the tone implied by the verbatim. Something that even when expressed, you seem totally blind to, thus leading to this post you read before you.

Hardly blind to. I jut refuse to accept that your interpreting my words in a particular way retroactively changes my intent.

Your first post has a certain obligation to it. "Yet another overpriced cosmetic". It has an air of propensity to it that implys insult, as if to indirectly say "How dare they!".

This, at least, is a fairly correct interpretation. I do feel a certain hyperbolic sense of "how dare they". It's a feeling I have about a great many things practiced by a great many people.

I don't see how expressing that is an issue, however. I'm certainly not the only one to do so, even within this thread.

Downside of that is, in the event of edits, I don't see them.

/shrug

locked

2855 views

With some of the edits, the edges are smoothed,

Certainly the intent of the edits. I should point out there were all made before your post however.

Yes, I saw the timestamps too. And yet I said as I did anyway. Why? Because what you didn't see in the timestamp is how long it took me to figure out what it was that I wanted to say. During that time, you made your edits.

but done is done and there is still plenty to show.

Quoting large swathes of text with no notes beyond two bolded sentences seems rather excessive. If you want explain something please do so, rather than alluding to further explanations to come.

Ah, but you speak with haste. You speak as if I was done, when no where is such implied. How telling. That said...

Your first post has a certain obligation to it. "Yet another overpriced cosmetic". It has an air of propensity to it that implys insult, as if to indirectly say "How dare they!".

This, at least, is a fairly correct interpretation. I do feel a certain hyperbolic sense of "how dare they". It's a feeling I have about a great many things practiced by a great many people.

I don't see how expressing that is an issue, however. I'm certainly not the only one to do so, even within this thread.

Fantastic. You can see it. I can continue. I should note... your absolutely abominable attitude is the same now as which I quoted (perhaps due to that self confessed hyperbolic per-view). It seems to me that I waste time, it ain't going to do a darn'd thing. Oh well, I made the offer, so here I go.

Oh... and yes, I know. In all patterned expectation, you may feel free to express "HOW IS MY ATTITUDE ABSOLUTELY ABOMINABLE!?!". To which, in response to that possibility; Brother, I am but one man. Help as I wish, you're going to have to walk though that door yourself (regardless the number of pushes I give). Goodluck.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Alright... so let's bring back the listical of text.

(cheapLEY) At the risk of sounding like a total fucking moron, based on the thread I started last week . . .

Why? I don’t get it.

So they’re selling some overpriced toys in their store? Who cares? I mean, Funko Pops exist, this sort of fits right in with modern consumerism.

I don’t think it’s great. Seems really freaking expensive for an ugly piece of molded foam and complete waste of resources that went into designing it, but I also don’t think not being able to afford an overpriced toy is reason to be mad at Bungie

(Some) Instead of implementing a satisfying reward in-game, they put time, effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game.

(Wu) Except that the people hired to do stuff like design real toys you can buy in the store are NOT the same people hired to build in-game rewards.

Your attitude is a little bit disturbing to me; you're acting scornful of (even disgusted by) a product that a) nobody is forcing you to purchase, b) some people seem to love (read a few over-the-top posts elsewhere), and c) affects your life NOT IN THE SLIGHTEST unless you want it to. It's as though you're telling people how they should live their lives...

(Some - Edited [Bold is what I recall the most])Telling people how to live their lives?

I'd love to see how you managed to pull that out of what I actually said.

I'll take the point about the resources being different resources (although at the end of the day it all stems from the only real resource - money they're willing to invest). But the rest? Absolute nonsense.

I don't care one bit what you all choose to spend your money on. If this is something you wanted then I'm glad it exists for you. My issue is completely unrelated to your enjoyment of the thing, and I think its intellectually dishonest to imply that I've said otherwise.

If you want to put words in my mouth, try to make them at least sound like something I'd say.

(Some) Scornful and disgusted?

Nah. Just concerned, which I had hoped would be implied by the fact I was answering the question "Why are you concerned" but maybe not.

(Kerm) But why exactly are you concerned? Boldfacing “buy” leaves it open to interpretation. You say Claude’s interpretation is wrong, so what is your concern? They might make money?

(Some - Edited) "Congratulations, you did great guys! And as a special reward, your prize is the opportunity to pay over the odds for something from our store!"

How does that not concern you?

Lucky us Bungie is so benevolent eh? I bet they hate letting people purchase products from them.

Alright, so we start this with the "hyperbolic sense of 'how dare they'", which by the way is a self described hint on how this next poster "managed to pull that out of what [you] actually said."

Enter our Fourm OG, The Lu-est of Wu-zzz. The Lu Wu over here trends toward even keeled logic and reason on the internet. I KNOW RIGHT! What-a-total-weirdo. ;D

Disgusting.

He comes in, mentions your attitude (for some reason - I guess we can ignore that), mentions that you seem "scornful of ([or] even disgusted)" (for some reason - I guess we can ignore that), and how you've put all this emotion (as implied though your post) into something that has insignificant impact upon... eh... everything? Finishing with "It's as though you're telling people how they should live their lives."

But... I guess we can ignore that, because of either Hanlon's razor or actual intent.

"Telling people how to live their lives?", you edit, somehow unable to parse the exacting nature of your original post; "I'd love to see how you managed to pull that out of what I actually said."

(I look forward to your thank you.)

You rebut with acceptance (the point about the resources - "Except that the people hired to do stuff like design real toys you can buy in the store are NOT the same people hired to build in-game rewards.") and then - "But the rest? Absolute nonsense." To which then you clarify " If this is something you wanted then I'm glad it exists for you. My issue is completely unrelated to your enjoyment of the thing, and I think its intellectually dishonest to imply that I've said otherwise.", apparently blind to your statement of...

"Effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game" AKA HOW DARE THEY!" Note - WU is mostly commenting toward your ATTITUDE toward the thing, while you are rebutting, (and thus mostly missing the point) about the object its self. AKA - ITS NOT WHAT YOU SAY IT'S HOW YOU SAY IT. Ring any bells?

You then finish - again to blindness in your attitude "If you want to put words in my mouth, try to make them at least sound like something I'd say."

Lets stop here and make this even more crystal.

Had you said, "I disagree with this. I would rather Bungie put their resources into in game items instead of expensive real world items", I would not be making this post right now.

YOU SAID: Instead of implementing a satisfying reward in-game, they put time, effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game.

... do you see the difference? Can you?

I was going to continue further, hence my original listical quote, but I think (and I hope) this sends home what you DESPERATELY seem to be unable to see. Everything else is more of the same. You were two strikes of three in a inflammatory matter in a very short amount of time. This usually (as I'm guessing upon the moment) is a good indicator that someone has been compromised emotionally, hence my address to chill.

So let me finish with this; YOUR ATTITUDE IS SHIT. Does that piss you off? GOOD! Point it at yourself and change. Don't come up in here and blame me (or anyone else for that matter) for your shit. You choose your words, and we are responding in action to them. If everyone around you is an asshole, the asshole is you. NOT SAYING YOU ARE, just the moment. Just the moment.

I guess I'll end with a question, since you are by all odds going to reply anyway. Can you stop, and look inward? This is the question of been wondering of you for the entirety of this posts writing. THAT'S A HINT. I'M TELLING YOU WHAT I SEE ON MY MONITOR HERE with the available data. In Blunt; the answer currently is no. I hope I'm wrong on that observation.

God speed brother.

locked

2822 views

Lets stop here and make this even more crystal.

Had you said, "I disagree with this. I would rather Bungie put their resources into in game items instead of expensive real world items", I would not be making this post right now.

YOU SAID: Instead of implementing a satisfying reward in-game, they put time, effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game.

... do you see the difference? Can you?

What are you objecting to here?

Satisfying?

Overpriced?

Is it upsetting to you if someone else calls a Bungie item "overpriced" instead of "expensive"?

locked

2821 views

Is it upsetting to you if someone else calls a Bungie item "overpriced" instead of "expensive"?

I mean, they mean very different things. Expensive means "a lot of money". Overpriced means "priced more than it is worth".

A $4 popcorn is not expensive, but it is overpriced.

locked

2836 views

As this is both.

locked

2816 views

As this is both.

That's your opinion. Expensive is in the eye of the beholder. A 4 dollar popcorn is not expensive to me, it's worth the cost in some situations. But to someone who has 20 bucks to his name, it very much is expensive. For me, the foam sword is too expensive. It's obviously too expensive to you. But to some people it's not.

Overpriced is somewhat subjective in my mind because by Cody's definition "worth" is also in the eye of the beholder to me. However, it's closer to the mark in that you can say the worth of the sword is what it takes to make it: material, work hours to produce it so on. However, it's up the person who makes the thing how much they want to increase the price based on the actual worth of the thing.

I honestly don't think people should be that upset over this unless they honestly want to buy it and it's way to expensive. However, from what I've read so far, people are willing to buy it at the current price and Bungie is still making a decent profit. So to those people who want to buy it and feel it's too expensive for them, I'm sorry, but that is commerce to me. And no, I don't think it's any sly trick of marketing or any such thing.

locked

2787 views

This sword is sold through the Bungie Store, so all profit goes to charity, right?

locked

2801 views

This sword is sold through the Bungie Store, so all profit goes to charity, right?

If you just give to charity, ALL of your money goes to charity.

locked

2787 views

This sword is sold through the Bungie Store, so all profit goes to charity, right?

This is non-transparent, though.

Bungie gets to decide internally what their cost is for their portion of the sword, if any.

I don't mean to sound conspiratorial on this point, or to allege any malfeasance, but a lot of people think "oh this purchase goes to charity" they mean the whole purchase price goes to charity.

Or they imagine, as they usually do, that the profit margin on many products is very high, and that therefore a good portion of the purchase price is going to charity.

There's a third party involved in the production of props like that, and their take includes both their cost and their margin.

Bungie itself I'm sure assigns some internal cost figure to that, and when those two elements are combined, the remainder is the "profit" that's assigned to charity.

Even if Bungie were entirely conscientious and transparent on those figures, the upshot would still be, depending on how they assign costs, that merch subsidizes the game and incentivizes the production of more merch and disencentivizes the less profitable work of... you know, making the game... even with some taken off the top for charity.

locked

2829 views

Even if Bungie were entirely conscientious and transparent on those figures, the upshot would still be, depending on how they assign costs, that merch subsidizes the game and incentivizes the production of more merch and disencentivizes the less profitable work of... you know, making the game... even with some taken off the top for charity.

Again, I think this is wrong. We can't definitively settle this, because neither of us has access to Bungie's books, but my conversations with people involved suggest that you're incorrect, that the merch sold in the store does NOT subsidize the game (this is different from the merch sold by Eververse, which DOES subsidize the game), and that there is no disincentivization (not a word) for game development because there's almost no link between the two groups. (The money the store makes runs the store. Additional money goes to charity.)

In fact, I'd argue the opposite; the people I know who are working on parts of the game that get real-world rewards are tickled by the way that some fans work to achieve those rewards, and look for new ways to challenge players because of this. And that outcome provides additional content for ALL players, regardless of whether you buy the real-world items or not.

Again - neither you nor I can see the books, and the internal math and thinking might be what you've speculated, or what I've speculated, or something in between... we have no way of telling. But I can say for sure that I'm not cynical enough to assume the worst, at this point. I'm sorry you've shifted to that end of the spectrum.

