89
“Protest”
Y’all are still engaging with the game. Stop playing, stop paying. That’s all corporations actually care about.
lmao exactly
Seems less like "protesting" and more like "fucking over other people in the game" to me, which sounds about right for the League of Legends player base.
Can't wait for the R34 of a $435 skin
https://www.reddit.com/r/Rule34LoL/comments/1devqp2/immortalized_ahri_bobartnsfw/
There you go it's like the top post of the month haha (NSFW obviously) (yeah its reddit sorry)
If you ever need to go to reddit, you always need to change it to "old.reddit".
So instead of: https://www.reddit.com/r/Rule34LoL/comments/1devqp2/immortalized_ahri_bobartnsfw/
You want: https://old.reddit.com/r/Rule34LoL/comments/1devqp2/immortalized_ahri_bobartnsfw/
Damn all I see is "this post is marked NSFW, go to the app to see this content or be redirected to reddit main page"
If you play league still it is your fault.
wow, i thought it would be a while before someone had the chutzpah to out-greed Battlestate Games. I definitely need to stop giving these corporations the benefit of the doubt. but of course, the culprit is Riot.
I will never give them my money.
Honestly I hate any game where the other team can just, arbitrarily decide "Nah you can't play the character you like, fuck you" and it's one of the innumerable reasons I don't like League.
I hate league with passion but this is the dumbest reason to argue against any moba game.
You could play a different game mode
As for draft, banning maps is a much better system
You got me I actually do in fact dislike all MOBA type games.
That particular mechanic of "banning" characters may also fuck right off though. I can't ban sniper when I play TF2
But don't you wish you could?
That particular mechanic of "banning" characters may also fuck right off though. I can't ban sniper when I play TF2
6s players: 😎
That's a hot take and a half
I feel like if anything has the right to be ridiculously expensive, it's art.
- It's not a necessity for survival.
- It's not a necessity to live a fulfilling life.
- There's so much else available to us that can fulfill the same purpose that are cheap/free.
- A one time $435 cost feels a lot more expensive than lots of small purchases adding up to the same amount, meaning this is more likely to be purchased exclusively by people who can actually afford it, unlike the latter which can trick people into spending more than they can afford.
- It funds free entertainment for everyone who don't have the ability to pay.
What's the downside?
What’s the downside?
Customer manipulation.
You could say "of course don't affect me" to FOMO, p2w, whales, dark patterns and alike... but just because you personally ignore it, it doesn't mean it's going to vanish. Industries live and evolve through money, the next iteration of video gaming is made by where money went.
LoL players came from a mod of Warcraft III; Riot is slowly cooking (put in warm-to-boil water) their frog customers in something people don't consider healthy (generally with "they are them, not me, so I don't care").
Worse than what they've been doing for the last decade? It seems to me like this is a better state of things because it's clearly a lot of money for one big purchase, so you know immediately that it's not something you can afford. Better transparency, so less manipulative.
Worse than what they’ve been doing for the last decade? It seems to me like this is a better state of things because it’s clearly a lot of money for one big purchase, so you know immediately that it’s not something you can afford. Better transparency, so less manipulative.
Clearly so it seems to you. There are companies that, more simply, don't do this at all: they don't need to be transparent on how dishonest they are... because they aren't.
If your argument "in secret they may be"... well, if your point is "entities that seems honest are the most secretly dishonest", I think the first entity that we can apply your logic is your very self: you pretend to be honest in defend companies who behave transparently dishonest... it simply mean that you're honesty is just a show off, while in truth you're just shilling.
That's your logic: next time behave openly dishonest, so we know how much transparently dishonest you are.
I think I'm missing an important part of your argument here. What are they doing that you consider to be dishonest?
F2P games target need big number of people, by necessity their biggest customer share is low-income people: proposing them luxury range product and peer-pressure ("to look good") is what I call dishonest.
Ah, I see. Though I would call this manipulative, not dishonest.
entities that seems honest are the most secretly dishonest
It's the converse. By definition, dishonest entities (that are good at what they do) will appear honest.
Definitions aside, let's go back to my original argument. To rephrase it a bit: A transparently manipulative entity is better than a deceptive and manipulative entity. So why protest the added transparency and not the manipulation?
this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2024
89 points (93.2% liked)
PC Gaming
7728 readers
910 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS