Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Op Ed

Cliffski's Blog - Kickstarting inequality.
Kickstarter is the absolute poster-child for inequality amongst gamers, based on income. Now I am definitely not a raging socialist, but I know a lot of gamers are, and I find it a bit weird that it doesn’t bug them that when these kickstarter games ship, not only will gamers with more money that them be swanning around with better outfits and weapons, (This already happens in F2P games), but some of the NPC’s will have the names of the ‘wealthy’ backers. Some will even have their digitized faces in the game. Elite is actually naming PLANETS after people who back the game with a lot of money.

Gamers say they hate in-game product placement and advertising. It compromises the game design for the sake of money. I agree. So why are we deciding that the best way to name our planets or design the appearance of our NPC’s is to put that part of game design up for auction? Why should gamers who are wealthy get more influence over a game that those who flip burgers for a living? The cold hard economic reality of the real world is bad enough without shoehorning it into games too.

Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at the bottom of the form.

25. Re: Op Ed Nov 24, 2012, 22:33 Draugr
 
Prez wrote on Nov 24, 2012, 17:25:
I don't get his complaint at all. In-game advertising is a cynical money grab and annoying to those who already paid for the game (obviously exempting F2P games). Having characters, planets, or other things named after the largest donors (without whom the game very likely would have never been made) isn't the same at all. I don't get his reference to socialism at all either.

It truly seems odd. Art, Games, and participation in game development I don't see as an issue of equality.

Game Developers usually just name things however they'd like, no one is demanding that power is given to the people. All of the arguments he would make against a kickstarted game would apply to the traditional publisher model, but I don't see him taking issue with it or expecting others to do the same.

All of the 'points' just fall flat for several reason, the most outstanding reason being that luxury goods part of a luxury service don't really determine social equity. At least, not in the way he seems to imply.

The only valid point he makes is P2W games are lame, but I think most people were already aware of that.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
Subject
Comment
     
 
      ;)   ;)   :(   :(   :o   :o   %)   %)   :)   :)   :|   :|   ;P   ;P   X|   X|   :D   :D   More
 
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you have a signature set up, it will be automatically appended to your comment.
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.
 
          Email me when this topic is updated.
 

Special Codes

  • b[bold text]b
  • i[italic text]i
  • u[underline text]u
  • -[strikethrough text]-
  • c[code text]c
  • +[bullet point]+
  • q[quote text (indented)]q
  • [quote="Author"]quote text (indented)[/quote]
  • [url=Link]text[/url]
  • r{red text}r
  • g{green text}g
  • b{blue text}b
  • m{maroon text}m
  • s{secret text (shows in the background colour)}s

Forum Rules

  1. Disagree all you want but attacks of a personal nature will not be tolerated.
  2. Ethnic slurs and homophobic language will not be tolerated.
  3. Do not post spam, links to warez sites, or instructions on how to obtain pirated software.
  4. Abusing the forums in any manner that could be construed as 'griefing' will not be tolerated.


footer

Blue's News logo