As to Cody's point that "if you just give to charity, ALL of your money goes to charity"... they're not giving THEIR money to charity, they're giving OURS. And yes, anybody buying something from the Bungie Store could choose instead to donate the $30 they were going to use to buy a shirt directly to the Bungie Foundation, and they'd get more bang for their buck... but that's not really how humans work. We LIKE getting merch, and if we can support a good cause at the same time, we like doing that (and we're often willing to pay a little extra in that case) . But a pretty small percentage of us would simply donate money for the heck of it, with no rewards, because there are an awful lot of other things vying for our money. Charities offer perks for donations because they work - they get more money overall by taking a smaller cut of a larger number of donations. I think it doesn't make a lot of sense to try and muddy the waters with this when it's not really part of the discussion we're having.

locked

2794 views

Even if Bungie were entirely conscientious and transparent on those figures, the upshot would still be, depending on how they assign costs, that merch subsidizes the game and incentivizes the production of more merch and disencentivizes the less profitable work of... you know, making the game... even with some taken off the top for charity.

Again, I think this is wrong. We can't definitively settle this, because neither of us has access to Bungie's books, but my conversations with people involved suggest that you're incorrect, that the merch sold in the store does NOT subsidize the game (this is different from the merch sold by Eververse, which DOES subsidize the game), and that there is no disincentivization (not a word) for game development because there's almost no link between the two groups. (The money the store makes runs the store. Additional money goes to charity.)

Not saying they do this now, or suggesting that anything in the charity is not above board-- just that someone seeing inflows and outflows could potentially decide it would be advantageous to do it. If Bungie takes no artist costs for those items, that's good! But they likely could if they wanted to, and as far as I can see I'm not even sure those things would show up on a 990 form.

And again, the jumping off point for this thread was the sword, but I was pushing the idea that those items aren't that problematic in and of themselves, but they exist on a spectrum that leads towards depending more heavily on non-game items for revenue, should they choose to do so.

Eververse is way, way more problematic, and if they were to draw a line that says "yeah, we'll do replicas for charity but we're going to close Eververse" I wouldn't really have anything to complain about.

With Eververse persisting I think it's a reasonable worry that its model starts to apply to other items.

locked

2802 views

With Eververse persisting I think it's a reasonable worry that its model starts to apply to other items.

::shrug::

They've said, over and over, that this isn't going to happen. Some people think they lie, and don't believe it. I don't think they lie, and I'm willing to say that if it happens, I'll reconsider my stance, but for now, I'm okay with what they're doing.

locked

2789 views

With Eververse persisting I think it's a reasonable worry that its model starts to apply to other items.

::shrug::

They've said, over and over, that this isn't going to happen. Some people think they lie, and don't believe it. I don't think they lie, and I'm willing to say that if it happens, I'll reconsider my stance, but for now, I'm okay with what they're doing.

Not saying anyone is lying.

Sometimes people just change their mind. Institutions often do, in response to internal and/or external stimuli.

If Bungie wants to absolutely allay any concerns that their in-game store might become dominated by gambling, one way to do so might be to have a policy, perhaps even as part of the user agreement, that says that no gambling is allowed ever and never will be, and to eliminate any and all, not just most, of any in-game for sale items that deploy gambling as a mechanic.

Of course, though, if they did that and THEN changed their minds... well, then they'd have been lying-- or at least in breach of agreement.

locked

2791 views

I don't mean to sound conspiratorial on this point, or to allege any malfeasance, but...

...you just can’t help it? A little snarky, sure, but... I don’t mean to be. :p

No, really, this goes back to what Claude said: The writers, artists, and programmers at Bungie are not 100% wall to wall busy. Meaning there are gaps where Bungie still need to pay them to keep them around but where there is not currently anything for them to do. Having them compile already written lore text into a yearly Grimoire or extract an already modeled sword to create a cool (if costly!) foam sword is not likely to get us another Raid, or Strike, or mission.

I agree, I do wish they were more transparent on the charity side, but yeah, I think the implication here that the Bungie Store, online or in-game, is affecting the game product or the amount / quality of content is just a bit absurd.

locked

2797 views

- No text -

locked

2781 views

That's your opinion.

locked

2772 views

Is it upsetting to you if someone else calls a Bungie item "overpriced" instead of "expensive"?

I mean, they mean very different things. Expensive means "a lot of money". Overpriced means "priced more than it is worth".

A $4 popcorn is not expensive, but it is overpriced.

Yes, they do mean different things.

The question was whether or not the difference between them, directed at a third party (Bungie) is enough to *upset* a person on this board justifiably, such that it is considered a reasonable position to say, well, I wouldn't have replied if you'd said "expensive" instead of "overpriced" but now you've done it.

I didn't think there was anyone here (other than the people we know) doing PR for Bungie. I'm not sure why someone would feel obligated to act that way if they aren't, or why they should be trying to police criticism of Bungie or others to try and encourage the use of weaker, value neutral terms more acceptable to PR.

I bet PR doesn't mind so much when you call a product "expensive" because hey, you get what you pay for!

Overpriced, though? Them's fighting words, apparently.

locked

2796 views

Lets stop here and make this even more crystal.

Had you said, "I disagree with this. I would rather Bungie put their resources into in game items instead of expensive real world items", I would not be making this post right now.

YOU SAID: Instead of implementing a satisfying reward in-game, they put time, effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game.

... do you see the difference? Can you?

What are you objecting to here?

Satisfying?

Overpriced?

Is it upsetting to you if someone else calls a Bungie item "overpriced" instead of "expensive"?

[image]

All right. Now I need to check myself. I can answer this RIGHT NOW, but that would be foolish. Per intent, the whole of my post should already imply the answer, both direct and indirect for anyone reading along.

Does anyone else here see of what I speak, or have I simply babbled to myself?

locked

2922 views

Is it that I didn't slap a "I personally feel" qualifier on the front of it?

I feel it ought not be necessary to point out that all of my opinions are my opinion :s

locked

2818 views

Lets stop here and make this even more crystal.

Had you said, "I disagree with this. I would rather Bungie put their resources into in game items instead of expensive real world items", I would not be making this post right now.

YOU SAID: Instead of implementing a satisfying reward in-game, they put time, effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game.

... do you see the difference? Can you?

What are you objecting to here?

Satisfying?

Overpriced?

Is it upsetting to you if someone else calls a Bungie item "overpriced" instead of "expensive"?

Is it that I didn't slap a "I personally feel" qualifier on the front of it?

I feel it ought not be necessary to point out that all of my opinions are my opinion :s

One last loose end. I was going to wait 24, but eh. Let's just get this done and move on.

The difference, narcogen & someotherguy is emotional content, the theme of this entire bit. Words filled with emotion can imply unspoken words, and do so enough to change the meaning. That's been the theme of this whole thing. My example is purely the content of statement, sans any emotional baggage whatsoever (for the sake of contrasting effect). With my example, it is exactly that. I don't like this, and that is it. It's a statement, again, shown for contrasting effect. I'm not expecting anyone to purely talk like this all the time... beep boop. With the original quote, the "how dare they", has an obligatory tone which is wholly unearned. This brings about a negative connotation, one which Wu took... Offense? Shock?... called out. One which WU called out. Leading us down our merry way with choices made.

Having said all that, at this point this quote has been poked so much that words are starting to lose their bite. If you can't see any of what I've had to say it right now, well so be it. I did the best I could with what I have. No more use jabbering on about it. Seeing as this effort has come to a head, I'll stop of this here, 'less someone summon me back to this topic again. I never did get that thank you. :(

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

One more thing for Narc, the only thing I would be "upset" of (though I'd say I'm far more bewildered than upset) is that this post has had the responses it has had about the original topic. All this... pointed banter over a... overpriced dust collector that you could mount on a wall. If ya want to save the world, I don't think posting here is the way to go. Seems like wasted energy to me.

I mean shoot... I'm using this again.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ We silly.

Ok. I'mma going go virtually blow shit up with space magic now.

locked

2804 views

- No text -

locked

2777 views

Is it that I didn't slap a "I personally feel" qualifier on the front of it?

I feel it ought not be necessary to point out that all of my opinions are my opinion :s

On forums, it always helps to exaggerate that point. Honestly, it shouldn't be necessary but when people read text it's really easy to disassociate the person behind the text, at least for me. I think it's just a human thing. Just like it's really hard to tell the emotions people are feeling in text.

locked

2783 views

Are you okay?

No snark. Just an Internet Stranger checking up on you.

I was going to pick this apart line by line. But re-reading this, I have to ask if you're having some personal troubles or have some other history that's affecting your interpretation of this whole thing. This is a lot of time and effort you've put into dying on a hill that, as far as I'm concerned, doesn't exist.

Either that or our views are just so at-odds that there's no sense continuing this, because I feel like I'm going insane reading your posts. Again, not in a mean-spirited way. I hate myself enough to always try to assume I've done something wrong, but its not sticking here.

locked

2808 views

[image]

locked

2835 views

- No text -

locked

2793 views

Because I don’t get it. (:

locked

2819 views

- No text -

locked

2797 views

Because I don’t get it. (:

What if the real Death Stranding was all the friends we met along the way

locked

2800 views

I was going to pick this apart line by line. But re-reading this, I have to ask if you're having some personal troubles or have some other history that's affecting your interpretation of this whole thing. This is a lot of time and effort you've put into dying on a hill that, as far as I'm concerned, doesn't exist.

Nah man, he’s right. You seemed dumbfounded that Wu could interpret your words as though they implied something more. He’s trying to show you how easy it is to get that conclusion. Your phrasing and use of bold came off as though you expect everyone to buy into your exasperation. That style of rhetoric implies a lot of things about your position, whether you intended to imply them or not ( Communication is fun!). Then, when someone interpreted your words in a way you say you didn’t intend you act dumbfounded, as though Wu’s interpretation was completely irrational (it wasn’t).

INSANE may have an esoteric, odd, patronizing and sometimes harsh way of pointing it out, but his attempt to bring your tone to the surface was something i considered doing. Indeed, he came to a place where his own words made parsing intent difficult. All that said, I don’t normally care about tone and wouldn’t have thought about it after your first post. People say and imply things on accident all the time(communication is hard after all). It was your turnaround when you seemed outraged/flabbergasted/ etc at Wu for having the audacity to have read your post in such a manner. I saw the same thing he did. Your tone wasn’t, “let’s have a conversation about why Wu could have understood your post that way,” rather, it was about implying that his interpretation was so off base that you just couldn’t even. You may not see it, or intended it, but that is a rhetorical sleight of hand in which you take offense to something as though it were so audacious that the other person must have malicious intent in even saying the thing. People pick up on that.

No hard feelings by the way. I just thought you might want to know how you came across, and that it wasn’t just INSANE picking up on it.

locked

2832 views

This explanation made much more sense to me.

For what it's worth, I've decided that you all know my feelings by now so there's not much point in continuing to post it. I'm not going to change the world by expressing my dissatisfaction here on DBO, and it seems to cause more conflict than good.

Easier to keep schtum and laugh at non-Titans for their inferior jumps.

locked

2790 views

This explanation made much more sense to me.

Cheers and no worries!

For what it's worth, I've decided that you all know my feelings by now so there's not much point in continuing to post it. I'm not going to change the world by expressing my dissatisfaction here on DBO, and it seems to cause more conflict than good.

Don't worry about conflict over the game. That's fine, even encouraged. I just noticed that it changed towards inter-personal conflict which is less fun to be around.

Easier to keep schtum and laugh at non-Titans for their inferior jumps.

Not a titan, but at least I'm not a warlock!

locked

2780 views

Easier to keep schtum and laugh at non-Titans for their inferior jumps.

Not a titan, but at least I'm not a warlock!

I would also like to make a correcting response to the, as always, incorrect yet gentle snark on the best jump set in the game, that of the Warlock. Please do note that Warlocks are the only ones who don't NEED (like... seriously) an exotic to make their jumps actually any good. I don't need Lion Rampant, I do that naturally through Controlled Glide. Nor do I need an exotic to make my in air maneuverability actually good (with Twilight Garrison), as that is naturally what I can do with Icarus Dash. I don't need ST0MP-EE5 to jump far, as that happens already, aided even more with my super cabilitys. All said, there is one concession with default jump height, but frankly a high mobility solves 99.9% of instances where you would need to jump for height in the game. More often then not it is the horizontal distance of the jump that matters. The only time I need an exotic is if I want to transcend the capacity to jump. With the Worldline Zero Exotic Sword I don't jump - I fly. In other words, it's not the Warlock jump that sucks.

Get gud scrubz! ;P

locked

2836 views

But can you launch yourself across the map at suh breakneck speed tht you occasionally die from collision with objects?

I think not.

locked

2787 views

- No text -

locked

2806 views

But can you launch yourself across the map at suh breakneck speed tht you occasionally die from collision with objects?

I think not.

locked

2838 views

But can you launch yourself across the map at suh breakneck speed tht you occasionally die from collision with objects?

I think not.

Oof. Ya got me. x_x Bleh. :P

I rarely play Dawnblade unless I'm a Well-lock. I stand corrected. Thanks for the rebound there Wu. :)

locked

2805 views

Easier to keep schtum and laugh at non-Titans for their inferior jumps.

Have I said I like this guy?

locked

2770 views

Words r hard. Plus the bonus incite is always helpful in refining my verbiage. Thank you Robot Chickens. Patronizing? Hmm. Will need to reflect on that. Possibly an effect of fatigue. Hmm.

locked

2788 views

But yeah, I do get a little prickly when I feel like I have to constantly defend those opinions against strawmen and the assumption that I'm some frothing anti-corporate Socialist who's telling you how to spend your money.

Some of us get a little prickly when you suggest that anti-corporate Socialists are "frothing" instead of reasonable people who don't want to watch the world burn in the fireplaces of the rich, but hey man, go on, it looks like you're doing well here on both sides of the ball.

locked

2821 views

Please go back and re-read this.

That is not my opinion. I was expressing that it's how I believe INSANEdrive intended to portray me by using words like "crusade" and "foaming".

I am an anti-corporate socialist. I just have issues with the caricature that I see painted so regularly by DBO.

locked

2829 views

We should all probably all go back and re-read this.

locked

2811 views

Please go back and re-read this.

That is not my opinion. I was expressing that it's how I believe INSANEdrive intended to portray me by using words like "crusade" and "foaming".

I am an anti-corporate socialist. I just have issues with the caricature that I see painted so regularly by DBO.

Carry on then :)

locked

2839 views

"Congratulations, you did great guys! And as a special reward, your prize is the opportunity to pay over the odds for something from our store!"

How does that not concern you?

Lucky us Bungie is so benevolent eh? I bet they hate letting people purchase products from them.

Because that was one heck of a dodge. :p

I too am interested in why offering the purchase of a physical reward after completing an in-game challenge is concerning to you.

For my part, I enjoyed buying the Moment of Triumph and The Last Word shirts over the years. I truly don’t understand your perspective.

And you answering a question with a snarky quote followed by your own question isn’t doing much to shed light on your concerns. :(

locked

2866 views

Pricing notwithstanding, I feel that by making it a "reward" for doing somehing in-game, rather than something you can just purchase straight-up, Bungie are adding additional false "value" and "rarity" to the item.

Just more marketting tactics I disagree with. Not all of you feel the same way. C'est la vie.

Honestly I didn't think it would blow up so hard. These are my personal reasons for having concerns. That's all.

I was mostly just flabbergasted by Claude's reaction to be honest.

locked

2838 views

- No text -

locked

2795 views

But not necessarily a constructive trait

locked

2829 views

Pricing notwithstanding, I feel that by making it a "reward" for doing somehing in-game, rather than something you can just purchase straight-up, Bungie are adding additional false "value" and "rarity" to the item.

Just more marketting tactics I disagree with. Not all of you feel the same way. C'est la vie.

I think the idea of false "value" and "rarity" is where I disagree. Based on previous posts, I think I'm right in saying your point is based on the idea that the limited availability is contrived, and not based on real-world scarcity, but by that measure much of the economy based on collectables shouldn't exist. But that economy is based on human nature--even when people have access to the same mass-produced goods, they still naturally desire what is rare or unique, regardless of how it got to be that way.

And that brings us to this idea: Bungie shouldn't appeal to that desire (to paraphrase of a reddit poster). I've been thinking about last week's discussion a lot, and part of my visceral reaction was a) I dislike trendy acronyms like FOMO, and b) I thought the reddit poster was inane, and pretentious at the same time. He (I assume) had the tone of a freshly taught 18-year-old, home on holiday break after his first semester of college, explaining to his ignorant family how repressed they were--all because he'd read a few pages about Freud in his Psych 101 textbook. I found his a simplistic, reductive take--essentially a conspiracy theory. (I actually think Freud was simplistic and reductive, but I digress.) As others have pointed out, there are innocent explanations for Bungie's actions--I include here the need to make money--a game like Destiny isn't cheap to create or maintain. That aside, I think know what the real concern is: greed.

And that brings us to this exchange:

Some of us get a little prickly when you suggest that anti-corporate Socialists are "frothing" instead of reasonable people who don't want to watch the world burn in the fireplaces of the rich, but hey man, go on, it looks like you're doing well here on both sides of the ball.

I am an anti-corporate socialist. I just have issues with the caricature that I see painted so regularly by DBO.

Okay. Sigh. There's a reason I named this post what I did. It's nearly impossible not to cross a line to address this. Before a frowning, capotain-wearing hall-monitor type tells me "I should know better," I'm saying now: yes, I know better, but people seem to be speaking their conscience, and I feel compelled to speak mine. I apologize in advance.

One more caveat before I dig in: you and narc are two of the coolest people I've met and played video games with, and I mean nothing personal by what I'm about to confess: I'm still not used to how blithely people claim that they are socialists. In this country it's become more common in the last decade among younger people and some ancient politicians, but some of us get a little prickly because to our ears it's akin to claiming you're a Nazi. I know, I know--you don't mean soviet-style socialism, and I get that, too, to a point. I'm not going to assume you're like the freshman in my previous analogy, who knows something but not enough, but for a lot of people my age, the word "socialism" points to an ideology that Solzhenitsyn pretty definitively identified as evil.

Here are my cards on the table: I'm a capitalist, but not without some serious reservations. Because humans participate in capitalism and socialism, both can be corrupted by cronyism and greed, as history has plainly shown. That said, I think liberal democratic capitalism is undeniably responsible for a 30-fold increase in living standards over the last 200 years. It's done so well at solving our problems that many of us now have the luxury to spend a significant portion of our lives in a virtual world solving virtual problems. I'd also say that Bungie the company or their games as we know them would not have been created under a socialist regime (at least the word as it was commonly understood until recently).

I am NOT saying that everything is just peachy now. I also share some of the concerns that narc and Cody express regarding where the gaming industry is going. I want the strong narrative game that Cody wants (fortunately, we still have Naughty Dog and others). I've heard disturbing things around Destiny's origin that point in the direction of it being simply a money machine, which is what I think narc fears. For me, anyway, where they have crossed a line (by selling chances to get cosmetics or treading close to pay-to-win), they've settled in a place that's not over my line. And the game has improved in other ways. The narrative is stronger. Their living world ambition seems closer to being realized. They've really created something amazing with Destiny, and it seems to be working better than ever. I don't underestimate how hard it's been to pull off. I know that to build something like this takes a lot of talented people who, in the competitive big business that is gaming in 2019, could get jobs elsewhere (and probably make more money). I don't care if Jason owns an exotic car or three. That man, regardless of whatever flaws he surely has, created something that has added a lot of joy to the world. I want Bungie to thrive, and this means not just keeping the lights on, but perhaps accumulating a decent amount of filthy lucre. I know it's popular to demonize the rich (and some deserve it), but most of the rich didn't start with money, and sacrificed a lot to get their wealth. I don't begrudge Bungie success. I have't felt taken advantage of.

I can't help but think that as a "anti-corporate socialist" (whatever those words mean to you) that that outlook in some way informs your opinion on Bungie's efforts to make money. By the same token, my philosophical beliefs lean more toward allowing people the freedom to make bad choices, including being whales. We can agree to disagree on that. Here's what I see: games and gamer expectations have become so outsized that the $60 model doesn't cut it anymore. That has led to some trends i don't like. On the other hand, I don't believe in top-down command-and-control approaches to economies; I believe capitalism provides a better environment for innovations that surprise us, that there will be breakout hits no one sees coming, and the business models will work themselves out, too. I think Bungie is threading a needle, trying to do something original and competitive in an environment that is evolving, and so far their business model hasn't offended me, especially since I think the core of their content is getting better (or at least has remained fun). I still imagine the article written on the 20th anniversary of Destiny, recapping it's history, its innovations, and how its initial weakness proved to be its greatest strength, how its rich lore ultimately transformed into an amazing narrative--a story no Vex simulation could have predicted.

locked

2877 views

- No text -

locked

2792 views

- No text -

locked

2798 views

I've heard disturbing things around Destiny's origin that point in the direction of it being simply a money machine, which is what I think narc fears.

Can you elaborate on this specifically? Or point me to the source. Not entirely sure what you mean.

locked

2817 views

I've heard disturbing things around Destiny's origin that point in the direction of it being simply a money machine, which is what I think narc fears.

Can you elaborate on this specifically? Or point me to the source. Not entirely sure what you mean.

Sorry. It would just be repeating gossip, even if I trusted my faulty memory to repeat anything accurately.

Speaking of faulty, I left out a very important word above:

“I'd also say that Bungie the company or their games as we know them would NOT have been created under a socialist regime.”

locked

2828 views

Sorry. It would just be repeating gossip, even if I trusted my faulty memory to repeat anything accurately.

Leave it to me to verify it. It doesn't get repeated unless I can confirm it.

locked

2795 views

Sorry. It would just be repeating gossip, even if I trusted my faulty memory to repeat anything accurately.

Leave it to me to verify it. It doesn't get repeated unless I can confirm it.

Dammit, Cody. No. Not only can I not remember a quote or who I said it, it would be irresponsible for me to repeat it if I did. It would lack context, and I promise you it would be no smoking gun or bombshell. I wasn't trying to be vague. I heard there was excitement about the WoW model from some in the studio. There. Is that a shocker to anyone?

And lest anyone think i'm a monster, I do think casino-style implementations are a problem in the industry. So is the way many mobile games are monetized. I just do not think microtransactions in general or the physical trophies that Bungie sells are a problem.

locked

2801 views

I heard there was excitement about the WoW model from some in the studio. There. Is that a shocker to anyone?

I don't think that sounds very bad… even though WoW is a bad game I understand why people like it. I honestly believe that in terms of game design Destiny is starting to suffer because the people designing it simply have bad taste. It's not bad faith.

But the investment system and eververse ARE.

locked

2805 views

I heard there was excitement about the WoW model from some in the studio. There. Is that a shocker to anyone?

I don't think that sounds very bad… even though WoW is a bad game I understand why people like it. I honestly believe that in terms of game design Destiny is starting to suffer because the people designing it simply have bad taste. It's not bad faith.

I don't know, man. I like where Destiny is. And I play the game (some).

But the investment system and eververse ARE.

I respect that opinion, but it's not mine.

locked

2799 views

Sorry. It would just be repeating gossip, even if I trusted my faulty memory to repeat anything accurately.

Leave it to me to verify it. It doesn't get repeated unless I can confirm it.

Dammit, Cody. No. Not only can I not remember a quote or who I said it, it would be irresponsible for me to repeat it if I did. It would lack context, and I promise you it would be no smoking gun or bombshell. I wasn't trying to be vague. I heard there was excitement about the WoW model from some in the studio. There. Is that a shocker to anyone?

And lest anyone think i'm a monster, I do think casino-style implementations are a problem in the industry. So is the way many mobile games are monetized. I just do not think microtransactions in general or the physical trophies that Bungie sells are a problem.

Eververse engrams are loot boxes.

Loot boxes are casino mechanics.

There's simply no air between these. The only hook to hang a hat on here is that Bungie's loot boxes that are purchased for real money are, so far, limited to cosmetic items.

I think it's an open question whether they're to be praised for maintaining that firewall lest they decide it's not worth it, or to suggest that this is a fragile thing and bound one day to end, and they should be argued back from the brink before that happens.

locked

2820 views

Sorry. It would just be repeating gossip, even if I trusted my faulty memory to repeat anything accurately.

Leave it to me to verify it. It doesn't get repeated unless I can confirm it.

Dammit, Cody. No. Not only can I not remember a quote or who I said it, it would be irresponsible for me to repeat it if I did. It would lack context, and I promise you it would be no smoking gun or bombshell. I wasn't trying to be vague. I heard there was excitement about the WoW model from some in the studio. There. Is that a shocker to anyone?

And lest anyone think i'm a monster, I do think casino-style implementations are a problem in the industry. So is the way many mobile games are monetized. I just do not think microtransactions in general or the physical trophies that Bungie sells are a problem.

Eververse engrams are loot boxes.

Loot boxes are casino mechanics.

There's simply no air between these. The only hook to hang a hat on here is that Bungie's loot boxes that are purchased for real money are, so far, limited to cosmetic items.

I think it's an open question whether they're to be praised for maintaining that firewall lest they decide it's not worth it, or to suggest that this is a fragile thing and bound one day to end, and they should be argued back from the brink before that happens.

Maybe I just don't look anymore, but I know there are Eververse engrams that you get by gaining experience, but can you still buy them? I thought the only thing you can buy now is specific items. Again, I might be naive on this because I rarely buy things and when I have it was for a specific item and not engrams.

I remember that you use to be able to buy engrams, but I thought they changed that? Or did they just hide it in the back of the store?

locked

2821 views

You can purchase nostalgic engrams.

locked

2794 views

Sorry. It would just be repeating gossip, even if I trusted my faulty memory to repeat anything accurately.

Leave it to me to verify it. It doesn't get repeated unless I can confirm it.

Dammit, Cody. No. Not only can I not remember a quote or who I said it, it would be irresponsible for me to repeat it if I did. It would lack context, and I promise you it would be no smoking gun or bombshell. I wasn't trying to be vague. I heard there was excitement about the WoW model from some in the studio. There. Is that a shocker to anyone?

And lest anyone think i'm a monster, I do think casino-style implementations are a problem in the industry. So is the way many mobile games are monetized. I just do not think microtransactions in general or the physical trophies that Bungie sells are a problem.

Eververse engrams are loot boxes.

Loot boxes are casino mechanics.

There's simply no air between these. The only hook to hang a hat on here is that Bungie's loot boxes that are purchased for real money are, so far, limited to cosmetic items.

I think it's an open question whether they're to be praised for maintaining that firewall lest they decide it's not worth it, or to suggest that this is a fragile thing and bound one day to end, and they should be argued back from the brink before that happens.

Maybe I just don't look anymore, but I know there are Eververse engrams that you get by gaining experience, but can you still buy them? I thought the only thing you can buy now is specific items. Again, I might be naive on this because I rarely buy things and when I have it was for a specific item and not engrams.

I remember that you use to be able to buy engrams, but I thought they changed that? Or did they just hide it in the back of the store?

Yes (as Cheapley said), you can buy engrams. They're one item out of dozens, though, and they're pretty cheap. Almost everything you can buy is no longer casino-mechanic-driven.

And my guess is, if they got rid of them altogether, some people would complain. :)

locked

2811 views

But I thought they were on the "featured" tab. Bottom right corner?

I also don't know how much (or how regularly) that tab changes mind you.

locked

2800 views

But I thought they were on the "featured" tab. Bottom right corner?

I also don't know how much (or how regularly) that tab changes mind you.

You're not misremembering. They're in the bottom right corner of the featured tab. I used the terminology I used because I was parroting what the question used. They're not totally hidden.

This doesn't change the fact that they're 1) the cheapest thing in the store, and 2) the ONLY thing that is random in the store. I don't think you can honestly make the argument that Eververse is run on casino mechanics because of them.

locked

2768 views

But I thought they were on the "featured" tab. Bottom right corner?

I also don't know how much (or how regularly) that tab changes mind you.

You're not misremembering. They're in the bottom right corner of the featured tab. I used the terminology I used because I was parroting what the question used. They're not totally hidden.

This doesn't change the fact that they're 1) the cheapest thing in the store, and 2) the ONLY thing that is random in the store. I don't think you can honestly make the argument that Eververse is run on casino mechanics because of them.

The products that Eververse sells that employ casino mechanics run on casino mechanics.

If Bungie doesn't want to be tarred by accusations that their in-game store deploys casino mechanics, they could decide not to sell any in-game items that deploy casino mechanics. And if it's so few of them and they cost so little, what's the reason not to?

And this way they could later say they decided to do it of their own accord before legislation forces them to either go all in on gambling because a law says their game is gambling if it has, you know, ANY amount of gambling in it, or to eliminate all the gambling instead of just most of the gambling.

locked

2799 views

Here are my cards on the table: I'm a capitalist, but not without some serious reservations. Because humans participate in capitalism and socialism, both can be corrupted by cronyism and greed, as history has plainly shown. That said, I think liberal democratic capitalism is undeniably responsible for a 30-fold increase in living standards over the last 200 years.

There's no denying that. But what's the cost? We have simply exported our atrocities and environmental destruction in service of the almighty dollar.

I am not anti-capitalist, necessarily. I'm very anti-whatever our current form of bullshit is, though. We can do better than a world in which thousands of people are dying every single day because bloodsucking middlemen in the form of private health insurance companies exist. We can do better than allowing massive corporations to avoid taxes and letting billionaires form policy through what amounts to legal bribery.

Greed and corruption are rampant in both socialists and capitalists systems. We need a mixing of the two. We need far more regulation for massive companies wreaking havoc on the world to produce a bunch of useless bullshit that ultimately ends up in the garbage. And we need better social safety nets.

This has strayed pretty far from the origin of this thread. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think Bungie is really the problem. I don't like a lot of stuff about the Eververse, as we discussed last week. I don't have a problem with their physical store. I am a little flabbergasted that they decided it was worth producing a $160 piece of foam, just because I think it's ridiculously stupid, but, whatever, I'm not going to buy it and I'm not going to waste time caring if someone else wants to buy one.

I do just want to call out the confusion at the younger generation embracing socialism, though. How could they not? Look around at what's happening in this country. Wages are as low as they've ever been while companies post record profits year after year and just generally wreak havoc to do it. We can do so much better than we are, and if that means embracing some socialist policies, I'll board that fucking train.

locked

2792 views

Here are my cards on the table: I'm a capitalist, but not without some serious reservations. Because humans participate in capitalism and socialism, both can be corrupted by cronyism and greed, as history has plainly shown. That said, I think liberal democratic capitalism is undeniably responsible for a 30-fold increase in living standards over the last 200 years.

There's no denying that. But what's the cost? We have simply exported our atrocities and environmental destruction in service of the almighty dollar.

I am not anti-capitalist, necessarily. I'm very anti-whatever our current form of bullshit is, though. We can do better than a world in which thousands of people are dying every single day because bloodsucking middlemen in the form of private health insurance companies exist. We can do better than allowing massive corporations to avoid taxes and letting billionaires form policy through what amounts to legal bribery.

Greed and corruption are rampant in both socialists and capitalists systems. We need a mixing of the two. We need far more regulation for massive companies wreaking havoc on the world to produce a bunch of useless bullshit that ultimately ends up in the garbage. And we need better social safety nets.

This has strayed pretty far from the origin of this thread. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think Bungie is really the problem. I don't like a lot of stuff about the Eververse, as we discussed last week. I don't have a problem with their physical store. I am a little flabbergasted that they decided it was worth producing a $160 piece of foam, just because I think it's ridiculously stupid, but, whatever, I'm not going to buy it and I'm not going to waste time caring if someone else wants to buy one.

I do just want to call out the confusion at the younger generation embracing socialism, though. How could they not? Look around at what's happening in this country. Wages are as low as they've ever been while companies post record profits year after year and just generally wreak havoc to do it. We can do so much better than we are, and if that means embracing some socialist policies, I'll board that fucking train.

The problem I have with some of your line of thought here is that it seems to presume (please correct me if I’m wrong) that changing the system will reduce corruption/greed. I don’t think that’s true. I think as long as human beings are behaving in the world, there will be corruption and greed. That’s why I have so little time for the typical “capitalism is bad because GREED” arguments... it’s utterly ignorant. It looks to me like the only answer to greed and corruption is the good will and hard work of other people, and a system that allows those elements to flourish stands the best chance.

It’s not that I think capitalism is the ultimate end-solution or anything like that, but it is so clearly, far and away the best system we’ve come up with, and that’s a BIG DEAL. It’s taken us hundreds of thousands of years to reach this point, and life on earth for most human beings was utterly miserable, short, and filled with suffering. The fact that we’ve clawed our way up out of that is miraculous. And the system and way of life that has allowed that is so complicated, that it’s dangerous to mess with it in any extreme way. We don’t fully understand it. A slight little tweak, and it all could go off the rails. That’s why, despite the fact that I’m generally a left-leaning guy, I get very conservative when it comes to suggestions of messing with what we have. Human beings are terrible at predicting the results of our actions, especially when it comes to something as monstrously complex as western civilization. The chances that any grand, sweeping changes will make things worse instead of better is almost 100%.

Now, on the environmental side, there are some serious concerns there, and we need to deal with them. But we also need perspective. We didn’t even know that our industries were effecting the environment in any real way until ~40-60 years ago. That’s nothing. And yet, in that time, there are some areas in which we’ve made huge progress. There are more trees in the northern hemisphere today than there were 70 years ago (but nobody knows that, because the media only reports the bad news). There is also the widespread general trend that has been well documented by UN environmental researchers that as people around the world get lifted into better living conditions, their local environments start to clean up. Turns out when people aren’t starving to death and live in relative safety, they begin to care about their local environment and work to clean it up. (On a related note, this trend correlates perfectly with the spread of free market capitalism in under-developed nations).

This is where the environmental discussion gets real tricky. When I listen to experts who study the environment and it’s effects on us, and I listen to what they recommend, it doesn’t line up at all with what I hear from “environmental activists”. The activists seem to ignore the proposed solutions from experts, and instead focus on anything vaguely anti-capitalist. You don’t have to dig very deep to discover how many of the environmental activists are self-proclaimed socialists or even full-blown communists. So it’s not surprising that they’re using the environment as a guise to attack capitalism. The problem is they’ve hijacked the entire discussion, so ACTUAL solutions are being ignored.

The most comprehensive and well-rounded research that I’ve found attacks the whole issue from a very different angle. They point out that higher standards of living lead to more concern about the environment from the wider population. They also point out that human beings themselves, when thriving, are the best problem-solving mechanism we know of. We’ve seen it before. Diseases, mass starvation... they were the “environmental crisis” of 40 or 100 years ago. And we solved them by raising standards of living and producing more geniuses (turns out the two are actually related), and those geniuses went to work and created solutions. New developments in battery technology, or the creation of cleaner power sources can and will do wonders for our efforts to clean up the environment. But nothing like that is going to happen if we start dismantling our economic prosperity. If we go by the experts, then proposals like the Green New Deal are just about the worst things we could do to clean up the environment. But again, if anyone believes for a second that the Green New Deal is actually about the environment, they’re not paying attention.

All this to say, the struggle to correct the harm we’re doing to the environment is a) very important, and b) not going to be solved by dismantling democratic capitalism, which is actually the only system we have that produces anything resembling a solution. That is, unless a drastic increase in human suffering is considered an “ok solution”.

locked

2799 views

The problem I have with some of your line of thought here is that it seems to presume (please correct me if I’m wrong) that changing the system will reduce corruption/greed. I don’t think that’s true. I think as long as human beings are behaving in the world, there will be corruption and greed. That’s why I have so little time for the typical “capitalism is bad because GREED” arguments...

Capitalism is GOOD because of greed. It funnels this human emotion into production, innovation, and wealth. It turns greed into a positive. You want more money? Make a better thing!

Then you simply regulate as necessary to prevent the negative consequences of such greed, like monopolies, worker exploitation, environmental destructions, etc.

Everyone looks at the negative aspects of capitalism without realizing the simple fact you can design the system to prevent those things through regulation and law. Just because the system has some bad aspects doesn't mean you should totally trash it.

Just… fix those bad aspects. Crazy right?!

locked

2792 views

Just… fix those bad aspects. Crazy right?!

That’s what I mean by regulation. One side of our political spectrum is seemingly on a quest to get as rich as possible at all costs and fuck everything else.

I don’t want pure socialism. I want what a bunch of idiots clutch their pearls over and label socialism to fear-monger their idiot base into voting for stupid policies that only make the rich richer at any cost.

Medicare for all, abolishing the ridiculousness that has become predatory student loans, much stronger unions in nearly every industry, much higher taxes on the extremely wealthy to provide services to the people the rich constantly exploit.

Capitalism is great, the crony capitalism that is current rampant in this country is not.

locked

2808 views

Just… fix those bad aspects. Crazy right?!

That’s what I mean by regulation. One side of our political spectrum is seemingly on a quest to get as rich as possible at all costs and fuck everything else.

It's so strange that in the system that said it was good for people to want to be as rich as possible, and then praised the people who did that, then used their money to seize political power to make sure you could not regulate their ability to continue to increase their wealth.

Cody's suggestion about regulation is about 30-40 years too late. It's a centrist argument from the pre-Nixon, pre-Reagan era, that assumes there's still enough shared assumptions and values between stakeholders to forge an agreement about what the rules of the game are supposed to be, when there's a "side" that has basically said there is no acceptable rule or oversight ever for a long, long time.

I don’t want pure socialism. I want what a bunch of idiots clutch their pearls over and label socialism to fear-monger their idiot
base into voting for stupid policies that only make the rich richer at any cost.

Very much this.

Although again the "I don't want socialism but" is a reaction to exactly the sort of pearl-clutching that's been going on for 40 years. It's a necessary prelude that gets in the way of any honest discussion, much like "well I'm not a feminist BUT... how about equal rights for women?" People are required to carve out what they think are the elements of a position that everyone agrees are beyond the pale before having a discussion, and we ought to stop doing it.

Medicare for all, abolishing the ridiculousness that has become predatory student loans, much stronger unions in nearly every industry, much higher taxes on the extremely wealthy to provide services to the people the rich constantly exploit.

Capitalism is great, the crony capitalism that is current rampant in this country is not.

Just want to mention something here.

When most people say "capitalism" what they really mean is a regulated free market. That can and is a component to capitalism, but it's not what capitalism is.

Capitalism is about the primacy of, well.. capital. It says that in the process that involves having an idea, making a product, getthing that product to market, and consuming that product, the single most essential element is capital. Capital gets paid first. Capital gets paid most. Capital gets paid forever.

In return for taking on the initial risk-- putting up the money before people know a product is viable-- capital gets to rent seek into eternity. Because venture and equity capital takes on the task commercial banking was supposed to do, because banking decided to focus first on speculation and then on fees. And the legal framework puts almost no limits on the kind of agreement capital can strike in those initial situations-- and in public markets, which were supposed to be the end-game for shares of big successful companies, where the entire populace can invest and participate, we've witnessed the clawing back of control into the hands of private equity, who consolidate or dismantle entities for short term profit, leading to less transparency and less competition. You know, the things that people really mean when they say "capitalism".

Capital overstates its initial risk as a matter of course and overpays itself, then uses the fruits of that overpayment to lobby into existence legislation that protects their right to continue to be paid first, most, and forever. That's what capitalism currently is.

We are absolutely experiencing the worst sort of "crony capitalism" currently, as classically understood by that term, but that should not distract us from the fundamental structural changes that probably need to be made if we care about the quality of life of the average citizen.

locked

2781 views

Cody's suggestion about regulation is about 30-40 years too late. It's a centrist argument from the pre-Nixon, pre-Reagan era, that assumes there's still enough shared assumptions and values between stakeholders to forge an agreement about what the rules of the game are supposed to be, when there's a "side" that has basically said there is no acceptable rule or oversight ever for a long, long time.

Oh that’s weird. Because when Warren proposes the kind of regulation I am talking about, nobody calls that position centrist.

locked

2797 views

The goalposts have been moved so often that almost anyone calls almost anything whatever they think will get the most people to agree/disagree with it.

locked

2780 views

Here are my cards on the table: I'm a capitalist, but not without some serious reservations. Because humans participate in capitalism and socialism, both can be corrupted by cronyism and greed, as history has plainly shown. That said, I think liberal democratic capitalism is undeniably responsible for a 30-fold increase in living standards over the last 200 years.

There's no denying that. But what's the cost? We have simply exported our atrocities and environmental destruction in service of the almighty dollar.

I am not anti-capitalist, necessarily. I'm very anti-whatever our current form of bullshit is, though. We can do better than a world in which thousands of people are dying every single day because bloodsucking middlemen in the form of private health insurance companies exist. We can do better than allowing massive corporations to avoid taxes and letting billionaires form policy through what amounts to legal bribery.

Greed and corruption are rampant in both socialists and capitalists systems. We need a mixing of the two. We need far more regulation for massive companies wreaking havoc on the world to produce a bunch of useless bullshit that ultimately ends up in the garbage. And we need better social safety nets.

This has strayed pretty far from the origin of this thread. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think Bungie is really the problem. I don't like a lot of stuff about the Eververse, as we discussed last week. I don't have a problem with their physical store. I am a little flabbergasted that they decided it was worth producing a $160 piece of foam, just because I think it's ridiculously stupid, but, whatever, I'm not going to buy it and I'm not going to waste time caring if someone else wants to buy one.

I do just want to call out the confusion at the younger generation embracing socialism, though. How could they not? Look around at what's happening in this country. Wages are as low as they've ever been while companies post record profits year after year and just generally wreak havoc to do it. We can do so much better than we are, and if that means embracing some socialist policies, I'll board that fucking train.

The problem I have with some of your line of thought here is that it seems to presume (please correct me if I’m wrong) that changing the system will reduce corruption/greed. I don’t think that’s true. I think as long as human beings are behaving in the world, there will be corruption and greed. That’s why I have so little time for the typical “capitalism is bad because GREED” arguments... it’s utterly ignorant. It looks to me like the only answer to greed and corruption is the good will and hard work of other people, and a system that allows those elements to flourish stands the best chance.

Ok to encourage people to have good will and be able to work hard I'd like to:

provide them free health care, so they can get back to working hard
provide accessible transportation for free so they can get to their job easier
free childcare so both parents can work while having free time to spend with their kid

My main thing is that in some cases Capitalism doesn't provide the most efficient system to for certain solutions. When we look at Health Care Expenditure per capita of a largely private system like the US vs a more socialistic one like Norway, Germany, or UK it looks drastically inefficient.

It’s not that I think capitalism is the ultimate end-solution or anything like that, but it is so clearly, far and away the best system we’ve come up with, and that’s a BIG DEAL. It’s taken us hundreds of thousands of years to reach this point, and life on earth for most human beings was utterly miserable, short, and filled with suffering. The fact that we’ve clawed our way up out of that is miraculous. And the system and way of life that has allowed that is so complicated, that it’s dangerous to mess with it in any extreme way. We don’t fully understand it. A slight little tweak, and it all could go off the rails. That’s why, despite the fact that I’m generally a left-leaning guy, I get very conservative when it comes to suggestions of messing with what we have. Human beings are terrible at predicting the results of our actions, especially when it comes to something as monstrously complex as western civilization. The chances that any grand, sweeping changes will make things worse instead of better is almost 100%.

Attributing all of human progress to capitalism is incredibly reductive.

Now, on the environmental side, there are some serious concerns there, and we need to deal with them. But we also need perspective. We didn’t even know that our industries were effecting the environment in any real way until ~40-60 years ago. That’s nothing. And yet, in that time, there are some areas in which we’ve made huge progress. There are more trees in the northern hemisphere today than there were 70 years ago (but nobody knows that, because the media only reports the bad news). There is also the widespread general trend that has been well documented by UN environmental researchers that as people around the world get lifted into better living conditions, their local environments start to clean up. Turns out when people aren’t starving to death and live in relative safety, they begin to care about their local environment and work to clean it up. (On a related note, this trend correlates perfectly with the spread of free market capitalism in under-developed nations).

You the phrase "correlates perfectly" incredibly casually.

This is where the environmental discussion gets real tricky. When I listen to experts who study the environment and it’s effects on us, and I listen to what they recommend, it doesn’t line up at all with what I hear from “environmental activists”. The activists seem to ignore the proposed solutions from experts, and instead focus on anything vaguely anti-capitalist. You don’t have to dig very deep to discover how many of the environmental activists are self-proclaimed socialists or even full-blown communists. So it’s not surprising that they’re using the environment as a guise to attack capitalism. The problem is they’ve hijacked the entire discussion, so ACTUAL solutions are being ignored.

The most comprehensive and well-rounded research that I’ve found attacks the whole issue from a very different angle. They point out that higher standards of living lead to more concern about the environment from the wider population. They also point out that human beings themselves, when thriving, are the best problem-solving mechanism we know of. We’ve seen it before. Diseases, mass starvation... they were the “environmental crisis” of 40 or 100 years ago. And we solved them by raising standards of living and producing more geniuses (turns out the two are actually related), and those geniuses went to work and created solutions. New developments in battery technology, or the creation of cleaner power sources can and will do wonders for our efforts to clean up the environment. But nothing like that is going to happen if we start dismantling our economic prosperity. If we go by the experts, then proposals like the Green New Deal are just about the worst things we could do to clean up the environment. But again, if anyone believes for a second that the Green New Deal is actually about the environment, they’re not paying attention.

Whoa wait, we'd be dismantling our economic prosperity? At no point have you demonstrated how things like the Green New Deal would dismantle our economic prosperity and produce fewer "geniuses". Do you think that programs like the Green New Deal and other socialist programs wouldn't raise the standard of living?

Find me a list of countries rated by Standard Of Living where the more capitalistic US is doing better than countries with more socialist policies (like Norway, Finland, Denmark, the UK, whatever) and we can then discuss how best to raise the standard of living...

All this to say, the struggle to correct the harm we’re doing to the environment is a) very important, and b) not going to be solved by dismantling democratic capitalism, which is actually the only system we have that produces anything resembling a solution. That is, unless a drastic increase in human suffering is considered an “ok solution”.

Your post does a good job of demonstrating how democratic socialist policies that improve the standard of living while addressing the environmental crisis directly would do a dang good job.

locked

2841 views

I'm just curious what "drastic action" you think the world needs to take to address this.

Because you seem real reluctant to upset the status quo...

locked

2818 views

Attributing all of human progress to capitalism is incredibly reductive.

But it isn't… Capitalism allows for economies of scale, without which many of the things that allow for today's standard of living would not be available to you.

Find me a list of countries rated by Standard Of Living where the more capitalistic US is doing better than countries with more socialist policies (like Norway, Finland, Denmark, the UK, whatever) and we can then discuss how best to raise the standard of living...

Oh look at that. Europe has the highest suicide rate by region. 50% higher than the Americas. Yes, because when your standard of living is high you totally want to kill yourself. Makes total sense to me.

locked

2849 views

Its not even clear to me what point you're making here, but it looks awfully scarecrow-y

locked

2799 views

Its not even clear to me what point you're making here, but it looks awfully scarecrow-y

A quick look at the page he linked shows only two western European countries that are higher on the list than the US: Finland (pretty much the same rate as the US) and Belgium (15% higher than the US).

So even if it's NOT scarecrow-y (I think you're completely right, btw), his point is silly.

locked

2812 views

Its not even clear to me what point you're making here, but it looks awfully scarecrow-y

A quick look at the page he linked shows only two western European countries that are higher on the list than the US: Finland (pretty much the same rate as the US) and Belgium (15% higher than the US).

So even if it's NOT scarecrow-y (I think you're completely right, btw), his point is silly.

I'm just floored by the stretch he made...

locked

2796 views

Its not even clear to me what point you're making here, but it looks awfully scarecrow-y

A quick look at the page he linked shows only two western European countries that are higher on the list than the US: Finland (pretty much the same rate as the US) and Belgium (15% higher than the US).

So even if it's NOT scarecrow-y (I think you're completely right, btw), his point is silly.

Hey I gotta liven up the thread somehow :-p

locked

2834 views

Cody might have made a flawed inference, and therefore a weak argument, but he didn't invent an obviously dumb argument in support of kidtsunami's point, then say it was kidtsunami's argument as a way to discredit him. THAT is a straw man argument.

locked

2799 views

He made an obviously dumb argument against kidtsunami's point and used it as "evidence" against kid's argument, moving the discussion away from kid's actual point.

Which fallacy is that?

locked

2784 views

- No text -

locked

2822 views

- No text -

locked

2767 views

kidtsunami, I think Cody was trying to be funny, but he was also pointing out that statistics show all kinds of things and obscure things, too. Cheapley argued the same when he took issue with my original stat about progress under capitalism. In that case, though, I wasn’t talking about relatively modest differences between modern developed countries. We wouldn’t have this debate 200 years ago because I’d be dead and many reading this would be, too. My opinion is that capitalism has been worth the cost.

EDIT: I wrote what I thought was going to be a brief reply about other stuff you brought up, but it turned out rather lengthy, and I think this thread has flirted with the ban hammer long enough. I don't want DBO to devolve into yet another place ruined by endless political squabbling. I'll email it to you. If anyone else wants to read it, email me and I'll send it. I don't mind discussing this further among friends--I just don't think this is the appropriate place.

locked

2835 views

- No text -

locked

2750 views

I'd also say that Bungie the company or their games as we know them would not have been created under a socialist regime (at least the word as it was commonly understood until recently).

I'm not sure their games would be made under any regime. Just to clarify, regime is shorthand for an authoritarian government, right? If you're thinking that you're fighting against pro authoritarian socialists, that... is just wrong.

locked

2798 views

Instead of implementing a satisfying reward in-game, they put time, effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game.

Except that the people hired to do stuff like design real toys you can buy in the store are NOT the same people hired to build in-game rewards.

It's not the people, it's the money. The money comes from the same place. They took the money people gave them for the Destiny digital gaming product and put it towards making merch that some people won't ever get a chance to buy (raid jackets) or merch that some people who buy the $60 game can't or won't justify (foam swords).

It's possible for a company to migrate from one product category to another if markets incentivize it.

Silent Hill is now a pinball machine.

locked

2872 views

- No text -

locked

2801 views

Are you also angry that they sell t-shirts? Or that they did the Halo graphic novel back in the day? The grimoire book?

Edit: Those are genuine questions, not snark. I don’t know where you draw the line. Selling an overpriced sword seems silly, but I don’t understand it’s fundamentally different from selling a t-shirt or a lore book.

locked

2835 views

Are you also angry that they sell t-shirts? Or that they did the Halo graphic novel back in the day? The grimoire book?

Edit: Those are genuine questions, not snark. I don’t know where you draw the line. Selling an overpriced sword seems silly, but I don’t understand it’s fundamentally different from selling a t-shirt or a lore book.

These things exist on a continuum.

I'd argue that while t-shirts and lore books are ancillary, they are less so than the props, the expensive jackets, and pinball or pachinko machines.

I'd argue that it's not merely the shift into branded merch that's concerning by itself, but the shift upwards in price, combined with the increased amount of merch, combined with the increasing emphasis on in-game purchases.

For instance, I've bought t-shirts and hats. Several of them. It started with just a hat that says "Bungie" on it so people would know I liked Bungie.

Now there are seasonal t-shirts-- simple shirts that cost more than the more attractive, and more durable hat that I still have and wear after a London tourist bus drove over it-- that I've bought more than one of.

But wait, one says, you can't object to the shirts. After all, you bought a hat!

Then there's raid jackets. Like the shirts, tied both to in-game achievements and to real money purchases.

But wait, one says, you can't object to the jacket, after all, you bought the shirts!

Then the foam sword. In-game achievements, real money purchase.

But wait, one says, it's not weird that they sell the sword, look at the jackets!

Sparrows and ghost shells are already sold. And armor and shaders.

When a spreadsheet tells Bungie that the most profitable thing to do is increase the price of Eververse goods and stop making a single player campaign at all, because high priced items in-game are more profitable than selling the game itself, what will anyone say then?

I realize that a lot-- perhaps even the majority-- of so-called "slippery slope" arguments are poorly formed and/or in bad faith. So I don't want to press that point. But I do think that these changes directly incentivize developers to create more of certain kinds of content than others because it's easier to get more money from fewer people with both in and out of game items than it is to actually make a broadly targeted piece of entertainment, and the logical, if regrettable terminus of that process may not be something we all want.

The objections to that transition happen now, not afterwards. I remember when people said that the whole idea of the in-game store had to have been pushed on Bungie by Activision.

Now Activision is no more, and Eververse is still there. Visiting that vendor is a core part of the game.

And I hate it.

Eris Morn goes into the Pyramid, absorbs the darkness and comes out muttering about Fenchurch.

locked

2848 views

Eris Morn goes into the Pyramid, absorbs the darkness and comes out muttering about Fenchurch.

Dude STOP! Halloween is over.

locked

2814 views

Eris Morn goes into the Pyramid, absorbs the darkness and comes out muttering about Fenchurch.

Dude STOP! Halloween is over.

When the moon is haunted, Halloween NEVER ends.

locked

2861 views

- No text -

locked

2799 views

That’s all fair enough. Completely understandable. I agree with a lot of it.

I see the in game stuff as far more problematic than expensive props. I guess that’s at least partly because the price of that foam sword is so completely outrageous that I find it hard to believe that anyone without a whole lot of disposable income would buy it. I literally laughed when I saw the price. I don’t think many people are going to be manipulated into spending $200 in the same way they might be to spend $20 here and there in Eververse, only to look back and realize shit, they’ve actually spent $300.

As far as the lessons Bungie are learning from all this in making Destiny . . . I don’t know. I’m not sure it matters. Destiny still hasn’t had a single player campaign that feels like it was worth playing for its own sake. Forsaken came close. The campaigns make up so little of my play time in Destiny, and I get so little out of them, I’d honestly be totally interested to see the version of Destiny that just drops them and puts those resources into making some extra strikes or another dungeon or raid instead.

locked

2816 views

That’s all fair enough. Completely understandable. I agree with a lot of it.

I see the in game stuff as far more problematic than expensive props. I guess that’s at least partly because the price of that foam sword is so completely outrageous that I find it hard to believe that anyone without a whole lot of disposable income would buy it. I literally laughed when I saw the price. I don’t think many people are going to be manipulated into spending $200 in the same way they might be to spend $20 here and there in Eververse, only to look back and realize shit, they’ve actually spent $300.

As far as the lessons Bungie are learning from all this in making Destiny . . . I don’t know. I’m not sure it matters. Destiny still hasn’t had a single player campaign that feels like it was worth playing for its own sake. Forsaken came close. The campaigns make up so little of my play time in Destiny, and I get so little out of them, I’d honestly be totally interested to see the version of Destiny that just drops them and puts those resources into making some extra strikes or another dungeon or raid instead.

Well, there you go. You've just asked Bungie to go ahead and implement the nightmare nuclear scenario I was worried about, so... I guess at least I'm not being alarmist?

locked

2849 views

I mean, or you could just accept Destiny isn’t designed for you and play something else?

In a world that I’ve posited, where we continue to get the lackluster campaign experiences of Destiny, or we get more good strikes or more Dungeons and Raids which have all been stellar, why would I ever choose another Destiny campaign?

I realize that’s just a matter of taste. That’s the thing, though. You seem to imply that it’s something more important than that. If you enjoy the campaigns, that’s great. I hope they keep making them for your sake. I will continue to play them and get some base level enjoyment out of them while eagerly anticipating getting to the point where I can do the things that are really fun.

People keep lamenting the rise of live service games without taking a minute to look around at all of the absolutely incredible single player only experiences that release all the time. Bungie isn’t holding you hostage and forcing you to play Destiny instead of any of those games.

Edit: I guess some of that isn’t fair to say. If you enjoy Destiny’s campaign, then it is a game for you. Who am I to say otherwise. I guess my point could be better expressed:

We can’t both get what we want out of Destiny. Resources are finite. Who is anyone to say their vision of Destiny is the correct one?

locked

2858 views

In a world that I’ve posited, where we continue to get the lackluster campaign experiences of Destiny, or we get more good strikes or more Dungeons and Raids which have all been stellar, why would I ever choose another Destiny campaign?

Because context is important for immersion.

locked

2843 views

I’m not playing Destiny to be immersed. I’m playing to have fun. I think the lore books and text blurbs we get from quest givers is just fine for giving context. Not like any of the cutscenes we’ve ever seen have given us fuck all for context anyway.

I’d rather they focused on building more fun, unique activities I can play with my friends. I’m not sure the campaigns end up being worth the resources they take to make in a game like Destiny.

locked

2813 views

- No text -

locked

2769 views

It's always felt a little unfair to call people out for the slippery slope argument when it comes to tbis industry.

I understand of course that it's one of the classic fallacies. But when was the last time the games industry chose not to go down that slope? And not just slip, but hurl themself down it grinning and giggling with glee?

locked

2831 views

Instead of implementing a satisfying reward in-game, they put time, effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game.

Except that the people hired to do stuff like design real toys you can buy in the store are NOT the same people hired to build in-game rewards.

It's not the people, it's the money. The money comes from the same place. They took the money people gave them for the Destiny digital gaming product and put it towards making merch that some people won't ever get a chance to buy (raid jackets) or merch that some people who buy the $60 game can't or won't justify (foam swords).

It's possible for a company to migrate from one product category to another if markets incentivize it.

Silent Hill is now a pinball machine.

Sorry - real life got in the way of stuff this week, and I'm just now getting back to the forum. Looks like things blew up, then calmed down again, so I'll leave most of it alone... but I wanted to step in here, because I think that you're wrong here.

I think that in most of the cases we've talked about (real-world rewards for in-game purchases), the money does NOT come from the same place. In most cases, someone ELSE has come to Bungie, and said "we'll make this thing, and we can split the profits." (No, I don't think it's that simple... but I think that's what it boils down to.) I don't think that (in most cases) that the items are being created by Bungie employees, or with Bungie money. (Example of an exception: Lorraine does a lot of work on the Grimoire books, and the comics. She does this work when her in-game contributions are not needed as much, and she has time that would otherwise be wasted. Not every employee can work on every aspect of a game, and some employees have downtime when their primary focus is no longer front-and-center. I think that Lorraine using that time to help turn out spectacular written material is not remotely a bad thing, and I would argue strongly that my life would be less rich without it; I do not think this sort of exception belongs in the 'slippery slope' argument.)

I think the result of this is that if they WEREN'T selling these things, there wouldn't suddenly be more time/energy/money to put in more in-game rewards. There would just be less money, overall, in the coffers.

locked

2813 views

Instead of implementing a satisfying reward in-game, they put time, effort and resources into making yet another overpriced cosmetic (albeit an irl cosmetic) you can buy to show you did a thing in-game.

Except that the people hired to do stuff like design real toys you can buy in the store are NOT the same people hired to build in-game rewards.

It's not the people, it's the money. The money comes from the same place. They took the money people gave them for the Destiny digital gaming product and put it towards making merch that some people won't ever get a chance to buy (raid jackets) or merch that some people who buy the $60 game can't or won't justify (foam swords).

It's possible for a company to migrate from one product category to another if markets incentivize it.

Silent Hill is now a pinball machine.

Sorry - real life got in the way of stuff this week, and I'm just now getting back to the forum. Looks like things blew up, then calmed down again, so I'll leave most of it alone... but I wanted to step in here, because I think that you're wrong here.

I think that in most of the cases we've talked about (real-world rewards for in-game purchases), the money does NOT come from the same place. In most cases, someone ELSE has come to Bungie, and said "we'll make this thing, and we can split the profits."

I don't mean externally to Bungie, I mean internal to Bungie.

In specific, Bungie themselves said they used revenues from in-game cosmetic items to fund the development of content. Which essentially means that higher margin cosmetic items are subsidizing gameplay content.

Which is fine until someone decides that it's way higher margin to not do that.

(No, I don't think it's that simple... but I think that's what it boils down to.) I don't think that (in most cases) that the items are being created by Bungie employees, or with Bungie money. (Example of an exception: Lorraine does a lot of work on the Grimoire books, and the comics. She does this work when her in-game contributions are not needed as much, and she has time that would otherwise be wasted. Not every employee can work on every aspect of a game, and some employees have downtime when their primary focus is no longer front-and-center. I think that Lorraine using that time to help turn out spectacular written material is not remotely a bad thing, and I would argue strongly that my life would be less rich without it; I do not think this sort of exception belongs in the 'slippery slope' argument.)

There are ancillary materials that I feel are much lower risk of providing bad incentives to the developer. Lore books and art books are among them, for the reasons you describe.

The props and clothing I think are a greater risk.

The in-game cosmetics are the next highest risk.

The highest risk would be items with gameplay value sold for Silver.

I think the result of this is that if they WEREN'T selling these things, there wouldn't suddenly be more time/energy/money to put in more in-game rewards. There would just be less money, overall, in the coffers.

Organizations do what they are incentivized to do. When the incentives are misaligned with the activities, this will correct itself. When the activity that generates the revenue is not the activity that requires expenditure, you create an opportunity for someone to sell themselves as a management genius by pointing it out, and stopping it.

locked

2801 views

They are straight up selling a boost to 900 power for $20. Getting to 900 takes a handful of hours the first time and becomes basically automatic for second and third characters afterwards.

I guess who am I to judge if someone wants to spend $20 to skip like five hours of game, but it’s also just fucking gross at a gut check level for me.

locked

2797 views

They are straight up selling a boost to 900 power for $20. Getting to 900 takes a handful of hours the first time and becomes basically automatic for second and third characters afterwards.

I guess who am I to judge if someone wants to spend $20 to skip like five hours of game, but it’s also just fucking gross at a gut check level for me.

Can you explain this? What exactly is being sold? Is this like that booster crystal from before?

locked

2806 views

They are straight up selling a boost to 900 power for $20. Getting to 900 takes a handful of hours the first time and becomes basically automatic for second and third characters afterwards.

I guess who am I to judge if someone wants to spend $20 to skip like five hours of game, but it’s also just fucking gross at a gut check level for me.

Can you explain this? What exactly is being sold? Is this like that booster crystal from before?

Yup.

https://www.pcgamer.com/you-can-now-boost-destiny-2-characters-to-power-level-900-for-dollar20/

locked

2811 views

They are straight up selling a boost to 900 power for $20. Getting to 900 takes a handful of hours the first time and becomes basically automatic for second and third characters afterwards.

I guess who am I to judge if someone wants to spend $20 to skip like five hours of game, but it’s also just fucking gross at a gut check level for me.

Can you explain this? What exactly is being sold? Is this like that booster crystal from before?

Yup.

https://www.pcgamer.com/you-can-now-boost-destiny-2-characters-to-power-level-900-for-dollar20/

Ug.

1. This is scummy.
2. It only works with a second character.

I guess the perfect solution that was in Destiny 1 wasn't good enough. You could just infuse your main character's extra armor into your secondary's or tertiary's and be up at the same light level in like 2 seconds. But nooooooooo. Now you can only infuse armor of the same class.

Huge step backwards.

locked

2788 views

They are straight up selling a boost to 900 power for $20. Getting to 900 takes a handful of hours the first time and becomes basically automatic for second and third characters afterwards.

I guess who am I to judge if someone wants to spend $20 to skip like five hours of game, but it’s also just fucking gross at a gut check level for me.

Can you explain this? What exactly is being sold? Is this like that booster crystal from before?

Yup.

https://www.pcgamer.com/you-can-now-boost-destiny-2-characters-to-power-level-900-for-dollar20/

Ug.

1. This is scummy.
2. It only works with a second character.

I guess the perfect solution that was in Destiny 1 wasn't good enough. You could just infuse your main character's extra armor into your secondary's or tertiary's and be up at the same light level in like 2 seconds. But nooooooooo. Now you can only infuse armor of the same class.

Huge step backwards.

Frankly I think a lot of it is.

Lots of people complained about how grindy and not fun earning XP or spending motes on unlocking perks was, but to be honest I think that system was fairer, more transparent, and more enjoyable as well as less immersion-breaking than what we have now.

I mean, it sort of made sense to me. We're immortal revenants wandering a post-apocalyptic landscape and scavenging, upgrading and maintaining powerful relics of a lost age. The more you used a weapon, the better the weapon became.

Now?

You pull from collections and shard the old one. Infuse a drop into the old one. Where does Banshee get all those weapons. Why are vendors holding out for currency. Is someone going to say, "hey, you could beat the Darkness with this exotic bow I have locked in some back room I forgot about but here, do this sidequest first"

To some extent the whole game is that, but I think some progression mechanics were better at integrating/concealing them than others, and I think it most of the ways that matter to me, the way things currently work are worse than D1 was at launch.

I actively avoid strike playlists now because Bungie's habit of severely limiting the number of strikes in them I find infuriating and the repetition plus nearly all players' habits of speedrunning everything is absolutely maddening.

Think of what a playlist would be like if it had every strike in D1/D2 in it going back to 2014.

locked

2815 views

I actively avoid strike playlists now because Bungie's habit of severely limiting the number of strikes in them I find infuriating and the repetition plus nearly all players' habits of speedrunning everything is absolutely maddening.

Why do you think players race to the end of strikes? Because they only want the drops. Perhaps if strikes were like mini raids… no matchmaking but with various challenge modes for you and your friends to do and get gear by completing them.

Think of what a playlist would be like if it had every strike in D1/D2 in it going back to 2014.

People would still run through as fast as they can to get drops.

locked

2778 views

D1 Strike design was significantly mechanically different. Almost every D1 Strike was composed of sequences which you couldn’t bypass and sandbox/boss design limited the ability to melt bosses. To that same effect, most Strikes were also more limited in overall scope. You will always have people trying to speed run content.

Improvements to the playlist variety and mechanically limiting speed runs would require retooling some D2 strikes (they are in need of it) but it would be nice to have a larger pool of strikes to pull from. Especially some of the more mechanically complex ones from D1. Alternate bosses and significantly changed encounters being more prevalent would also be nice.

Aside: NF the Ordeal already covers your point about strikes without matchmaking for gear seeking parties. But would also benefit from a level of mechanical complexity.

locked

2792 views

I actively avoid strike playlists now because Bungie's habit of severely limiting the number of strikes in them I find infuriating and the repetition plus nearly all players' habits of speedrunning everything is absolutely maddening.

Why do you think players race to the end of strikes? Because they only want the drops. Perhaps if strikes were like mini raids… no matchmaking but with various challenge modes for you and your friends to do and get gear by completing them.

Except strikes drop crap, so I don't know why they'd bother.

And now for the weekly drop it's not 1 strike and 3 strikes, it's only 3 strikes, so I don't bother at all.

I used to run 3 nightfalls back to back *at reset*.

Think of what a playlist would be like if it had every strike in D1/D2 in it going back to 2014.

People would still run through as fast as they can to get drops.

And I'd probably put up with it a bit longer because at least you could play for a couple of hours without seeing the same content over again.

It isn't even just repetition that bugs me, because patrol doesn't bother me in the least in this respect. Strikes, though, are always the same stuff, in the same order, the same way, every time. And it simply isn't possible to play more than 30 minutes without a high likelihood of seeing the same stuff twice.

locked

2768 views

You can still transfer weapons. If my main is at 920 or so, stuff starts dropping in like the 880s for my alts.

It’s a completely useless boost that does feel like a trick. It fundamentally doesn’t jive with how the game actually works.

locked

2780 views

You can still transfer weapons. If my main is at 920 or so, stuff starts dropping in like the 880s for my alts.

It’s a completely useless boost that does feel like a trick. It fundamentally doesn’t jive with how the game actually works.

I think it's a catch-22 though.

If it did work, it'd be bad that they're selling it.

But they are selling it, and it seems it's not really worth it since you don't gain from it, which is also bad?

locked

2782 views

This is news to me, but ooooooooh boy maybe I won't be buying any battle passes after all.

Edit: Dammit I replied to the wrong person again. Imagine this was one level up.

locked

2795 views

At the risk of sounding like a total fucking moron, based on the thread I started last week . . .

Why? I don’t get it.

So they’re selling some overpriced toys in their store? Who cares? I mean, Funko Pops exist, this sort of fits right in with modern consumerism.

I don’t think it’s great. Seems really freaking expensive for an ugly piece of molded foam and complete waste of resources that went into designing it, but I also don’t think not being able to afford an overpriced toy is reason to be mad at Bungie.

Because of the kind of behavior that it encourages.

It can help to think about products by comparing them to other things. Let's take, for example... toothpaste and automobiles.

Evyerbody needs toothpaste. Everybody needs about the same amount of toothpaste, generally speaking, over the same amount of time.

Some people might want different toothpaste, and some may be willing to pay more for their toothpaste, but the difference between the cheapest and the most expensive, the "best" and the "worst", the person who uses the most toothpaste and the person who uses the least, is limited.

There are no "whales" in the toothpaste market, and even if there were, you could not sustain your toothpaste business on them.

Now look at cars. Cars are bought less often. Some people don't even have one. There are cars that are really cheap (even used cars!) and there are also cars that are really, really expensive.

It's possible to make cars so expensive that you can have a profitable company selling only a few thousand or even a few hundred-- if the people paying for them are willing to pay enough for them.

People take it for granted that markets for products always follow the sort of curve that Musk tried to with Tesla-- make a bespoke, high margin, low-volume product to kickstart the company, then get into the broad middle of the market where the real money is.

Except under certain market conditions, the "broad middle" of the market shrinks. And it becomes sensible to chase the top of the market or the bottom. Free to play or subscription based with in-game purchases.

To be honest the real issue here isn't the overpriced foam sword, it's more the in-game purchases.

For instance, I'd wager that most game developers are more artist-heavy than they were in the 90s, because of higher resolutions and framerates and rising standards of visual fidelity. The pipeline requires more people to create more textures and models, and rig more animations. I'd guess the increase is disproportionate compared to, say, any analogous increase in the number of designers or programmers needed.

The cost to, say, make a player emblem, is fixed. The artist worked on it til it was done. But there's no inventory for that item. You could sell it for in-game currency any number of times and accrue almost no additional costs other than the (relatively) fixed costs
of running your game and your in-game store.

Foam swords, Eververse silver, and Fallout 1st to me now, as well as the proliferation of "special editions" in the past, Virtual Reality hardware, concern me about a market going forward where games aren't like movies or TV-- entertainment for everyone-- but exotic cars, a market where it's deemed more profitable to seek many thousands of dollars a year or more from a smaller audience.

Think about the raid, for instance. Given the number of people who actually play and complete it, it's sort of crazy Bungie invests in making it. I think it's why the entire raid "event" is now structured around streamers and the "world's first" race, to the detriment of ordinary players who want a reasonably unspoiled experience when they can reasonably approach an appropriate power level.

locked

2872 views

Think about the raid, for instance. Given the number of people who actually play and complete it, it's sort of crazy Bungie invests in making it. I think it's why the entire raid "event" is now structured around streamers and the "world's first" race, to the detriment of ordinary players who want a reasonably unspoiled experience when they can reasonably approach an appropriate power level.

But the raid comes free with your purchase. Nobody's ever going to raise the price of games like they should, so it doesn't actually change anything for the players by it being there except to give them the option to play it.

Foam swords, Eververse silver, and Fallout 1st to me now, as well as the proliferation of "special editions" in the past, Virtual Reality hardware, concern me about a market going forward where games aren't like movies or TV-- entertainment for everyone-- but exotic cars, a market where it's deemed more profitable to seek many thousands of dollars a year or more from a smaller audience.

This is okay by me. I would rather spend the same amount of money and have fewer, better experiences. If I could only afford 2 games a year, but those games were perfect 11s, I wouldn't mind. That's not the problem. The problem is the games and the experiences are becoming more terrible at the AAA level.

But it doesn't have to be that way. Death Stranding has no microtransactions.

locked

2829 views

Think about the raid, for instance. Given the number of people who actually play and complete it, it's sort of crazy Bungie invests in making it. I think it's why the entire raid "event" is now structured around streamers and the "world's first" race, to the detriment of ordinary players who want a reasonably unspoiled experience when they can reasonably approach an appropriate power level.

But the raid comes free with your purchase.

Yes, but not sure what the point is of that?

Nobody's ever going to raise the price of games like they should, so it doesn't actually change anything for the players by it being there except to give them the option to play it.

Yes, they will, but not sure why you say they should.

If what you mean is that the people who actually make games should be paid better, then yes! If you're saying the register price needs to go up to make that happen, I'd say... no, probably it doesn't.

Foam swords, Eververse silver, and Fallout 1st to me now, as well as the proliferation of "special editions" in the past, Virtual Reality hardware, concern me about a market going forward where games aren't like movies or TV-- entertainment for everyone-- but exotic cars, a market where it's deemed more profitable to seek many thousands of dollars a year or more from a smaller audience.

This is okay by me. I would rather spend the same amount of money and have fewer, better experiences. If I could only afford 2 games a year, but those games were perfect 11s, I wouldn't mind. That's not the problem. The problem is the games and the experiences are becoming more terrible at the AAA level.

I think you're only going to get one of those things. As the "live services" trend continues to get pushed, everyone is trying to make more games that are the kind of game you could only play one or two of, because nobody has more time than that.

The response to the "there are too many good games and not enough time" is going to be to make games that are less good, but consume even more time. And to hook in-game purchases to them.

But it doesn't have to be that way. Death Stranding has no microtransactions.

That is a whole other kettle of fish, though. Neither does Outer Worlds.

But yes, it doesn't have to be that way. But for Destiny, right now, it is.

There are a lot of anti-consumer practices that go unnoticed when those using them are at least able to execute their jobs with competence and deliver an entertaining product. That's what makes Destiny "not everyone's cup of tea" and makes Fallout 76 an embarassing farce.

But strictly with regard to the business practices themselves, there is less separating those two than I think I would like to comfortably admit.

locked

2806 views

This is okay by me. I would rather spend the same amount of money and have fewer, better experiences. If I could only afford 2 games a year, but those games were perfect 11s, I wouldn't mind. That's not the problem. The problem is the games and the experiences are becoming more terrible at the AAA level.

I think you're only going to get one of those things. As the "live services" trend continues to get pushed, everyone is trying to make more games that are the kind of game you could only play one or two of, because nobody has more time than that.

The response to the "there are too many good games and not enough time" is going to be to make games that are less good, but consume even more time. And to hook in-game purchases to them.

You are right about this if current trends continue.

There are a lot of anti-consumer practices that go unnoticed when those using them are at least able to execute their jobs with competence and deliver an entertaining product. That's what makes Destiny "not everyone's cup of tea" and makes Fallout 76 an embarassing farce.

If the only difference between Destiny and Fallout was competence, you would agree that Destiny is ultimately a con?

locked

2831 views

This is okay by me. I would rather spend the same amount of money and have fewer, better experiences. If I could only afford 2 games a year, but those games were perfect 11s, I wouldn't mind. That's not the problem. The problem is the games and the experiences are becoming more terrible at the AAA level.

I think you're only going to get one of those things. As the "live services" trend continues to get pushed, everyone is trying to make more games that are the kind of game you could only play one or two of, because nobody has more time than that.

The response to the "there are too many good games and not enough time" is going to be to make games that are less good, but consume even more time. And to hook in-game purchases to them.

You are right about this if current trends continue.

There are a lot of anti-consumer practices that go unnoticed when those using them are at least able to execute their jobs with competence and deliver an entertaining product. That's what makes Destiny "not everyone's cup of tea" and makes Fallout 76 an embarassing farce.

If the only difference between Destiny and Fallout was competence, you would agree that Destiny is ultimately a con?

Maybe? But not really?

The problem is that isn't the only difference, and despite the huge backlash against FO76 for a wide variety of reasons, in terms of purely handling in-game MTX, they aren't the worst, either-- they're just over the line that Bungie is just behind. And EA and ActiBlizz are way over there just straight up running casinos.

Last I looked the only in-game item sales in FO76 that really cross the line are the repair kits.

The whole "Fallout 1st" debacle and their other issues are bad, but I guess I feel they're just not as emblematically bad. Most of the criticism is that what they are offering is broken, and that it's pure Hubris to even try and offer it when so much of what they did deliver is still horribly broken, unfinished, etc.

I think what Destiny is too much of is manipulative. I think it is leaning too hard into the social dependence area. I feel the arguments of, "hey, stop criticizing the game if you don't like it and play something else" rings hollow when every part of the game is trying to keep you playing it. I fear the day where, like some mobile game, they offer a way for you to feel like you're fulfilling your obligation to do your in-game chores, keep up with your friends, stay abreast of the new content, and do it more efficiently, in less time, by offering an in-game "timesaver".

I am definitely coming around to your position that obstacles are deliberately placed between the player and the "fun" (however one defines that) to keep populations around.

The optimistic interpretation of that is that because since Destiny is such a socially dependent game, you need populations around playing activities so that people have other people to play with.

The cynical interpretation of that is that every unit of time a player spends playing is another chance to sell them an item when they visit Tess.

locked

2796 views

The optimistic interpretation of that is that because since Destiny is such a socially dependent game, you need populations around playing activities so that people have other people to play with.

A couple thoughts on this.

The first is that many games can maintain a decent population for multiplayer modes without resorting to the design practices we are talking about. If your multiplayer is fun and reasonably deep / complex, and if you can match people up according to their skills most of the time, it shouldn't be a problem for the life of the game.

The second point is that just because a game is socially dependent doesn't mean it has to be manipulative. D&D is impossible to play alone, requiring a social aspect, and yet not an ounce of that game is exploitative. Every design decision Bungie has made could have been made differently. Social games don't NEED to manipulate or pressure you to play.

locked

2830 views

The optimistic interpretation of that is that because since Destiny is such a socially dependent game, you need populations around playing activities so that people have other people to play with.

A couple thoughts on this.

The first is that many games can maintain a decent population for multiplayer modes without resorting to the design practices we are talking about. If your multiplayer is fun and reasonably deep / complex, and if you can match people up according to their skills most of the time, it shouldn't be a problem for the life of the game.

The second point is that just because a game is socially dependent doesn't mean it has to be manipulative. D&D is impossible to play alone, requiring a social aspect, and yet not an ounce of that game is exploitative. Every design decision Bungie has made could have been made differently. Social games don't NEED to manipulate or pressure you to play.

I'm not saying I find any of these practices justifiable for any of those reasons, I'm just speculating on the reasons that might be used by an entity that clearly does find some justifiable reason for doing them, since they are clearly doing them.

locked

2812 views

I'm not saying I find any of these practices justifiable for any of those reasons, I'm just speculating on the reasons that might be used by an entity that clearly does find some justifiable reason for doing them, since they are clearly doing them.

They are doing it because they have to. 'Live' games or MMOs are inherently bad genres because they need these types of things to even work. So the problem I think is that they chose a bad genre to make.

locked

2814 views

D&D is impossible to play alone

This is measurably incorrect. It may play out substantially different to playing with people, but you can play is as one person. It all depends on what someone is trying to get out of it and what they are willing to put into it.

locked

2824 views

Back to the forum index

RSS Feed of thread

DBO Forums

Finish the Pit of Heresy, you get to buy a sword (Destiny)